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
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt1068680
|
Yes Man
|
As the studio credits roll, a pop tune starts playing and it turns into the ring tone for Carl Allen (Jim Carrey). Carl sees 'Unknown Caller', which he ignores until he accidently answers the call. Carl is talking to his best friend Peter (Bradley Cooper) who is trying to persuade him to come to a gathering at the usual bar and Carl keeps trying to weasel out telling Peter that he's at home and he's got things to do but is really at the local Blockbuster renting movies like 300 and Transformers for a lonely night at home. During the conversation, we see Peter outside the store window, and Carl is caught.Carl ends up going to the bar with Peter, Rooney (Danny Masterson from That 70's Show) and Lucy (Sasha Alexander). Peter makes the big announcement that he and Lucy are engaged and tells Carl the date of their engagement party, which Carl is obligated to attend. While this is going on, Carl looks over at the bar to see Stephanie (Molly Sims). Stephanie is Carl's ex-wife and it's been three years since their split. He tries to excuse himself but they come over and chat for a bit and he's introduced to her new boyfriend. He tries and makes a graceful exit but doesn't bumping into the waitress with a tray full of drinks and then slipping on the wet floor.The next morning, we see Carl get dressed in a bland suit, pick up a name tag and head out the door to his job as a junior loan officer at a bank. As he closes his door, a nice elderly woman named Tillie asks him if he wants some breakfast and invites him over, and Carl declines. As he heads to work, he meets a homeless man and declines him help, gets his coffee and declines a flyer to come see a local band and ends up in front of his computer declining emails and websites for Middle Eastern wives.At work, we meet his boss Norman (Rhys Darby). Norman takes a call at Carl's desk and it turns out that Carl was passed over for a promotion. A guy then comes in and asks for a loan to start a business of making "Roller Blade Suits". He is desperate and has no other options but Carl denies his claim. As he sits outside and ponders his existence, he meets an old co-worker Nick (John Michael Higgins) who left the rat race to "live". He's traveled exotic places and done incredible things and he attributes this to being a "Yes Man". He invites Carl to the next 'Yes' conference and makes him take a pamphlet.We then see a montage of Carl living out his mundane life renting movies and watching them and in the middle of the movie 'Saw' (the part where he's cutting off his own leg, please see spoiler for Saw), Peter comes in and tells him he missed the engagement party and he's upset at Carl. As he leaves, he tells Carl to do something about his life or he'll be alone.Immediately after this, Peter and Rooney enter Carl's apartment and make comments of how dead Carl looks. It turns out that this was only a nightmare and as Carl wakes up, he opens the 'Yes' Conference pamphlet and he decides to attend.As he walks through the lobby of tables and booths holding a 'Yes' tote bag, he walks into the conference room and sits down. Amazingly, Nick is in the same row and comes over to sit with Carl. As the conference begins, there is a montage of images with the philosopher of the so-called 'Yes' Guru, Terrance Bundley (Enter, Terrance Stamp). He starts his 'Yes' chanting and what not and welcomes everyone, especially those that are there for the first time and as he continues to ask who is there, Nick shouts out that Carl is there for the first time. Terrance asks Carl to come to the front and when Carl declines several times, Terrance takes off his shoes and runs to him from the stage. As he confronts Carl, every time Carl says no, the crowd starts chanting, "No-man! No-man!" and every time he says "yes", the crowd screams, "yes!" After bantering with Carl for a while, Terrance makes a 'covenant' with Carl to say YES at every opportunity and Carl hesitantly agrees.As Carl and Nick are walking away from the conference, people congratulate Carl on his breakthrough. Just then, a homeless man (Brent Briscoe) mentions how nice his BMW is and asks Carl for a lift to the park. Encouraged by Nick, he agrees. In the car before they leave, the homeless man asks to use Carl's phone and Carl agrees. On the ride to the park, the homeless man is laughing with someone on the phone, while Carl is asking where in the park to drop him off. The cell phone battery dies and the man thanks Carl. Before the homeless man shuts the door, he asks Carl for a few bucks. The new Carl reluctantly says 'yes' while taking out a wad of bills... he ends up giving the guy the money and the guy thanks him and runs into the bushes with a head first dive. As Carl tries to drive away, his car runs out of gas.We see Carl talking to himself all the way to the gas station. While filling up his gas can, a woman on a scooter pulls in and takes a Polaroid of him bent over filling his gas can. They make small talk and she offers him a ride, to which he says yes. While riding the scooter, she takes another picture, this time of both of them and drives him to his car. Carl seems to be enjoying this somewhat. As they are about to part, he says under his breath if they want to make out and she hears this, walks over and kisses him... after riding away, Carl looks in his hands and sees the Polaroid of the two of them.The next morning (Saturday), he reflects on his adventurous night and he smiles. Just then the phone rings and without hesitation, he picks it up and it's Norman asking if he can come to work, and the new Carl of course says "Yes!" As he leaves his apartment, Tillie bumps into him and asks if he could help her put up some shelves, to which he agrees. After finishing she wants to give him money but she didn't go to the bank so she offers to help him 'release' but he declines and leaves. As he closes the door, it closes on his shirt and he wonders if it's because he broke the covenant with Terrance. When he yanks his shirt free, he falls down the stairs to a waiting dog who is barking viciously at him. So he picks himself up and reluctantly agrees to Tillie's 'payment'. As he's lying on his back in her frilly bed, she begins to go down on him. Carl looks over at her nightstand and sees Tillie put her dentures into a cup of solution. Throughout the blow job, Carl has a wide variation of facial expressions, and although he is disgusted by her age and the fact that she has no teeth, he is loving the feeling.When he finally gets to work, he begins to click 'Yes' to spam emails advertising penis enlargement and ordering a Middle Eastern wife. While he's doing this, a woman approaches his desk with a large box and asks for a loan to start a cake making business. She explains that she makes cakes that resemble the heads of famous people. Carl then mistakes the cake sitting on his desk for Bono, when it is actually Mickey Roderek. With his new found philosophy, he says 'yes' to her loan and then as he's explaining it to Norman, Norman hints at a promotion that he didn't get earlier because he said 'yes to too many projects. Further to this, accepts Normans invitation to dress like a character from Harry Potter.He goes back to the Bar with Peter and Rooney, where Carl apologizes to them, especially Peter, for missing out and being a recluse. Then, Carl begins sharing the 'yes' philosophy, and the guys toast to Carl's effort. Peter offers Carl to start a tab paying for their drinks, and Carl agrees. In the next scene, their table is full of empty glasses and Carl accepts the dare to snort hot sauce. Carl is wasted and as they begin to leave, a woman asks if she can... and before she finishes the sentence, Carl grabs her and passionately kisses her and then spits out the gum she was chewing. Her boyfriend then comes over and Carl goes into a monologue about how beautiful girls deserve to go to a Ball and the two end up fighting in the alley. Carl gets completely beat up and wakes up the next day on the floor of the bathroom with his legs wrapped around the toilet.The next day we see a montage of Carl saying yes to a guy who wants to start a fertilizer business and taking the flyer from the guy to see the band, to taking guitar lessons, to taking Korean language lessons, and Flying lessons (okay, all of these are important later). After seeing him do take guitar lessons, flying lessons, and taking Korean classes, he shows up at the club to see the band and they are a weird psychedelic, kind of campy throw back band (two members wearing seahorse hats) and there are about 6 regulars who come to watch them perform and the lead singer is... Scooter girl from the park! (Her name is Allison, played by Zooey Deschanel) After the show, he offers her a drink but she says no because she has a yoga/jogging/photography group she leads (she seems like a free spirit) and so Carl walks her to her scooter and accepts an invite to the group, which meets at 6am. That night as he sets his alarm and turns off the light, Rooney calls and asks if he wants to join them on an all-nighter with multiple cases of Red Bull, which of course Carl says Yes.The next morning at the jogging group, a car screeches in and out jumps Carl pepped up on Red Bull and saying goodbye to Lee, who is an Asian male Registered Nurse. He attends the group and he goes on a love rant about Red Bull and Allison mentions that there's a hard crash with those things but Carl doesn't care and takes off jogging and taking pictures at the same time... the group is having a hard time keeping up until they see Carl crashed on the ground holding his camera... the group then start taking pictures of him. After the group is done, we see Carl and Allison talking and it's revealed that a guy dumped Allison when things got too serious and there's an obvious spark.We then cut to a funny scene where Carl is having lunch with Peter and his new Middle Eastern bride Faranoosh (Anna Khaja) and they whisper about Allison even though Faranoosh can hear... Lucy then shows up and is disappointed that no one can help her with her bridal shower so Peter asks Carl and of course he agrees even with a 'look' from Faranoosh.At the bridal store, a surly Korean woman Soo Mi is helping them and Carl then engages her in a conversation as to why she is unhappy (in Korean) and she tells him that she sees all these couples but she can't find anyone... just then a man comes in shouting in Korean that a man is standing on the ledge ready to commit suicide... Carl springs into action and the Suicide man (great cameo by Luis Guzman) seems to be on his last string and instead of talking him down, Carl hesitates and asks Suicide man to hold on and we see him go and tune a guitar and he comes back and sings "Jumper" by Third Eye Blind... and sings him down from the ledge... The whole crowd was watching and joining in the singing...We see a door and a knock and Norman opens it dressed like Ronald Weasley and Carl is there with Allison (Harry Potter and Hermione Granger) and they see everyone from a guy wearing a Hagrid costume to a guy with a full blown Dobby the Elf costume and mask (for all the character, please see spoiler for the Harry Potter movies) and seems like a great party with them watching all the Harry Potter movies (and Norman reciting line for line with the movie). Afterwards, Allison lets Carl drive her scooter and he ends up taking her to the Hollywood Bowl (concert hall) and they sneak in and he starts to sing a Beatles tune and they make out and then sit in the stands and talk about Allison's band and stuff... they really connect here and are caught by an old guard... as the guard tells them to Stop, Carl does and when Allison says lets go, he does and this goes back and forth 'til he says, he can't please everyone!The next morning at work, Carl now has a line of people waiting to seek a loan and Norman tells him an executive is here from the Head Office and that they may be in trouble for saying yes to all those loans... Before going up, he sees Lee (the Registered Nurse) in his office and having an idea that he may be fired, Carl approves Lee's loan for a Ducati Motorcycle and heads upstairs (Important Later). The bank executive seems like a hard ass about these small loans but mentions that people are so grateful, 98% of them are making good on their payments and the bank is making lots of money... and so Carl gets the promotion to the Board room and Norman does not, although Norman was the manager who approved Carl to do these...We now see Carl at the airport and he runs into Stephanie and her boyfriend on their way to Tahiti, where his family owns 100 acres (seems like a pompous rich guy, who corrects Stephanie about it being a small piece of land). Stephanie mentions how he saw Carl on the news about saving the Suicide mans life and asks where he is going and he replies he and Allison are just traveling wherever and as they leave, she glances back at him...At the airline counter, they just ask for tickets on the next boarding flight and it's to... Lincoln, Nebraska. So they go and visit a museum of telephones, watching a University of Nebraska College Football game (face and body paint! and Peter, Rooney and Lucy see him at the game...) and end up walking on a gravel road and when it starts raining, they take shelter in a barn and she reveals she's in love with him and suggest they move in together and before saying yes, he pauses, which she notices but they hug with him in deep thought.At the airport, they try to fly again but then are detained by the FBI who have been tracking them since he made the initial flight to Nebraska and they ask they begin to interrogate him asking him why he gave a loan to a fertilizer business man, why he's taking Korean lessons (North Korea connection), why he's taking flying lessons and why he was only married for 6 months... all in ear shot of Allison... he calls for his lawyer, Peter who explains that he's following a new philosophy of saying Yes to everything and Allison hears this and thinks that's why he paused because he had to and not wanted to see her and be with her... she leaves him behind and breaks up with Carl.Back home, Carl gets a call from Stephanie who says her boyfriend left and asks him to come over, to which he does and while explaining what happens, she starts to kiss him and she asks him to stay... but he says No! As he is leaving, bad stuff starts happening and he wonders if it's because he broke the covenant... He tries to get Allison back but she tells him to go jump off a bridge and he does by bungee jumping. As he is hanging upside down, he gets a call from the Bank executive telling him to close down some branches including his old one, so he visits Norman who is having a '300' themed party and give him the bad news and Norman breaks down crying... Carl then gets home to his answering machine only to be reminded that he has to throw Lucy a bridal shower and it's the 11th hour... it looks like he's about to 'fess up to them when they walk into the bar and are greeted by a multitude of people... turns out that Carl called up all his loan favors and asked them to come to the bridal shower... at the shower, he hooks up Norman with Soo Mi, Rooney ends up agreeing to do a favor for Tillie (knowing how good she is...) and Carl and Peter talk about things and how Allison doesn't want him back and realizes that maybe he broke the covenant... so he hurries out and sneaks into the back of Terrance the Guru's car (who is just coming out of a conference) and as Terrance beings to drive away, he is startled by Carl and steps on the gas into traffic and the car is hit...In the hospital, Carl is confronted by Terrance and Terrance says that since he was being so negative, he had to do something so that he doesn't look bad... but the Yes part was all a principle and that Carl needs to show discernment in what he says yes to! With that note, Carl storms away wanting to see Allison and Rooney tells him it's 5:40am just before her morning class... He bumps into Lee who give him the keys to the Ducati and he takes off for the group... once at the group, he screeches smoke into the air and there's a cool slow motion coming out of the smoke scene and Carl tries to explain everything to Allison including that he doesn't want to move in right now but that he loves her and wants to be with her... this while the group is taking their pictures inappropriately... the movie ends with them kissing.During the end credits: A guy in an SUV is thanking Carl for approving his loan and it's the guy from the beginning who was rejected... Carl and Allison are now suited up with Roller Blades and they go blading down the road on their stomachs a la Olympic Skeleton-ing... and fades to black.
|
entertaining, romantic, philosophical, feel-good
|
train
|
imdb
| null |
tt5457772
|
Sarrainodu
|
Gana is a youth who beats crooked people that escape punishment due to faults in the legal system. He is raised by his paternal uncle Sripati, and berated by his father Umapati for leaving the military and not having an aim in life. One day Gana is sent to a neighbouring village to meet his prospective bride, Mahalakshmi. She is the daughter of his father's friend, Jaya Prakash, who is a sincere Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer and politician. However, Gana meets Hansitha Reddy, who is revealed to be the local Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA), and falls in love with her. He tells his father that Mahalakshmi rejected him because he gets into fights.
Dhanush is the son of a chief minister; he kills a farmer for refusing to give up his lands. Later, a prominent businessman comes to Dhanush to escape punishment for raping and murdering a college girl. The victim's parents seek the help of Hansitha to get justice. At the trial, a new defence lawyer twists the case, making it seem like the girl provoked her beating by blackmailing the accused, and the judge decides in favour of the lawyer's argument. Gana learns about the lawyer and beat him up, cuts off the legs of the rapist. Dhanush takes this as a challenge to his influence and becomes incensed.
Hansitha falls for Gana and promises to marry him if he swears in the presence of God that he will stand behind her and never get into fights. He is about to do so at the temple when a badly injured Mahalakshmi arrives, running from people who try to kill her. Gana holds her up, beats everyone who tried to kill her, and ultimately gives Mahalakshmi courage.
Narrating a flashback, Mahalakshmi explains how Dhanush tried to blackmail her father. Her father had been protecting farmers so they wouldn't have to sell their lands. This infuriated Dhanush who killed the farmers. When Mahalakshmi intervened, slapping and insulting Dhanush (she had also called him a zero, which angered him more), he killed her father and tried to kill her. She narrowly escaped and had run for four days to find Gana, whom she had fallen in love with.
Gana decides to solve her problems. He goes to Dhanush's home, beats his men, and tries to burn Dhanush alive but Dhanush escapes. Gana is questioned for the attack but claims that other people beat Dhanush. One of Dhanush's men tells the truth about the atrocities he committed in the village, and the media is thrown into an uproar.
Dhanush arrives at the Director General of Police (DGP) office to surrender but shoots at DGP Mallikarjun. He tries to kill Umapati but Sripati takes the bullets. The chief minister stops Dhanush from shooting anyone else and tells Umapati to call Gana and make him surrender to Dhanush. Told that Sripati will only be taken to hospital if he surrenders, Gana does so and is beaten and stabbed by Dhanush and his men. The chief minister then tells Dhanush to kill Sripati, which enrages Gana into killing the thugs and the chief minister. Gana then fights Dhanush and decapitates him with an axe when he tries to run over his father and uncle.
A cover story is told, that the chief minister and Dhanush were killed while trying to protect the DGP from unknown terrorists. Hansitha is made a candidate to become the new chief minister.
|
violence, cruelty, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
This kind of Movies must not be passed in the censor.
Even when some one sits an entire night and wants to write some illogical scenes for a Surrealistic plot , it would have been better than this movie .Even in the days of people encouraging some really good stories , i don't know why these movies are becoming Huge hits , Its time for the audience to strongly discourage watching this kind of mediocre movies , if there was a scale of 1-10 for the movie's story , i would give it a -145 when asked about what is genre of this movie , the director would say it is a blend of Action , Comedy , War, Politics , Sentiment ,Mass , OOORA MASS.still cant figure out how did Sentiment become a Genre in Telugu films.
Unbearable torture waste of time, money and peace..
Please please do not torture and torment audiences by making such movies.
After watching this dreadful movie I have gone into such a state of shock that I may not go to the cinemas to watch any movie hereafter ,or for at least a few months (me being quite a movie buff).
I can confidently say that this is the WORST movie i have seen in my life.
Absolute torture and painful cant even sleep due to the over the top mindless action and loud noise.
This is the kind of movie that should not be watched by anyone.
Such movie makers should learn a lesson that audiences do not appreciate such nonsensical stuff and that they should not make such stuff.
My whole body is in a state of shock with eardrums bursting due to the loud noise.
Overall unbearable movie I can't even find words to describe the horrendous story line and plot.
Worst ever it can't get worse that this.
Awful movie..
Way too over-rated....
This is the dumbest movie I have ever seen my entire life.
In fact I am shocked when I saw a rating of 7.2 for this awful movie in IMDb. My 10 year old kid is more logical than Boyapati.
I still wonder how the hell did he become such a big and famous director?
Anyway, coming to the movie, there is nothing but useless fights, heroines' glamour and an item song with rocking dance of AA in it.
Don't even think about the story, because when Boyapati directs a movie, there won't be any story in it.
As far as acting goes, Sai Kumar, JP, Chalapathi Rao and other legendary actors were seriously under-used.
Heroines don't have much to do other than flaunting and dancing for the songs, decent role for Srikanth and lame comedy from Brahmanandam.
Overall, this movie is a perfect example of how a movie should not be.
Boyapati thinks audience are dumb just like him to watch his stupid films with absolutely no logic at all.
I request everyone to boycott such stupid movies.
At least then these kind of directors realize their mistakes and start doing sensible movies..
SARRAINODU...
Another SGS, LOL!.
As an ardent fan of movies, watching films like these makes me sad!
Very sad!!
Moreover, I don't even had a respite after the movie as yesterday was Hanuman Jayanthi and a dry day!
tongue emoticon A ruthless villain who grabs innocent poor villagers lands and kills everyone who crosses his path ( I know you are already yawning!)...
A hero who doesn't like anyone breaking the law except him, confronts the villain and will not fight it out in the first scene because, the cinema length should be at least 150 mins..
A heroine, who is a damsel in distress being rescued by our hero and a romance follows...
A second fiddle, who is there to showcase her curves and to fill in 2 songs...
A comedian who tries to make you laugh but fails and makes you feel so sorry for him...On the top of all, cheap narration by the director which can only be enjoyed by illiterates!I bet you can't even sit through this movie...There is an English movie "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless mind", a Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet starrer.
The basic plot is to erase the memories of each other when their relationship is not going good.
Yday, while coming out of theatre I wished we had that technology.
Because that way, I can erase "Boyapati Sreenu", "Sarrainodu" and many such films from my memory.
I felt happy for the thought but then it suddenly struck me..
If i forget these people and films and after the process of deleting, while going home if i see the poster of Sarrainodu I may go back to see the movie?
That gave me chills my friends!.
Delightfully insane style over substance.
The English subtitling for this Tollywood effort is rough, and much of the humor doesn't fully translate, but director Boyapati Srinu and "Stylish Star" Allu Arjun (aka "Bunny") succeed in transcending the language barrier with their waaaay over-the-top action scenes, and some infectiously fun - hip-hop influenced - dance sequences.
Music is by SS Thaman, with choreography by Bollywood's Bosco, and it impresses and/or inspires giggles in equal measure.The first half of this fully ridiculous ride is the strongest by far, highlighted by a nasty fight scene on skates at a roller park, and ultimately, with a show stopping massacre at the ill-fated marriage ceremony that concludes Act 1.
Sadly, topping this visual mayhem would be next to impossible, which leaves the 2nd Act as a bit of let down.Love interest for our impossibly unstoppable fighting superhero is provided - during most of the 1st Act - by Catherine Tresa, and - in the 2nd - by the very alluring and talented Rakul Preet Singh, easily the best of all of the actors in this film (and a fella's best reason for sticking around past intermission)..
Might be the worst movie for this year.
If there were an option to choose 0, would have gladly.Likely, the worst movie to come out of Telugu industry so far this year.
(apart from SGS, which I have luckily escaped.....!) Absolutely mindless plot, poor narration, poor screenplay, crap editing mixed with mediocre casting,insane dialogues and unrealistic heroism make this movie your worst nightmare (unless u are into nightmares, that's a different story).
Its mind boggling how someone like Boyapati Srinu, with his style of movie-making (more like mediocre-making) managed to convince AA and his shrewd dad, AA, into making this movie.
This should have never made it onto the sets.This movie clearly reminds us again how steep the divide between Tollywood and its contemporaries, Bollywood and Kollywood really is these days..
High voltage mass entertainer.
Plus:
1. Allu arjun's oora mass performance
2. Hero elevation scenes
3. Aadi pinisetty
4. Action scenes (especially climax fight)
5. Songs and bgm
6. CinematographyMinus:
1. No story
2. No logic
3. Catherine tresa role was unnecessary
Verdict:
Allu arjun fans and mass action lovers will love it..
Best Commercial Entertainer.
Fight sequences were just top notch.
This movie could be easily called as one of the top 10 commercial films of all time.
The rapport build-up b/w the pro/anto-gonist was immeasurable, the best that I've ever seen in any film.
Climax was just the ultimate..
Sarrainodu Review: Thoroughly entertaining and enjoyable action packed ride!.
Movie: Sarrainodu (UA)Rating: 4.5/5Apart from BAAHUBALI 2: THE CONCLUSION, SARRAINODU is the most awaited Hindi dubbed film of the year.
And as a coincidence, both these are Telugu language action films and are excellent as well.
Allu Arjun, who's known for his stylish dance moves and jaw-dropping action, comes with SARRAINODU, a stylish action entertainer which has a perfect blend of masala entertainment.
The story is quite an interesting one, but it's the screenplay which holds all the proceedings together.
The execution is another major thing which works for the film.
It's true that many reviews for the Telugu version have criticized the film, but the film has made waves in Northern parts of India and many neighbouring countries.
People here have enjoyed the film thoroughly, making it the highest viewed Hindi dubbed film on YouTube till date.
Allu Arjun is another major reason to watch the film.
He's in his top form, and redefines style with his solid looks and performance.
He surprisingly shows varied emotions in many scenes: something he has not done in many of his previous films.
The heroines Catherine Tresa and Rakul Preet have a lot of to in the film, but in the end it's AA saving the day.
Aadhi Pinisetty as the Villain is impressive and is menacing at times.
The role suits him extremely well.
Rest of the cast does its job well, especially Srikanth: his bonding with AA is heartwarming.
V. Jayaprakash delivers a solid performance in the climax.The action is the major as well as the biggest highlight of the film.
It's solid and jaw-dropping as is in most of the AA movies.
The comedy by Brahmanandam is really hilarious.
The music is good, but you don't get to see it the Hindi version.
The cinematography, VFX and visuals are top-notch.
The emotional scenes have been handled very well, as are many humorous sequences.Another thing worth praise is the Hindi dubbing: the artist who has dubbed for AA has an amazing voice and suits AA, eventually making you think it's his original voice.
The production values of the film are praiseworthy.
SARRAINODU is a mass action entertainer that has already received a great response from its audiences.
Do watch and enjoy it, as the film shows that mass entertainers will never be out of fashion if executed well, like most South Indian films including this film too..
Ridiculous, Mindless, Dumb, Violent Movie.
Watched the special show of Sarrainodu at midnight on 21st in Sharjah.The story is very lame and similar to most Boyapati movies.
Needless violence, glorification of violent acts, wafer thin story, two heroines, item song etc.
There is nothing new to boast off.
Even the dialogues have a sense of deja vu.
It is not even like old wine in a new bottle ...
it is actually old wine in an old bottle.
The story or whatever you may want to call it consists of Arjun who playing the role of a vigilante who cannot see injustice anywhere.
He is willing to even kill in justification of justice.
How sick is that and how foolish is that his father who happens to be an IAS officer merely chides him for being difficult.
The father has to be phenomenally blind or an idiot to condone and pass of such behaviour as mere transgressions.Arjun falls in love with the local area MLA -Catherine.
Can you believe that Boyapati has made Catherine an MLA who moves around in designer clothes that reveals more of her body than hides it.
He keeps on tailing her and the girl falls for him.
Unmindful of this, his father packs him off to a village to see his friends daughter and be accepted by the daughter Rakul.
Here, he gets involved in an altercation with the villain who in fact happens to be his nemesis from an altercation in the city.
From here begins a tale of mindless gore, revenge and forced emotions.I cannot believe that I sacrificed my precious sleep for such a dumb, idiotic and foolish movie.
Even Allu Arjun fans should avoid this movie.
If you really feel compelled to watch the movie, at least watch when you are feeling terribly sleepy.
Maybe the movie will not hurt that much..
horrible terrible silly stupid childish immature movie script.
The director Boyapati Srinu imagines some kind of violent society in movies that does not exist in real world.
The director Boyapati Srinu imagines some kind of violent society in movies that does not exist in real world.
Lamest movie I have ever seen.
Lamest movie I have ever seen.
What a waste of resources.
What a waste of resources.
A person with such lame thinking is not qualified for writing scripts and should not be allowed to make movies.
A person with such lame thinking is not qualified for writing scripts and should not be allowed to make movies.
Awful songs.
Awful songs.
Worst Editing.
Worst Editing.
Terrible actions sequences..
Terrible actions sequences..
Avg Movie but u can watch it once.
Fights are not realistic at least they are have stopped doing that slow motion things in fights in the movie over all in the movie Few songs and Intervel Fight is worth watchable., There is no change in the screenplay which went awry in the first half of the first half itself and and gained momentum in the latter half of first half and go into its regular awry way in second half.
overall not a good movie but has few songs and a fight to watch.
thats it.
Not worth watchable.
Movie lacks in story and sense and also there is no logic in the characters in the movie mainly in second half but villain is very good in this movie, i think movie is not suitable to arjun,There is no change in the screenplay which went awry in the first half of the first half itself and and gained momentum in the latter half of first half and go into its regular awry way in second half.
Below average second half and it's last 30 mins, mediocre screenplay are spoilers of the movie.
Below average second half and it's last 30 mins, mediocre screenplay are spoilers of the movie.
for me its just a disastrous movie afer SGS..
Overall a Below Avg Movie.
1.Movie is worst except MLA song and Intervel Fights,, 2.
Seems like over slow motion in fights 3.tried every shot like Mamidi Tota fight From Srimantudu,, 3.Bgm is copied form TERMINATOR 5.There is no change in the screenplay which went awry in the first half of the first half itself and and gained momentum in the latter half of first half and go into its regular awry way in second half.
This movie is a oora mass commercial entertainer from Boyapati Sreenu with Allu Arjun which has its pros and cons stuffed together.
This movie is a oora mass commercial entertainer from Boyapati Sreenu with Allu Arjun which has its pros and cons stuffed together.
This movie is a oora mass commercial entertainer from Boyapati Sreenu with Allu Arjun which has its pros and cons stuffed together.
Below average second half and it's last 30 mins, mediocre screenplay are spoilers of the movie.Overall onetime worth watchable.
|
tt0057449
|
The Raven
|
"The Raven" follows an unnamed narrator on a dreary night in December who sits reading "forgotten lore" by a dying fire as a way to forget the death of his beloved Lenore. A "tapping at [his] chamber door" reveals nothing, but excites his soul to "burning". The tapping is repeated, slightly louder, and he realizes it is coming from his window. When he goes to investigate, a raven flutters into his chamber. Paying no attention to the man, the raven perches on a bust of Pallas above the door.
Amused by the raven's comically serious disposition, the man asks that the bird tell him its name. The raven's only answer is "Nevermore". The narrator is surprised that the raven can talk, though at this point it has said nothing further. The narrator remarks to himself that his "friend" the raven will soon fly out of his life, just as "other friends have flown before" along with his previous hopes. As if answering, the raven responds again with "Nevermore". The narrator reasons that the bird learned the word "Nevermore" from some "unhappy master" and that it is the only word it knows.
Even so, the narrator pulls his chair directly in front of the raven, determined to learn more about it. He thinks for a moment in silence, and his mind wanders back to his lost Lenore. He thinks the air grows denser and feels the presence of angels, and wonders if God is sending him a sign that he is to forget Lenore. The bird again replies in the negative, suggesting that he can never be free of his memories. The narrator becomes angry, calling the raven a "thing of evil" and a "prophet". Finally, he asks the raven whether he will be reunited with Lenore in Heaven. When the raven responds with its typical "Nevermore", he is enraged, and, calling it a liar, commands the bird to return to the "Plutonian shore"—but it does not move. Presumably at the time of the poem's recitation by the narrator, the raven "still is sitting" on the bust of Pallas. The narrator's final admission is that his soul is trapped beneath the raven's shadow and shall be lifted "Nevermore".
|
good versus evil, cult, horror, gothic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0451164
|
Pray for Morning
|
In 1984, a group of five high schoolers had broken into an abandoned hotel, as was tradition after graduation. They were all gruesomely murdered. At the insistence of one set of parents, the police brought in a psychic, as they could find no leads. The psychic said that the murderer was still in the hotel. The police searched but found no one. The psychic died in her sleep that night. The search was never continued, the murderer never found.
20 years later, six students had planned to enter the hotel. Two younger high school students found out that they were "up to something" and they "wanted in." The plan was, during the course of one night, to find all five rooms where the students were murdered. They find a severed hand in the first room and it unleashes a horrible curse. After the first two deaths, they find out that they need to find the other hand and the body and bury them together.
|
suspenseful
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
This under the radar indie horror wasn't cheap to make, standing at over 2 million dollars Pray for Morning looks a lot better than it's shoddily made cover art and stars horror legend Udo Kier.It tells the story of a right of passage for youngsters to spend a night in an abandoned hotel, but the latest batch are in for the night of their lives as they find themselves getting picked off one by one.Though not an original concept the delivery is, this isn't your standard slasher or ghosty flick it's something altogether different and has character.
Sadly the execution is lacking and the film is just plain messy, with an unlikeable cast, confused plot and mediocre delivery this should by all rights have been better.It has it's moments but they are too few and far between, so though it starts promisingly enough it spirals out of control and faceplants hard.The Good:Promising startDeaths are pretty brutalThe Bad:Highly amateurish cover artPoorly madeThings I Learnt From This Movie:Udo Kier is overdue a lifetime achievement awardThe horror genre needs more bone crunching.
A group of students or student types enter a haunted house for a dare, out of curiosity or necessity, and strange things happen, then spend the next hour walking around in the semi-dark.
Yes, you guessed it, somebody or more likely something is killing them, starting with the resident nymphomaniac and her boyfriend in the middle of a session.
Others...Seriously, if you can sit through this one in a single session without taking a break to watch something genuinely interesting - like watching paint dry - well, you're braindead if not dead already.
I don't have any preconceptions about B movies I like to watch all kinds of quality work.
This movie however, was not fun to watch.
It wasn't the horror that had me cringing in my seat, it was the acting.
The most cliché group of teenagers decide to ditch their graduation party to spend a night in an abandoned and haunted hotel as a way of marking end of their youth, friendships etc.
When I started watching this, I was ready for the usual sloppy horror movie, with terrible acting, terrible plot choices and, well, basically the usual stuff that all horror fans are already used to by this point.
Although I have to say, that "Pray for Morning" did contain all of the previously mentioned things, it was also surprisingly entertaining..
A different kind of horror movie.
When this movie first started I thought...Oh No another teen slasher flick!
It's about these teens on there graduation night they go to this hotel that is supposed to be haunted.
They are gonna stay the night, and go to the individual rooms where these kids from the 80's were murdered.It starts off kinda slow, but really picks up by the middle.
What I thought about the movie totally changed, It has twists and turns you really don't know what's going on until the end.This movie was not your typical cookie cutter horror movie.
I was actually pleasantly surprised by this movie.
That may be because I'm a major fan of B horror movies, mostly because I like to laugh at them...but this one I actually found I was enjoying it.
I have to admit the acting was a little sub-par for many of the characters and a lot of the plot was cliché and directly from some A list horror, but really nothing is new anymore so I didn't mind that too much.
The plot was pretty good...the characters...could have been developed better, and some just seemed pathetic.
But it is horror and they still were a bit entertaining.
What bothered me the most was the special effects, of course it was low budget, but come on...the lighting seemed like sunlight shining on a pool.
Just ignore the actors' looks of "horror" which look more like surprise and trying not to laugh.
Other than that, if you enjoy and I mean enjoy B list movies I think you'll be surprised..
What we call in Spanish NACA!
NACA!
the set looked like the tower of terror at Walt Disney world.
Bottomline is that for someone who is studying film (and even those who are not) This movie is a complete waste of time and money.
An essay in horrorThose who love horror films will recognize this formula, a group of H.S. kids camp out in a haunted .
The first hour runs the familiar course A) Background of said location, B) Intro of the kids and their dynamics c) Realization that something is not right and finally d) first deaths.
All fine and good.The bad: Never saw a window, never saw the kids attempt to escape after the first deaths.
They spend too much time wandering halls looking for the rooms.
In fact, the movie moved too slowly for my liking.
This last character (the girl whose brother was killed twenty years prior) should have shared her information long before entering the haunted locale.
Furthermore as the story progressed she reveals even more (when the time is right) Why?
Presumably to come 'back to life'.The good: Very haunting.
(Heck how he did it would have made a better movie) The curse aspect.
The hotel itself was very frightening.How it should have went down: Removing the two nerd boys and getting to the curse sooner would have helped.
Introducing the villain sooner and diving into Jesse's past midway through the film would have lend credence to the proceedings.
The fact that Jesse reveals at the end that he knew all along who he had been in a past life p*ssed me off!!
Editing would have helped.I have written all of this because I didn't hate the film, I only wanted it to be better.
So I say, IT'S WORTH A LOOK for die hard adult horror fans.The acting was fine, the direction, inspiring at times and the story idea was good..
Eight friends decide to go to an abandoned hotel that is supposedly haunted after the brutal murders of five teenagers back in 1985.
As soon as they enter the hotel, weird events begin to happen, and they start disappearing after seeing a mysterious light.The mystery unravels as the remaining survivors realize that they're trapped in the hotel, and every time they try to leave, they're transported back to where they started from.
I wasn't expecting much going into this film, so maybe that's why I was so surprised by how much I enjoyed it.
It's not your 'typical' haunted house story, and there's more to it than meets the eye.
The friends are more than just mere eye candy who have no clue what's going on...they actually solve the riddle of the hotel and know how to stop the curse of it, but all they have to do is survive to achieve that goal.
I watched this movie after having seen it gain a rating of 8 on IMDb. I thought this must be a good horror movie to attain such a high rating (even though there had only been 44 votes at the time).
After watching it i can say i am a little disappointed in the movie.
Seemed like a low budget movie with poor actors & a fairly simple plot & thats exactly what you get!
I thought it was a good enough watch & kept me reasonably interested but the fact that the source of all evil in the hotel turns out to be a stand-up show magician seemed to ruin the whole thing for me.
The pacing of the movie was also sluggish, as the majority of the kills were children twitching with blue light shining over them.
They didn't reveal the ghost until too late in the movie, where you stopped caring.I was most disappointed by the fact that these teenagers appeared to be stupid from their dialogue, but were still able to solve plot points.
It was extremely artificial, and not in the least bit suspenseful.There are good points to the movie, as the characters seemed to genuinely enjoy each other's presence (save the obligatory fighting couple), which is a dynamic most movies miss on.
There were a few good actors in the mix, even though they weren't playing with their best cards.
And the story, if re-edited by a different company, could be genuinely interesting.It also had a beautiful and creepy soundtrack, and sometimes (note, sometimes) had the perfect atmosphere for a higher quality horror movie..
I'm a huge fan of horror movies, and this one did a lot right, though some things they messed up.They were right in casting more or less unknowns for the kids.
A common mistake in horror movies is that they'll cast stars as the younguns.
B, No one can watch the movie without thinking of them as stars.
There are rare actors that can disguise themselves in their character, but for the most part it's a bad idea to stick them in a horror.
In horror movies, either they stick with the formula, or they do something completely different.
They stuck to the formula in that the kids who were all about the sex were instantly killed- during the act.
That's bad form.They should have put a story to the light earlier, and shown something other than that the people were standing stalk-still screaming.
The creepy brownish light and the ghosts' random appearances were well done, and the actors did a good job.
Supernatural teen haunted house horror..
Pray for Morning starts as a few teen friends decide to spend the night in the Royal Crescent Hotel, a large rundown long abandoned hotel that was the scene of five gruesome murders back in 1984.
Jesse (Jonathon Trent) has always been interested in the hotel & drawn to the mystery surrounding the still unsolved murders, he has convinced some of his high school mates to accompany him, during the middle of the night of course because going there during the day when it was light would just be silly.
Once there they decide to check out the rooms in which the five bodies were found, before anyone know's it an evil ghostly spirit has been awakened & is killing the teens off one-by-one & unless they can stop it none of them will live to see the morning...Written & directed by Cartney Wearn I watched Pray for Morning last night without knowing a thing about it, the title is rather vague & could have referred to anything so I didn't go into it with any great expectation yet I still found myself disappointed & not particularly having a good time.
What we have here is a cross between The Shining (1980) with it's hotel style setting & The Amityville Horror (1979) with the now standard haunted house scenario (spooky property has a dark past, you know the sort of thing) along with a few boring mystery elements thrown in there for good measure.
The film spends far too much time showing annoying American teens wondering around this old hotel in the dark, it just doesn't make for particularly entertaining viewing & gets very boring very quickly.
The script is predictable & is nothing more than a teen slasher with some tenuous supernatural elements along with an obligatory twist ending which didn't do much for me at all to be honest as I thought it was pretty ineffectual.
There is one amazing scene I just couldn't work out, in it one of the annoying American high school teens examines a twenty year old blood stain & determines that whoever left the stain was trying to hide something!
According to earlier exposition the police had 'torn the place apart' looking for clues so why not find that severed hand only a few feet away from a murder victim?
The police obviously didn't do a very good job, did they?
There's no explanation as to how or why there's a ghost in the hotel or how it manages to alter reality or how it can transport people back in time &, of course, the annoying American teens mobile phones don't work for no apparent reason either so they get isolated from the outside world in a now obligatory plot device for low budget horror films.
The story doesn't engage or entertain, that character's are both poor & annoying, the plot is forgettable & not that much actually happens.The hotel sets or locations (not sure if they filmed in a real hotel or in a studio) are quite nice but why are some of the lights on?
Horror wise there's not much to get excited about here, there's a few bloody corpses & what looks like a bamboo stick stuck through someone but not much else & there's not much in the way of scares since the less than impressive CGI computer effects have the opposite effect & make things almost laughable.
The film seems to take itself very seriously & there's no humour or fun to be seen anywhere which doesn't help when the plot feels so stale & lethargic.
To give it some credit there are a few period flashbacks at the end which are quite nicely done I suppose.With a supposed budget of about $2,000,000 this has better production values than a lot of recent low budget horror but that's hardly any sort of recommendation on it's own.
The only real cast member of note is cult German born actor Udo Kier who doesn't look interested at all & to my eyes seems to put on more weight in every subsequent film he makes (the Steven Seagal of the low budget horror world!).Pray for Morning is a dull supernatural teen horror slasher that doesn't satisfy on any level really, never mind pray for morning I would suggest that most audiences will be praying for it to finish not too long after it has started..
Fine horror.
this film didn't have any well-known actors in it, apparently it's a small budget film, but the actors' performance are excellent, especially Jonathon Trent's cast, he perfectly showed the courage and the fearlessness of the young character.The story starts a few graduated kids went to a abandoned hotel where mysterious murder took place, and then found themselves in danger from "someone" in the hotel.The entire plot of the haunting house story is carefully planned, signs appeared one by one, giving a new hint to the killer of those bone-twisted victims, while creating another mystery, first the "this place is not safe" sign, and then those hands.
It wasn't easy to guess what these things means actually as the story is just an ordinary haunted house story.The death of the first few friends are quite surprising, they 're not killed each time they got teleported by the ghost, sometimes one survived, sometimes one killed, after their friends were killed hopelessly, Jesse were invited to see the killer ghost, then, the whole atmosphere turned and they started to revenge.A major weakness of this film is that the surprising ending is not clear enough, they director didn't make it clear how Jesse remembered his previous life in the hotel, i couldn't figure it out until i watched some scenes again, it was that when the old women touched him and showed him how she died, she showed him who he was as well, and at the ending, there wasn't any link back to this hint.
But one thing i still not sure, how did Jesse bring back his boss to finish the job?
I never thought I'd feel so robbed of time.I rarely see really bad movies...
And I do that to convince my wife that I didn't waste her time making her watch the movies that I like her to watch with me.But on this one, I failed.Actually, it was my wife who tried to help herself enjoy the film, while most I could do was delay my judgment and not ruin it for her.
Throughout the movie all that I could think of was hitting the eject button.
In the end, the only thing positive with the experience was that we both enjoyed hating the film.We hated it that when a character, inside a haunted building, sees a kid with blood trickling down his forehead, extends his arm to the kid and says "It's okay!" instead of running like hell.
I know, people in horror movies are supposed to do stupid things, that's the way it is, but this one is just way too dumb!We hated it that the characters get teleported during climactic scenes, but never beyond it.
They didn't even have problems searching for the clues in every nook and cranny of the hotel.We hated it that there was so much detective work done you'd think they're with Scoobie Doo. Seriously.We hated the clichés of stumbling on the floor while running, rivals fighting over a girl at a really bad time, and a teen couple leaving all the others to have sex while inside a ghost-inhabited hotel.
Clichés are forgivable, but clichés that are badly used and looked just plastered on the script is a crime.The monster in this movie, or the element that's supposed to make this scary, is lame, funny at best.
The title, while interesting, turned out to be irrelevant to the story.
Save for the camera, it's really easy to mistake this for a high school project.To each his own, but Pray For Morning for us turned out to be Pray For The Ending.3 out of 10.
The story behind the movie is good, although some of the special effects could be better.
Who would ever think that power would still be connected to an old abandoned hotel, yet they try the breakers and presto, they have lights!!
If you can over look all these little things and others like them then its a watchable flick.
If you're going to watch this movie with someone who constantly points things like this out, don't.
You're better off watching this movie without them.
|
tt3212232
|
I Am Wrath
|
In the midst of a unprecedented crime wave in the city of Columbus, Ohio, Governor John Meserve (Patrick St. Esprit) gives a press conference about his crime reduction efforts. When questioned by protestors about a proposed pipeline, Meserve promises that he has commissioned an independent study of the pipeline. Abbie Hill (Amanda Schull) and her family are watching the press conference, and they are thrilled that the Governor has referenced the work her mother Vivian (Rebecca De Mornay) is doing.
Vivian heads to the airport to pick up her husband Stanley (John Travolta), who has returned from a job interview to manage a factory in Orlando, Florida. When they arrive at their car, they notice one of the tires is flat. Before Stanley can fix it, a man approaches and asks them for money. Stanley politely refuses, but another man sneaks up on Stanley and stuns him with a blow to the head. The first man stabs Vivian and takes her wallet. Stanley watches the men flee.
The police use Stanley's descriptions to quickly capture the man who killed Vivian. However, they let him go after Stanley positively identifies him. This enrages Stanley, and now that he knows the man's name is Charley, he starts to stalk him. When he sees a carefree Charley on the street, Stanley goes home and retrieves a case from behind a wall. The case has several passports, foreign currencies, and several weapons. He calls Dennis (Christopher Meloni), his friend from the Special Forces, and asks him for information about Charley and his crew. Dennis runs black operations from beneath a barbershop.
Stanley uses Dennis intelligence to track down one of the men who attacked him at a local bar. As the man lies dying, he hints that Vivian's murder was more than just a robbery. Stanley and Dennis are photographed as they dispose of the body. Local crime lord Lemi K (Sloan) is furious when he sees the photograph, and he orders hits on the men who killed one of his crew.
Stanley tracks down another man who was involved in the attack. He confronts him at a tattoo parlor, after getting the words "I Am Wrath" tattooed on his back. After killing the man, Stanley makes off with a bag full of drugs and money. Stanley and Dennis use the bag as bait to lure Charley to the VIP room at a Korean nightclub. Before being killed, Charley tells Stanley that Vivian's murder was ordered by Lemi because she was too nosy.
Lemi has tracked down Abbie and is holding her hostage. Stanley and Dennis arrive and kill Lemi. When two corrupt cops arrive, Stanley realizes the entire plot was organized by Governor Meserve. He infiltrates the Governor's mansion and murders him. When the police arrive, Stanley raises a weapon, prompting them to shoot him in his bulletproof vest. While he recovers in the hospital, one of the corrupt cops tries to assassinate Stanley, but Stanley shoots him with a hidden gun. Dennis spirits Stanley away from the hospital, and the film ends with Abbie reading a postcard from Stanley that he sent from Sao Paulo.
|
comedy, neo noir, murder, violence, flashback, revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
It's a good action movie starring John Travolta.
The movie reminds me of a cross between John Wick and The Punisher (of which Travolta played the villain in the 2004 movie version).Travolta plays what looks like your average Joe, who watches his wife get murdered right in front of him by what looks like an average car jacking in a city that's been boiling over with violence lately, but it turns out Travolta has a past that was beyond average and goes Liam Neeson on the bad guys.Though he does not look as good as Neeson lashing out those particular set of skills on his wife's killers (but who does?),Travolta was still fun to watch as he hunted down his foes one by one, and just when he thought he was finish, turned out we have more villains to kill.
It's good banter.This action movie was a great safety net for Travolta, I can't remember the last time I seen him in something decent, and that's what this was, very decent, very watchable from the very beginning all the way to the very end..
Travolta has done much better work as a tough guy, notably in Luc Besson's "From Paris with Love." Here he is not given a multi-layered, finely nuanced character and makes little effort to bring new dimensions to a sparsely developed script.
'John Wick' made revenge movies look cool again, and 'I Am Wrath' really tries to emulate similar coolness but it falls out like toothless alligator trying to eat buffalo.
Chuck Russell's film is a hard-edged action thriller that keeps things simple over the course of its lean 90 minute running time.Travolta is Stanley Hill, a family man with a dark past who springs to action when his wife (Rebecca De Mornay) is murdered.
Case in point the very ending when the daughter played by actress Amanda Schull is in front of her home with husband and son get a postcard from Brazil, hum does that seem a tiny bit like the great Morgan Freeman getting a postcard from Tim Robbins in the classic film "Shawshank Redemption" ?John Travolta is good, but for this type of action film, he is not quite up to the great Liam Neeson or Denzel Washington.
I liked John's actions scenes much better in his film "From Paris with Love".
The best action fight scene in this film is with his co-star, Christopher Meloni in the barber shop fight scene which take it's cue from Denzel's night club fight scene in "The Equalizer" where he slice and dice up several Russian thugs in short order.Also there is pretty eye candy for us men who like to see pretty women and that is pretty Cuban Latina Doris Morgado.
Yes here it is folks another in a long line of 'Death Wish' clones and one which quite frankly isn't much cop...The story here sees Stanley Hill (John Travolta) hunting down the crew that killed his wife.
Many of the supporting performers don't fare much better and to be honest the only person who I thought made any kind of impact was Luis Da Silva Jr who was actually very good and he looked kind of menacing as well.Of course, a weak and generic story doesn't always matters in films such as I am Wrath as long as it has some style and intensity, but the film falls flat in these respects too - there's no real imagination here, there is some style here (although I personally feel the John Woo style slow-mo stuff looks a bit lame now).
I watched it, but the only feeling I had about it when the credits started rolling was indifference.I Am Wrath isn't completely terrible, but it's the sort of film that's so generic and so safe you'll likely be predicting what's going to happen 5 minutes before it does.
Like I said a generic story isn't a bad thing if you're made to care about what happens, but I just never got that feeling at any point during this film..
The action is heavy, the plot is sort of thin, but who cares, we got back up in the way of that cool bro, and pretty soon the grinder turns on and meatbags start flying, and there is no reanimating these simple thugs, they were born dead, out on the streets and they should've never messed with Trav's love, cause when Trav gets mad, he explodes like a racecar too long in the red, its got double packed Wrathful ending that will leave you spinning and wanting just lil' extra taste.
What it should have said instead was "out of work actor stoops to new low in the action film genre."Horribly predictable and equally painful to watch this movie was a total let down for me.
Yvan Gauthier and Paul Sloan are responsible for his tight script directed by Chuck Russell and for a change of pace in the current run of corruption in the police force and in politicians in general this film stands out as a cut above the usual tales.Stanley (John Travolta) works with cars (his history includes Black Ops years ago) and is happily married to Vivian (Rebecca De Mornay) when Vivian is killed by a group of thugs.
His version of Liam Neeson, an awesome new hair piece (most impressive part of the movie.) Meloni looks more intimidating than Travolta but nobody really cares.
Stanley's (John Travolta) wife Vivian ( Rebecca De Mornay) is killed in front of him and the cops let the killer go.
This becomes a multiple kill-scene movie as both Stanley and Dennis knock off the bad guys in a sort of systematic way and we think we are done.
This is not to be confused with a million other low budget action movies, by crappy directors, starring actors past their prime, like Wesley Snipes, Cuba Gooding, Dolph Lundgren etc, I Am Wrath is a lot better than those.
So twelve long years later I'm treated to "I Am Wrath".The film is about a man Stanley Hill(John Travolta of Saturday Night Fever 1977 fame), whose wife(played by the lovely actress Rebecca De Mornay who saw fame in the film The Hand That Rocks The Cradle 1992) is brutally murdered in front of eyes by muggers.
But in this case, Stanley Hill is totally justified.More John Travolta films: The Boy in the Plastic Bubble (TV Movie 1976), Blow Out (1981), Staying Alive (1983), Look Who's Talking(1989 and subsequent 2 sequel films), Pulp Fiction (1994), Phenomenon (1996), Broken Arrow (1996) & Face/Off (1997 Both directed by Hong Kong cult action film director John Woo of Hard Boiled 1992 fame), Michael (1996) and Basic (2003).
Along for the ride is Christopher Meloni as Travolta's right-hand man – they both make for a great pairing and it would be fun to see a few more adventures where the duo take-out a few more bad guys.
How many times can the good guys have guns pointed directly at their heads and simply spin round and knock the gun out of the way?If you've watched 'I am Wrath', then you'll know that the answer is at least 5.This would have been a far better film if Travolta had just been a regular guy instead of the oh-so clichéd Spec Ops agent who's put his past behind him, or if the villains had any sort of charisma or brains.
Well first of all don't expect a shawshank redemption out of this so stop being immatureThe movie starts pretty good and has a good follow up too The other thing is that this movie is not boring at all so its pretty fun to watch John Travolta is a very good actor and it makes the movie better This movie is awesome not 10 star worthy but because some people voted one star im voting 10 I don't want to spoil anything so its a good old fashioned revenge and action / crime fans will like it :).
John Travolta, who is a talented actor as well as a gentleman and nice guy, had better stay away from action roles.
I was honestly not expecting much from Travolta with a name like "I am wrath" and his pose evoking mid-nineties bad-cop action flicks, but as it turns out I was overestimating the film at that.
Like most revenge movies, Stanley has a dark hidden past and a set of skills that he revisits to uncover who is responsible for his wife's death.Without spoiling anything, there seems to be a trend in the world of cinema presently- an older man loses something, he just happens to have a set of skills and the villains have messed with the wrong man blah blah blah.I Am Wrath is overall just another B grade revenge story with a predictable story line straight to the finish line.
And that's sad, because the two main stars, John Travolta and Christopher Meloni have nice free flowing chemistry between them, and both of them are charismatic and talented to pull off bad ass tough guys with emotional range.
And let's not forget John Travoltas awful wig was also so bad it was hard to concentrate on this movie.
Outside of not being able to take my eyes off of Travolta's terrible rug, Meloni is the only thing worth watching in the film.
Well, honestly, then I didn't have all that much hope for it, since it was an action movie starring John Travolta.But director Chuck Russell managed to take my lack of expectations and give me a good and wholesome entertaining experience with "I Am Wrath".The story is about Stanley (played by John Travolta) whose wife is killed, and he seeks out vengeance upon those responsible.
And he seeks help with his old friend Dennis (played by Christopher Meloni) to accomplish this particularly violent task.Actually John Travolta and Christopher Meloni really carried the movie quite nicely.
An ex-CIA operative whose wife is murdered, is seeking for revenge.The script is ludicrous, the dialogs are terrible and they ruin the possibility of developing any chemistry between Travolta and Law & Order's Christopher Meloni, who plays his ex-CIA buddy.The action sequences are ridiculous too.
Also never forgets to be in close range so you can grab his gun, disarm him and kill him instead.I am really surprised that someone would write such a script in 2016, convince an international star like Travolta, who had his share on good action movies in the past and get a green light to shoot this.Even the latest of Steven Seagal's movies are better than this..
Not even close to what we should expect from John Travolta's acting, nor his contemporary fellow actors and this absolutely low grade, poor choice of a movie.
there is not anything here that we haven't already seen before."Unemployed engineer Stanley Hill (John Travolta) witnesses the brutal murder of his wife Vivian (Rebecca De Mornay) who was attacked by thugs in a parking garage.
It is only then that Stanley and Dennis are found to have a mysterious past that, until now, they kept very well hidden."Still, "I am Wrath" shows to be good enough to provide entertainment as we stand still watching two great actors, John Travolta and Christopher Meloni, working together to achieve vengeance..
I used to like movies with John Travolta.
at some point I was sure that Travolta reminded me of Schwarzenegger and after that I was glad that the movie ended and I got what was wrong with the Movie, it all comes down to its Director.The Director is Chuck Russell, and his finest hit on action of this kind was Eraser with Arnold Schwarzenegger, and I can't stop feeling like he was trying to recreate his master peace from 1996, and he did it, but we are not in 1996 anymore, unfortunate for Chucky .I voted 3 of 10 for this movie; I wanted to turn it off but watched to the end anyway.
John Travolta name wont save this movie from being less than average if it was released like 10 years ago it might be good movie but we have seen tons of similar ideas and movies that watching it now leaves you wondering why you wasted your time on such crab .
But that's beside the point.So, Travolta as the self-made avenging angel Stanley, who swings into action, along with his former colleague Dennis (Christopher Meloni), when his wife Vivian (Rebecca De Mornay) gets killed.
Now the rest of this review I cut and pasted from some other review because i had to fill up the space .Give me a good movie without one thousand bullets AND NO MORE little Dutch girl crap .He teams up with his old OPs partner that don't give him a choice and they start cleaning the streets, bad cops, and higher ups in the process of getting the ones that actually did the crime against his wife.
Ever since that terrible movie, Battlefield Earth, Travolta hasn't hit the peak that he had during the 90's, with films like Pulp Fiction, The General's Daughter, Michael, Phenomenon, Face Off, Primary Colors and a Civil Action, so it's really going to take a big movie to bring him back into the spotlight.
Budget: $18million Worldwide Gross: N/AI recommend this movie to people who are into their action/crime/dramas starring John Travolta, Christopher Meloni, Amanda Schull, Rebecca De Mornay, Sam Trammell and Patrick St. Esprit.
At least Travolta has had a good run as a movie star since his breakthrough in 1977 with Saturday Night Fever.He plays Stanley Hill who witnesses the murder of his wife in a car park.
The police appear to be uninterested in apprehending the suspects.However Stanley is ex special forces and he turns to his old friend Dennis and both plan on finding the murderers.Welcome to the world of the geriatric action thriller, it is Travolta's turn to go for the Liam Neeson 'Taken' dollar although he just seems so unsuited to be a hard ass action hero.Meloni and Travolta at least make a good team and as they delve deeper they find out that certain criminals in the city are protected and his wife might not had been a random victim.However the movie is uninspired and the ending horrible..
John Travolta is a very good actor and I feel for a direct to DVD film as this is was done exceptionally well by director Chuck Russell.The story is your typical revenge thriller formula but I think this was elevated by Chuck Russell and John.When I first seen this my expectations were low but was pleasantly surprised on how it was handled.
An Excellent Movie With A Great Actor Called John Travolta..
This movie knows we get it, so I was pleased with the ending.As far as John Travolta's wigs I don't know why he feel the need at this point in his career.
This movie knows we get it, so I was pleased with the ending.As far as John Travolta's wigs I don't know why he feel the need at this point in his career.
As they inflict vengeance, those involved in the cover up realise that Stanley and Dennis are more dangerous than they could ever have imagined...After the amazing success of the Taken franchise, it seems that once big A-list stars are trying to resurgence their career by doing their own vengeance/one man army movie.......geri-action if you would.Arnie did it with the last act of Sabotage, Cage did his with Tokarev, Costner did his with 3 Days To Kill, and Willis is in talks to do a remake of Death Wish.And here's Travolta's take on the vengeance movie, and it's a pretty strange movie, considering it's directed by Russell, whom showed a lot of flair with Eraser, The Mask, and even Nightmare On Elm Street 3.It's strange in the fact that nothing new is offered to the viewer.
A bad guy with an ulterior motive, and for no reason other than lazily explaining why Stanley is in possession and can access so many weapons.If it wasn't for this silly plot inclusion, thus making Stanley a human killing machine, instead of making him the Everyman we first thought he was, it would have been just that little more palatable.Travolta is fine, he can do this type of role, the grieving Husband/Father/Son walking in his sleep, so you'll spend more time looking at his wonderful hairline than his performance, and the action scenes are hilarious, Travolta's stunt double just has his back to the camera while the action is taking place, and it's right out of the Seagal school of poor stunt doubles.The one liners provided by Dennis, fall flat almost every time, which in turn, makes then the funniest one liners you've heard in a long time, they just seem so out of place when your main character has just lost his soul mate.For a generic action film, it's fine, it runs along at a steady pace, and provides no surprises for the viewer, just another nuts and bolts action film starring so done who wants to be as famous as he used to be.But Travolta must have really believed in the script because he gets a tattoo with the films title on his back, and he literally says the films title when he asked who he is.That is supposed to be one of the more tense moments of the film, but again, it's sadly hilarious.And for some reason, the ending reminded me of The Shawshank Redemption.Not terrible by any means, just a little pointless..
Playing the protagonist is John Travolta who looks really good for his age of 62, and is a treat of watch in action.
I don't know whats worse here: the morons on this site, actually thinking this is a good movie or John Travoltas fake looking wig.
Still, I feel that Travolta could have found a better movie project than "I Am Wrath".
Travolta is a great actor and at times it seemed like he could save the movie.
|
tt0060305
|
Le deuxième souffle
|
Widely respected in the criminal world for his ability and loyalty, Gu Minda escapes from prison and heads for Paris to see his devoted sister Manouche and her faithful bodyguard Alban. Her admirer, restaurant owner Jacques, is shot dead by gunmen sent by club owner Jo Ricci, who then sends two men to Manouche's house. Gu catches them there and gives them his trademark execution, which is a country drive in which they are shot and dumped. Commissioner Blot of the Paris police suspects the hand of Gu, who Manouche and Alban then try to smuggle to Italy via Marseille.
Before going, Gu is interested in one last job to put him in funds. An old associate Orloff sends him to Jo Ricci's brother Paul, who is planning to hold up a security van full of platinum bars. It is escorted by two armed policeman, one of whom Gu kills. Commissioner Fardiano of the Marseille police catches Gu and Paul, giving them rough treatment. In an exchange which is secretly recorded, Gu is tricked into admitting that Paul was involved.
Jo Ricci, wanting revenge on Gu for his jailed brother, also sees a chance to get Gu's share of the proceeds. He works on the other two participants in the robbery, who fear Gu may name them as well. To clear his name in the underworld, Gu escapes from the hospital where he is being held and captures Commissioner Fardiano in his car. After being forced to write a confession, which admits maltreatment and clears Gu of informing, he gets Gu's usual execution. Orloff then tells Gu where Jo Ricci is meeting the other two robbers and, in a final gun battle, all four are killed. Searching Gu's body, Commissioner Blot finds the confession, which he drops at the feet of a journalist.
|
violence, neo noir, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Jean-Pierre Melville and his long standing infatuation with Hollywood "Film Noir",which he was the most devoted follower of, in entire history of French cinema, produced the whole line of best French crime pictures ever.
Building a story of old school criminals with sense of criminal honesty and honor, around 800 million heist, Melville, tells many stories, from human relations, betrayals and greed, to love and friendship that will go all the way.The dialogs are great.
Witty police inspector Comissaire Blot, beautifully portrayed by Paul Meurisse and Lino Ventura's Gustave "Gu" Minda,play the game of cat and mouse with no unnecessary talk, and no unnecessary action.
Melville devoted a lot of attention to detail, and this film deservedly looks like a crime-action documentary, with no plot holes or "how the hell this or that could have happened" types of questions for the viewer, which is very important for mature audiences that appreciate classic films.
I think that this may be the best film Melville made in the 60's, even better than "Army of Shadows" or the "Samourai",and was the last he made in his own studio that burned up during the production of "Samourai" in 1967, which may explain the possibilities he had, to devote time and attention to details.
Meanwhile the smart Commissary Blot (Paul Meurisse) is investigating a shooting plotted by the mobster Jo Ricci (Marcel Bozzufi) and the gangster Jacques the Lawyer (Raymond Loyer) that is murdered.
Gu decides to travel to Italy but he is short of money; his friend Orloff (Pierre Zimmer) invites him to participate in the heist of an armored truck with his friend Paul Ricci (Raymond Pellegrin) and the gangsters Antoine (Denis Manuel) and Pascal (Pierre Grasset) in Marseille.
"Le Deuxième Soufflé" is a realistic police story by Jean-Pierre Melville with great performances.
not bad at all, actually very good and meticulously structured heist movie, but not great.
I had seen nearly everything that is readily available from Jean-Pierre Melville in the United States by the time I got to Le Deuxieme soufflé, which may be part of why I didn't respond overwhelmingly to it.
After such challenging, methodical and precisely existential crime masterpieces as Le Samourai, Le Cercle Rouge, Bob le flambeur and the underrated Le Doulos, this one just seemed to not pack the same kind of punch that the others did.
Again, this may be the fault on the viewer for seeing this last among his mostly thriller-oriented oeuvre, but perhaps it's also some of Melville's fault too; again and again, as the dedicated and ruthless auteur that he was (one of the great French directors I would argue), he kept coming back to men in trench-coats with grim expressions figuring out on both sides- criminal and detective- of how to plot the next move or, for the former, how to keep from the fatalism of the plot.Which, for Melville, is something that comes second nature.
The difference, perhaps, in this case is that the length (a whopping two and a half hours, longer than both The Red Circle and Army of Shadows) and the amount of details in the structure of the story (i.e. what happened on such and such a day made this happened could've been snipped, albeit I can't pinpoint to which) bog down some of the more successful aspects to the picture.
Which is also to say that for all of its minor misgivings, Le Deuxieme soufflé (or, simply, The Second Breath) is near-classic Melville, with nail-bitingly tense suspense scenes like the opening escape from the prison and the latter heist sequence- somewhat more obvious and less coolly ambitious as Red Circle.There's the amazing cinematography as well, a trademark of Melville and his crew to make things gritty but smooth in precision and style, and the performances from Paul Meurisse as the Detective (maybe my favorite performance of the picture just for the intelligence he imbues in the character), and Lino Ventura as one of the quintessential Melville anti-heroes, Gu, the convict who wants in on the big 200 million heist.
And even as it could be Melville's most "talky" picture after Bob le flambeur (which is relative to how pleasantly light, or how seemingly sparse, his films are with dialog), when the characters speak it's to the point of with some quotable spunk to them.There's an icy, unspoken angst in Melville's world of criminals, almost questioning but still true to the notion of the 'policier', where you'd want the criminals to get away with it if the detective wasn't so doggone determined all the time.
It's another fine piece of film-making from the director, just not an all-time-top flick - more along the lines of Un flic.
However intimidating a run time may look, the greats go by quicker than many 90 minute efforts.
While many have commented on "Second Wind" (using the English title for simplicity's sake) running time, rest assured, it too is deceptive.The film opens abruptly into the finale of an escape sequence from prison, giving no breathing room as you are thrown into the action.
Many plot points are running intersect, including a battle over the cigarette business and the forming of a heist, the latter of which Gu is drawn into in order to have some money when he leaves the country.
While there are a lot of characters and going ons to keep track of, as long as one is paying attention, following along is simple, as Melville masterfully brings these plot points together.This is a dialogue and character heavy movie, making it more similar to "Bob the Gambler" (1955) than "Le Samurai(1967).
While maybe not as snappy as Godard, or Tarantino for a more modern example, Melville's films were always strong in dialogue, and this is no exception.
Whether it's humorous, like inspector Blot's sarcastic rant on the unwillingness of a restaurant's employees and customers to comment on the shooting that had occurred, or serious, such as a trio of gangsters confronting a man they believe set them up, there are no wasted scenes or dull moments, whether five minutes or twenty.
There's nothing here story wise that is of particularly new ground: a noir style fatalism, a police force as corrupt as the criminals they pursue, political intrigue and betrayals, however it doesn't matter.
This is actually a much more subdued effort for Melville in that regard, but it works here as the focus is much more on story and characters.Not to be missed for fans of crime films..
As is common in Jean-Pierre Melville's later films, this meticulously crafted crime film opens with a title card that epigrammatically sets out a foreboding epigram that molds ostensible meaning into the action: "A man is given but one right at birth: to choose his own death.
I'm not so sure that this slow, deliberate caper, or any of Melville's others for that matter, seeks all of the indications of this quote, but its pretext of fate, mortality and grim, solipsistic judgment corresponds with the essential themes of the film.Like Le Cercle Rouge, Le Deuxième Soufflé is a nominal saga, an antithetical and composite film in which the life seems as if to impose and simultaneously exhale.
There are several instances set within moving cars, less to expand the atmosphere than to show the inhibition of the space they employ.What frustrates and somewhat detaches me however is that Melville never seems to give his characters any involved cognitive measure.
Gu is a ruthless, intractable and curtailed presence who gains recognition, even from Inspector Blot, another wonderfully named character, played by Paul Meurisse, who respects his deadly actions because he eventually complies with and doesn't veer from his dang "code."Much of this 1966 cops-and-robbers film can be explained just in terms of its distilled preoccupation with the reference to the conventions regarding the treatment of Chandler, McBain, W.R. Burnett, Jim Thompson, stylish Hollywood crime dramas, and classic American gangster pictures.
Melville's films in this mode have the element of photogenics, conformity to modern ideas and models nourished by a shadowy nonchalance and the characters' affectedly memorialized mannerisms.
Also, it's not until Gu changes into clothing more mindfully echoing that of a gangster that he is allowed to free himself from being so secretive and concealed.The sullen, inflamed and exceedingly conventionalized quality of this typified film conveys Melville's immersion in the downbeat deliberation of the play of loyalty and destined disloyalty.
With this transcendent crime film, as per Melville's usual, complete with another great title, Second Wind, Melville pushes the tonal qualities and gray scale of the image to new levels.
The movie's preoccupation with issues of fellowship, abnormally all-consuming professionalism, silence, and duplicity reverberates with Melville's own distinction as an egocentric, tight-lipped, fringe-dwelling figure in French cinema, who despite his success never truly declared participation or involvement in any founded generation or evolution of filmmakers..
I'll start with a quote from Alphonse Boudard, regarding the tendency to make crime films like Greek tragedy: Melville wants to remake the Atreidae among criminals.
The excessive length of the film (Le Samourai clocks in at 100 minutes, Un flic at 94--these stories are not much less complicated than Deuxieme souffle), means there must be scenes that drag on, until the dramatic effect is totally lost.
Pierre Zimmer, playing Orloff, is given silly lines about what he has to do with Gu, if there's betrayal, but he comes off so stiff you want to fast-forward through his scenes.
Lino Ventura acts well, has lots of charisma, but looks old--and his age is commented on by the younger thugs.
There's only one stand-out performance: Paul Meurisse is so elegant and smart as Blot that the story takes off every time he comes into the frame.
If you have seen Les Diaboliques, you'll know how good he is.The camera work is mediocre; a washed-out b/w that looks more like television than Melville's great pictures of the 50's.
Slow Going But Rewarding Heist Film Needs Another Look.
While in many ways a quintessential heist film, and in other ways a gangster film, this brooding black and white masterpiece also deals with certain codes of honor, and much that is important in the film is left unsaid; the viewer may expect reactions that don't occur, may often question the motives of characters that don't speak, and it is only to viewing the film a second time that much of it comes clear; with the excellent Criterion transfers, it's fascinating to follow the second time with the included commentary; this is not an action-packed film at 2 1/2 hours, but a good deal does happen: lives are lost, a massive robbery takes place, and one is never too sure where the lines between law and disorder cross.
I don't speak French, but the acting and the subtitled dialog are outstanding throughout.The plot and each situation, each conversation, is completely credible, and follows naturally, yet not predictably, from what came before.A note to younger audiences: there are no highly choreographed fight scenes or stylized gun battles (though there are fights and shooting).
This appears to mark the turning point where Melville lost all real interest in character (after the wonderful Le Doulos and the underrated L'Aine Des Ferchaux) and turned his attention to set piece robberies and shoot outs.
Performance wise two people stand out - Paul Meurisse as the compassionate, intelligent and very, very funny Inspector Blot, and Pierre Zimmer as Orloff, the gangster who serves as the moral touchstone for his peers.About three quarters of the way through the film turns from an escaped convict and heist movie into the story of a man trying to prove that he hasn't been a police informer/collaborator.
As with a lot of Melville's gangster vs police movies (a big favourite with the French) you can't help feeling that he's really dealing with the issue of wartime resistance to the German occupation.
To my mind, though, Melville seems more interested in shoring up the myth of resistance rather than dealing with the truth (as Louis Malle tried to in Lacombe, Lucien, resulting in his effective exile from France for the rest of his life).The scene where Paul is interrogated by the police was apparently edited at the insistence of France's censors to remove the scenes of water being poured down his throat.
The Second Chance of a Desperate Man. Painstaking detail and near-real-time narrative pace characterize THE SECOND BREATH (WIND).
This is another in Melville's series of caper films in which the viewer is shown the entire process of planning and executing the crime.
But, like the director's other fine films, this one is also about the characters.
On several occasions, Melville has given us a nearly washed-up criminal as a main character and here we are given one of the hardest-boiled examples: Gustave "Gu" Minda (Lino Ventura).
The film alternates between Gu and Commissaire Blot (Paul Meurisse) the police chief who is as committed to capturing Gu as Gu is to escaping.
A latter-day Film Noir in which fate plays a major role, it's not Melville's best film, but it deserves to be seen by anyone interested in this director..
Another of Melville's existential thugs struggling with the Code, and with 144 minutes to do it in.
Nearly two-and-a-half hours is a long, long time in the movies, especially so when Jean- Pierre Melville is once more demonstrating his passion for hard boiled gangsters.
With Le Deuxieme Soufflé (Second Breath), it seems to me that Melville has given us some extraordinary set pieces of heists, shoot-outs and chases...including one roll-along-the-floor while-shooting-a-gun-in-each-hand and-plugging-all-the-guys-who were-going-to-plug-you that now has become a pretty-boy-actor-as-tough-guy cliché.
Melville underlines it all with his stoic gangster code of conduct, illustrated by the pretentious words that start this movie: "A man is given but one right at birth: To choose his own death.
But if he chooses because he's weary of life, then his entire existence has been without meaning." Let me tell you something...nothing, nothing will go right as long as Gu Minda, cold-blooded murderer with a soft spot for Manouche, believes his buddies think he ratted them out.
Is this to deny that Melville was a great director?
Hardly, but it is to recognize that Melville was human: He didn't always make great movies; his preoccupation with gangsters and their fictitious code of conduct was limiting; his indulgence in what passes as "style" in the gangster milieu could appear, in my opinion, downright silly; and as a screenwriter he was capable of some corny gangster dialogue (or at least he was ill-served at times by the subtitle writers).
The director who could give us Bob le Flambeur, with its irony, its humanity and its tight, story-telling prowess, is a great director with a sense of humor.
Watch Army of Shadows and Bob le Flambeur (and Le Cercle Rouge) first, then Le Deuxieme Soufflé and Le Samourai...and come to your own conclusions.
The devil of it with Le Deuxieme Soufflé is that great stretches of the movie are gripping, Lino Ventura (with that hard, tired face) and Paul Meurisse are first- rate and Melville never lets us have less than a superbly presented series of scenes.
But, in my opinion, his series of scenes, some lengthy, don't add up to a tightly realized movie, especially at over two-and-a-half hours.
Gu Minda (Lino Ventura) is a cop-killing gangster who has just broken out of prison.
Two hoods threaten Manouche, his long-time girl friend (Christine Fabrega), in her apartment.
With Melville's code of the existential gangster, there never is.
While the plot is simple, Melville embellishes it with any number of twists and turns, sneaky actions, a coincidence or two and some satisfying betrayals, plus a long, extremely well-done set piece on how to hi-jack a van full of platinum.
It would be difficult to say -- between Ventura with Gu's grim, murderous honor and Meurisse with Blot's sardonic realism and intelligence -- who gives the film more interest.
Very well written and played--this one is a thinking person's crime film.
"Le Deuxième Soufflé" is an excellent crime film--mostly because it emphasizes realism as opposed to sensationalism.
The first half of the movie have a lot to do with his escape and his life in hiding.
However, once again, there is much more to this 150 minute film--a lot of twists and turns that occur because Gu, though generally amoral, will do anything to convince his fellow criminals that he has a strong sense of honor and integrity.
Making this film in black and white was a great choice, as it heightened the Noir look and it as well as "Bob le Flambeur" and "Le Samourai" are among the best in this French genre.
One of the greatest french crime movies of all times.
A director who was very influenced by the US crime films world.
And the sequence - in LE DEUXIEME Soufflé - where the four gangsters wait for the armored truck robbery, on the desert road, this very sequence is directly a homage to the nearly same scene, in the Robert Wises' film, where the three robbers - Ryan, Belafonte and Begley - wait before the heist.Some scenes here are also some repetitions for further Melville's films.
You'll have the very same scene, later in LE CERCLE ROUGE, when Yves Montand makes the same thing during the jewelry store heist.Or the other sequence, where Denis Manuel - Antoine's character - walks into the room where he knows he will probably have to fight against his enemy; Manuel hides a gun somewhere; and a couple of minutes later another character comes into the room, after Manuel's departure, searches and finds the famous gun, hidden just before.
Cops enter Alain Delon's flat, hide some bugs in order to spy him...And also a couple of minutes later, when Delon comes back to his room...Know what I am driving at?That the Melville's touch.
Shooting in black and white was essential to focus viewers on the story, the characters and the script.
A middle-aged gangster with the deceptively nice and normal name of Gustave (or "Gu") escapes from prison and returns to his habitual environment, to wit the environment of heavy-duty professional crime.
|
tt0080058
|
L'umanoide
|
Sometime in the distant future, the planet Metropolis, (once known as Earth), is a peaceful utopia led by a leader called The Great Brother. His world is threatened however by his brother Graal who has escaped from a prison satellite, stolen a warship and enlisted the help of a mad scientist named Dr. Kraspin. Kraspin has a plan to make Graal an army of unstoppable super soldiers he calls "Humanoids," but first he requires a powerful element to mutate them called Kapitron that is being kept at the Grovan Institute on Metropolis.
Graal sends down a squad of soldiers to break into the institute and steal the Kapitron. They are also ordered to kill a woman named Barbara Gibson, a scientist who once worked with Kraspin but who realized the horrendous potential of the element and had Kraspin committed to a mental control facility. Kraspin had escaped the facility two years earlier and seeks revenge against her. Barbara leaves before the slaughter when she is summoned home by her mysterious pupil, a boy named Tom Tom who exhibits powers of mental suggestion. Tom Tom also communes periodically with two mysterious beings who he claims are foreign travelers.
After the raid, Graal returns to his hidden base on the planet Noxon where he is joined by Lady Agatha, the world's tyrannical queen, who hopes to share the rule of the galaxy as Graal's wife once he conquers Metropolis. Kraspin is also hiding there, given asylum in exchange for keeping Agatha young and beautiful with daily injections of a youth serum he creates by sapping the life essence of female slaves.
Once in possession of the Kapitron, Kraspin selects the perfect specimen to test his mutation on and targets a bearded, giant of a man named Golob. Kraspin forces Golob to crash his ship in a lake and Kraspin fires a small Kapitron missile which explodes turning Golob into a beardless, raging hulk with superhuman strength. Witnessing the horror is Golob's robot dog companion Kip, who sadly watches Kraspin capture and take his master away.
After Kraspin fits Golob with a brain chip to control him, Graal unleashes him upon Metropolis with orders to kill the Great Brother. Nick, a Metropolis security officer, tries to protect the Great Brother, but Golob easily brushes off any armed forces that get in his way. As Golob approaches his primary target to destroy him, Kraspin interrupts with new orders to go after Barbara Gibson first and Golob suddenly leaves.
Golob tracks Barbara to her house but Tom Tom uses his powers to calm him down and removes the control chip. Golob, now free of Kraspin's control, becomes Tom Tom and Barbara's friend. With his humanity returning, Golob tells Barbara that Graal and Kraspin are hiding on Noxon and she goes to inform Nick and The Great Brother. On her way, however, Barbara is captured by Graal's forces and taken back to his base. Tom Tom and Golob try to rescue her but are forced to retreat when Graal's soldiers open fire. The two are saved by the mysterious travelers who shoot the soldiers with glowing arrows.
At the Metrolpolis command center, Nick devises a plan to rescue Barbara with a commando raid, but the Great Brother fears innocent people living on Noxon will be killed. Instead, Golob says he will rescue Barbara himself. Nick joins him and he and Golob take a ship to Noxon. Along the way they discover Tom Tom stowing away and wanting to help. Nearing the planet, their ship is attacked by Graal's fighters and crash lands. Near the crash site, they encounter Kip who Golob excitedly remembers as his old companion. Kip then helps them sneak into Graal's base. Once inside the heroes discover Kraspin has a giant missile filled with Kapitron that he will explode over Metropolis and turn its population into mutant humanoids.
Meanwhile, Barbara is taken to Kraspin's laboratory and placed in a machine to extract her essence. Kraspin promises Lady Agatha that Barbara will provide the best youth serum yet, but Barbara is saved last minute when Nick and Golob burst in and free her from the machine. Kraspin and Agatha then attempt to flee to Graal's ship.
With Barbara's help and assistance from the mysterious travelers, the heroes launch an attack on the missile launch bay. During the battle, Agatha, unable to get a dose of the youth serum, collapses and dies when she rapidly ages into a skeleton. Nick chases Graal onto the bridge of his ship and faces off with him in a duel. Graal shoots lasers from his hands in defense and almost kills Nick, suddenly Golob appears and crushes a control panel on his chest and Graal disappears. Kraspin is killed when Golob topples the launch pad of the Kapitron rocket. Golob then removes the Kapitron container from the missile which then launches across the bay and hits Graal's ship destroying it.
With the whole facility exploding around them, the heroes make their escape but without Golob. Tom Tom spots him running away with the Kapitron and jumping off a cliff into a lake. The lake explodes and the heroes fear Golob dead, but he emerges from the water appearing bearded as he did before, with the effects of the mutation having been reversed. The group briefly celebrates their reunion and victory over their enemy.
Soon, a mysterious translucent sailing ship appears in the sky piloted by the two travelers. Tom Tom tells Barbara that his mission is over and he must return home. Barbara asks who he really is and where he comes from. Tom Tom tells her he is returning to a land called Tibet in the ancient past, but he will always be with her in her heart. Tom Tom is then seen departing on the ship as the movie ends.
|
entertaining
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0086216
|
Rumble Fish
|
Set in Tulsa, Oklahoma, the film begins in a diner called Bennys Billiards, where local tough guy Rusty James is told by Midget that rival group leader Biff Wilcox wants to meet him that night in an abandoned garage lot for a fight. Accepting the challenge, Rusty James then talks with his friends — the wily Smokey, loyal B.J., and nerdy Steve - who all have a different take on the forthcoming fight. Steve mentions that Rusty James' older brother, "The Motorcycle Boy," would not be pleased with the fight as he had previously created a truce forbidding gang fights, or "rumbles." Rusty James dismisses him, saying that Motorcycle Boy (whose real name is never revealed) has been gone for two months, leaving without explanation or promise of return.
Rusty James visits his girlfriend, Patty, then rendezvous with his cadre and walks to the abandoned garage lot, where Biff and his buddies suddenly appear. The two battle, with the fight ending when Rusty James disarms Biff and beats him almost unconscious. Motorcycle Boy arrives dramatically on his motorcycle and this distracts Rusty James who is gashed by Biff in the side with a shard of glass. Incensed, Motorcycle Boy sends his motorcycle flying into Biff. The Motorcycle Boy and Steve take Rusty James home (past Officer Patterson, a street cop who's long had it in for the Motorcycle Boy) and nurse him to health through the night. Steve and the injured Rusty James talk about how Motorcycle Boy is 21 years old, colorblind, partially deaf, and noticeably aloof — the last trait causing many to believe he is insane.
The Motorcycle Boy and Rusty James share the next evening with their alcoholic, welfare-dependent father, who says that the Motorcycle Boy takes after his mother whereas, it is implied, Rusty James takes after him. Things start to go wrong for Rusty James: he's kicked out of school after his frequent fights. Despite Rusty James' desire to do so, The Motorcycle Boy implies that he has no interest in reviving any gang activity. Rusty James fools around with another girl and is dumped by Patty.
The two brothers and Steve head across the river one night to a strip of bars, where Rusty James enjoys being away from his troubles. The Motorcycle Boy mentions that he located their long-lost mother during his recent trip while she was with a movie producer, which took him to California although he did not reach the ocean. Later, Steve and Rusty James wander drunkenly home, and are attacked by thugs, but both are saved by the Motorcycle Boy. As he nurses Rusty James again, the Motorcycle Boy tells him that the gang life and the rumbles he yearns for and idolizes are not what he believes them to be. Steve calls the Motorcycle Boy crazy, a claim which the Motorcycle Boy does not deny — further prompting Rusty James to believe his brother is insane, just like his runaway mother supposedly was.
Rusty James meets up with the Motorcycle Boy the next day in a pet store, where the latter is strangely fascinated with the Siamese fighting fish, which he refers to as "rumble fish". Officer Patterson suspects they will try to rob the store. The brothers leave and meet their father, who explains to Rusty James that, contrary to popular belief, neither his mother nor brother are crazy, but rather they were both born with an acute perception. The brothers go for a motorcycle ride through the city and arrive at the Pet Store where the Motorcycle Boy breaks in and starts to set the animals loose. Rusty James makes a last-gasp effort to convince his brother to reunite with him, but the Motorcycle Boy refuses, explaining that the differences between them are too great for them to ever have the life Rusty James speaks of. The Motorcycle Boy takes the fish and rushes to free them in the river, but is shot by Officer Patterson before he can. Rusty James, after hearing the gunshot, finishes his brother's last attempt while a large crowd of people converges on his body.
Rusty James finally reaches the Pacific Ocean (something the Motorcycle Boy never got to do) and enjoys the shining sun and flocks of birds flying around the beach.
|
neo noir, murder, dramatic, violence, psychedelic, philosophical
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Viewing the movie with a more mature mind now, I appreciated it much more than I did when I was nineteen.Based on the S.E. Hinton novel (Coppola also translated 'The Outsiders', which remains remarkable even today for its amazing cast), 'Rumble Fish' follows the story of one Rusty James (Matt Dillon, in full bad-boy mode) stuck in the middle of nowhere (Tulsa, actually), dissatisfied with his life but not really bright enough to know why.
Honestly it helps that Rourke has some of the best lines in the film, most notably one of my favorite quotes from any film: 'You want to lead people, you have to have some place to take 'em.' Motorcycle Boy is also something of a transitional hero, knowing he is damned to live, and die, in this hellish world but making sure the path to redemption (and escape) is secured for his follower (he even says of Rusty, 'His only vice is loyalty.')'Rumble Fish' is mostly an artsy character piece, the type of film that normally does not appeal to me, but Coppola displays such skill with the material and is so willing to subvert the very conventions of his film so that they further serve the characters and their development that the movie works, and works very well.
I read Susie Hinton's books afterwards and also sought out the Outsdiders (also from a Hinton novel) which was made at the same time and was a good film with some of the wistful intensity of teenage life so strong in Rumble Fish but was like the straight, conventional brother by comparison.
I saw Francis Ford Coppola's Rumble Fish in a film class, and it was interesting to see how certain scenes were made (seeing transitions and shots in slow motion, stopping to point out things), among the plot.
There's also keen supporting work by fresh faces- Nicolas Cage, Chris Penn, and Laurence Fishburne as friends and sometimes followers of Rusty; Diane Lane (wonderful even in her youth) as a sweet/sour love interest; and Dennis Hopper as the father of Rusty James, who appears just enough to get the psychological points across to the viewer.Coppola tends to use his symbols rather thickly, and it's arguable if he may show things too much, or maybe if he shows them just enough (i.e. skies darkening, clocks).
Hinton novel, tells about young street tough Rusty-James (Matt Dillion) who idolizes his older brother known only as 'The Motorcycle Boy' (Mickey Rourke).
Those who wonder why Mickey Rourke is so revered by cult film fans need look no further than his almost-hypnotic performance as The Motorcycle Boy. But Matt Dillon is just as good as his younger brother, and when you also have the likes of Nic Cage, Diane Lane, Dennis Hopper, Laurence Fishburne, and Chris Penn in the supporting cast, you know it's a once-in-a-lifetime movie.
It should be made clear that this author also comes from that midwest and identifies with this theme, so there is some bias in this review, but this may apply to other "midwestern refugees" as well.Fans of S.E. Hinton, on who's book the film was based and who co-wrote the screenplay, will appreciate the film, as well as fans of Tom Waits, Stuart Copeland (of the Police and little known project Klark Kent- which closely resembles the soundtrack), Mickey Rourke, or any of the (then) young, up and coming actors like Matt Dillon, Nicolas Cage and Diane Lane.Rourke is at one of the peaks of his young career here, a cool rebel without a cause type, vaguely reminiscent of young Peter Fonda or James Dean- a striking character.
The film has memorable scenes and lines, one of which is Dillon's character saying to the fatalistic older brother- "Motorcycle Boy" played by Rourke, something like- "People would really follow you anywhere, why don't we do something?", to which Rourke responds- "Yeah, they'd probably follow me right down to the river...and jump in."Similar scenes and numerous references to time passing away seemed to summarize the hopeless stagnation of growing up nowhere and proceeding to go nowhere.
Groping in the dark for everything or anything meaningful in the context of a forgotten, lifeless irontown where even the young seem more like ghosts trying desperately to become tangible in some sense, and the middle aged are already on some other world.Other films that come to mind- James Dean films; "Reckless", another Hollywood film released a year later, with Aidan Quinn (as "Rourke"- coincidence?), and Daryl Hannah, was semi-successful in making the occasional reference to a similar blighted steeltown theme, though overall it was spotty; "Dogs in Space" with Michael Hutchence of INXS was a punk classic, and had some of that "nowhere with style" appeal with an Australian twist; two other 1980's films the author never saw- "Down by Law" and "Rivers Edge" probably fit somewhere in here as well..
It is the flip side to "The Outsiders"; and in my opinion, the more mature work of the two (although both are very good).Matt Dillon gives his best performance as Rusty James, a 1950s street punk whose alcoholic father has all but walked out on him, and whose older brother (an enigmatic figure known only as The Motorcycle Boy) has left and moved to California some time ago.We are led to infer that The Motorcycle Boy was a sort of rebel hero - a type of Robin Hood, as Rusty James says - and the entire town loves him.
He rescues his kid brother from a violent underground fight with a group of thugs and takes him back to the safety of their home.The Motorcycle Boy has come back in order to make amends, one supposes; or at least because he feels as if he has an obligation to see his father and brother again.Meanwhile, Rusty James - in a desperate intent to match his brother's reputation - continues his downward spiral of street fights and violence, resulting in more than a few bloody brawls."Rumble Fish" is displayed in grainy black-and-white, and the soundtrack itself is surreal, often featuring fragments of distorted audio matched with hazy visuals.
An all-star cast includes not only Dillon and Rourke but also Diane Lane (who was also in "The Outsiders" with Dillon), Dennis Hopper, Diana Scywid, Vincent Spano and Nicolas Cage.Dillon's performance is key to the film because essentially this is his story, but it's being narrated to a certain effect by The Motorcycle Boy (at least insofar that it's his problems taking form in the narrative) - and Rourke gives a terrific performance.
It all depends on how far you want to look into it."Rumble Fish" may not be Francis Ford Coppola's best film, but it is one of his most sadly underrated movies and is probably worth mentioning in a list of the best films of the 1980s.
I was surprised about how many people wrote good reviews about this movie.I thought I was the only only one who appreciated the artistic value of Rumble Fish.It's my favorite movie and it finally got the special edition DVD it deserves.Most people don't get the deeper meaning of the film because nowadays people don't wanna think too hard watching a movie.It's a piece of art just as much as it is entertainment.You can get lost in the film for the visual and musical boundaries it pushes.I've watched it a thousand times and I never lost my appreciation for it's beauty.It's groundbreaking and a masterpiece in film making..
The film was shot in black and white and it had an expansive cast of talented actors including Matt Dillon, Mickey Rourke, Dennis Hopper, Diane Lane, Laurence Fishburne, Tom Waits and Nicolas Cage.
Dennis Hopper stars as Rusty James and the Motorcyle Boy's dad, Diane Lane stars as Rusty James' sweet friend, Tom Waits stars as the grill master in the town's diner, and Chris Penn, Laurence Fishburne and a young Nicolas Cage are featured as some of Rusty James' gang buddies.First of all, I adored the way 'Rumble Fish' was shot.
Matt Dillon gives his best performance as Rusty James, a 1950s street punk whose alcoholic father has all but walked out on him, and whose older brother (an enigmatic figure known only as The Motorcycle Boy) has left and moved to California some time ago.
Rumble Fish is a strange and hypnotic film that follows the character of Rusty James, a young punk growing up in a small sleepy mid-western town, shackled to a drunken father, a group of fickle friends, and continually in the shadow of his enigmatic brother, The Motorcycle Boy. The film, although seemingly set in the present day, uses the style of the old 50's melodramas to great effect, referencing the likes of Rebel Without a Cause and The Wild One with it's stark, stylised black and white photography and it's bizarre compositions, whilst director Francis Ford Coppola uses a number of audio and visual effects familiar from his previous films, most notably, The Conversation, Apocalypse Now and One From the Heart, to give the film a strange, hypnotic and dreamlike quality that lingers throughout the film.As with many of the other films that it references, the plot to Rumble Fish is quite simple, with Coppola building the film around the enigma of The Motorcycle Boy and around the ideas of family ties, small-town ennui and personal redemption.
Here, Rourke possess all the cool and feckless attitude of Brando and James Dean, but he also brings that damaged, somewhat alienated quality to role, which suggests so much about the characters and his past and also, about the possible future of the younger Rusty James.The cinematic style of the film is exquisite, with Coppola invoking a real period feel through the use of photography and production design, which jars beautifully against Stuart Copeland's very 80's, very anachronistic score.
The sound design is purposely muddy, attempting to convey along with the images that skewed, slightly alienated view of the world that these characters possess, whilst Copeland's music also merges with the sound design to heighten the overall atmosphere of the film.The acting is strong throughout, with Rourke coming across as the real standout, although the performance of Matt Dillon as the hotheaded and arrogant Rusty James is also impressive.
Now for Francis Ford Coppola that must have been really painful but those people who walked out had no brains."Rumble Fish" is a very visual stunning adaptation of a novel which has everything to make it a great film: actors who are now great stars of Hollywood and have went on to do huge films, a great score, atmosphere,editing and direction which gives it a 10/10 rating..
Its main character, Rusty James (Matt Dillon) tries hard to be a gang leader, and to live up to the days when his elder brother (Mickey Rourke) led the rumbles in the streets.
Mat Dillon, Mickey Rourke (in the ONLY significant role of his career), Nick Cage, Diane Lane (still the ultimate teen babe for me), Dennis Hopper, Tom Waits (with the famous "finger" scene), Lawrence Fishbourne and Chris Penn - incredible acting by all in this (sadly) forgotten masterpiece by F.F. Coppola.
I can certainly see the arguments against this film: style over content, pretentious, mannered acting, unnecessarily arty shots, etc., etc.It's just that, for me, these arguments don't matter.Generally, for the majority of people the reasons why they would like a film is either because its entertaining or it tells a message.Well, in the case of "Rumblefish" what I like about it is the way it confirms the best cinematic traditions of creating the magical out of the mundane in the way it mythologises its lead character, Motorcyle Boy (played by Mickey Rourke at the height of his powers).The story doesn't really matter.
The film is a biker homage, taking it's lead from such films as `The Wild One' and `Rebel without a Cause', and gives Mickey Rourke the chance to put his mumblings to good use, as the ultra cool Motorcycle Boy. The film deals with Rust James (Matt Dillon) a young man who idolizes his older brothers charisma, and the respect he seems to gain from everyone in the small Kansas town where the plot takes place.
Francis Ford Coppola's Rumble Fish is an underrated classic that's filled with great direction,amazing performances from the cast,visually stunning cinematography and a masterful music score.
It's one of my favorite films and is one of Coppola's best.Based on S.E Hinton's novel of the same name and set in Tulsa Oklahoma,Rumble Fish tells the story about a teen named Rusty James(Matt Dillon),a street fighter who loves gangs and gang fighting who wants to live up his older brother The Motorcycle Boy(Mickey Rourke)who is a legendary gang leader and is respected in his hometown,but has been in California and gone for two months.
Dillon and Rourke are both very good as they get deep into these two brothers and bring out the sense of lost time, jealousy and admiration there is between Rusty and Motorcycle Boy.Visually, the film is brilliant in its use of black and white as well as the minimal use of color.
The soundtrack CD, even in isolation, is great music.The film is beautifully shot entirely in black and white, with the exception of the Rumble (Siamese Fighting) Fish, of the title, a metaphor for Rusty James (Matt Dillon) and his brawl-prone friends.
He lacks his brother's intelligence and is too stupid to understand that this is why he will never be like The Motorcycle Boy who, for his part, now regards the "rumbles" as childish.The performances of Dillon, Rourke, Nicolas Cage, Vincent Spano, Diane Lane etc - are excellent.
Rated R for Language,Violence and Some Sex and Drug Content.I am a big fan of S.E Hinton's books.She is one of my favorite authors.I have read most of her novels.I saw The Outsiders movie which everyone praises and did not really like it.It was decent but the acting was pretty bad and it was not very faithful to the original novel.Though I heard there is a new DVD edition of that film called "The Complete Novel" with plenty of new scenes.I might check it out sometime.Anyway I rented this film about a year ago and I want to watch it again.It was a very good movie.It is a bit like Sin City which was filmed in Black and White but with some color.Most of this film is in Black and White with the exception of some Rumble Fish you see in a pet store which are shown in color.Francis Ford Coppola director of "The Godfather" trilogy disappointed me with "The Outsiders" but he did well with Rumble Fish.Rumble Fish has much better acting than the outsiders.It stars Matt Dillon and Diane Lane who were both in the outsiders together and it is much more faithful to the book than Outsiders was.The film is about a young teen punk named Rusty James.He is a gang-member who is the younger brother of a legendary gang-member named "The Motorcycle Boy".The motorcycle boy is colorblind and is slightly deaf.The film basically shows Rusty James's life after The Motorcycle Boy's return along with his friend Steve who is somewhat a nerd and not at all like the people he is friends with.The film has small roles from Nicholas Cage and Lawrence Fishburne.If you liked the book I recommend this film.You will not be disappointed..
I don't know many people who like it, but I've always loved the odd, dreamy story of Rusty James and his big brother, the Motorcycle Boy.Rumble Fish was Francis Ford Coppola's second S.E. Hinton adaptation of 1983 after The Outsiders, and it was generally derided as a silly, pretentious, self-conscious "art film for teenagers".
But it's really good, too".Among the good things are the beautiful cinematography, the outstanding but neglected soundtrack by ex-Police man Stewart Copeland, the best-ever performances by Dillon and Rourke, and not least the stunning Diane Lane, back in the movies recently after an up-and-down career.It's a film that oozes cool and which Coppola apparently regards with considerable affection.
Releasing after the much less artsy adaptation of S.E Hinton's The Outsiders Francis Ford Coppola's Rumble Fish adaptation is prime example of where the once great director started to lose the plot and a product that shows the downfalls of trying to make a movie with the style over substance mantra.Filmed in a stark Black and White and filled with many a dream like quality Rumble Fish's presentation allows no connection to the story of Hinton's book which one feels would be ripe even this day to adapt if the approach was more grounded.
Although the little success at the time of his release has subsequently become a cult film thanks to the cast, which includes, in addition to Dennis Hopper and Tom Waits, a host of young actors who will make Hollywood's fortune from Matt Dillon to Mickey Rourke Vincent Spano, Nicholas Cage and Diane Lane as well as a very young Sofia Coppola..
Like that previous film, Rumble Fish deals with teen angst with an almost film noir texture unusual for a teen flick of the time.Matt Dillon plays Rusty James, the punk brother of town legend "The Motorcycle Boy" who was played by Mickey Rourke.
Based upon the novel by S.E. Hinton, Rumble Fish follows the misadventures of the dim-witted Rusty James (Matt Dillon), younger brother to the legendary Motorcycle Boy (Mickey Rourke).
Matt Dillon and Mickey Rourke are nothing short of perfect as Rusty James and his older brother the 'motorcycle boy'and are also backed up by a strong ensemble cast featuring Nicolas Cage (in one of his first ever roles) Laurence Fishburne who had another early role after 'Apocalypse Now' and Diane Lane as Rusty's love interest Cherry.Now obviously most of the cast coming from the previous 'The Outsiders'which was another Coppola classic about growing up, but i have to say i liked this more.
It's based on the identically titled, and more satisfying, book by S.E. Hinton.***** Rumble Fish (10/7/83) Francis Ford Coppola ~ Matt Dillon, Mickey Rourke, Vincent Spano, Diane Lane.
|
tt0032571
|
Busman's Honeymoon
|
Larry Abbot (Wilder) and Vickie Pearle (Radner) are performers on radio's "Manhattan Mystery Theater" who decide to get married. Larry has been plagued with on-air panic attacks and speech impediments since proposing marriage. Vickie thinks it is just pre-wedding jitters, but his affliction could get them both fired.
Larry's uncle, Dr. Paul Abbot, decides that Larry needs to be cured. Paul decides to treat him with a form of shock therapy to "scare him to death" in much the same way someone might try to startle someone out of hiccups.
Larry chooses a castle-like mansion in which he grew up as the site for their wedding. Vickie gets to meet Larry's eccentric family: great-aunt Kate (DeLuise in drag), who plans to leave all her money to Larry; his uncle, Francis; and Larry's cousins, Charles, Nora, Susan, and the cross-dressing Francis Jr. Also present are the butler Pfister and wife Rachel, the maid; Larry's old girlfriend Sylvia, who is now dating Charles; and Susan's magician husband, Montego the Magnificent.
Paul begins his "treatment" of Larry and lets others in on the plan. Unfortunately for all, something more sinister and unexpected is lurking at the Abbot Estates mansion. The pre-wedding party becomes a real-life version of Larry and Vickie's radio murder mysteries, werewolves and all.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Sir Seymour Hicks Shines In British Mystery Movie.
A titled amateur detective & his mystery-writing bride spend a BUSMAN'S HONEYMOON when a murdered corpse is discovered in their new Devonshire home.Beginning with its first release in 1938 and for several years thereafter, MGM maintained a sister studio in England.
In this way she could take advantage of the wealth of British acting talent available, and also get around the UK restriction on the import of foreign films.
BUSMAN'S HONEYMOON (called HAUNTED HONEYMOON in the USA) was one of those films.BUSMAN'S HONEYMOON, while not unpleasant to look at, is not without its flaws.
The mystery isn't all that enthralling, but the main difficulty seems to lie in Robert Montgomery's portrayal of Lord Peter Wimsey.
This very fine actor made a career from playing suave, sophisticated characters, which Lord Peter should be, but you can never for a moment forget that this is only Robert Montgomery playing a role; nor for an instant do you believe that this is Lord Peter come to life.
And the American accent surely doesn't help, either.The lovely Constance Cummings, as Lady Harriet, suffers much the same fate.A fine gaggle of British actors, including Robert Newton, Leslie Banks & Googie Withers, appear in supporting roles.
But the real joy in watching this film is reveling in the rare opportunity to see the marvelous old actor Sir Seymour Hicks, who portrays Bunter the butler.
Sir Seymour (1871-1949) had been one of the great actor-managers & dramatists of the turn of the century.
Sayer's hero received superlative interpretations from actors Ian Carmichael & Edward Petherbridge..
Constance and Robert have a great deal of fun with this film although he is not my perfect idea of Lord Wimsey although he has a certain ironic charm.
As the other comments make clear, this is not a bad film.
One of MGM's British-made films, it has several good moments, and lots of good performances.
Its problem is that it makes the ultimately wrong decision to play down the mystery elements in favour of the romantic comedy.
It could have been a marvellous comedy thriller, but instead looks more like a pale imitation of the great romantic screwballs of the thirties, or the fag end of the cycle.
And, of course, we as viewers are supposed to assume that Robert Montgomery and Constance Cummings, by extension, are also such wonderful beings.So the picture is actually an hour old before we get going with the murder.
We have had the clues front-loaded, interspersed with the comedy and romance, whereas in the book Wimsey pieces together the clues from his interrogations.
The solution of the mystery ends up as a total afterthought, Montgomery casually piecing together the fiendish plot, and the film sloppily omits to give us any actual proof that that was how the crime was done.And, to coin a phrase, why oh why oh why did anyone think that suave New Yorker Montgomery could be Lord Peter Wimsey, whose archetypal English "silly ass" manner concealed a brilliant brain?
Montgomery is a very pleasing screen presence, but an English nobleman he is not.As usual it is the character actors that steal the scenes.
Robert Newton gives an early eye-rolling performance complete with dodgy West country accent.
But the real star of the show, as other comments have also pointed out, is the old actor-manager Seymour Hicks, showing the youngsters how it is done.So, much to please, much too long, more thrills needed..
This picture takes forever to get underway, as it isn't until 20 minutes in that a crime is committed.
Then ensues a lot of dialogue and alternate plot development, and then 30 minutes later, the body is discovered.
That leaves less than 25 minutes to track down the murderer.I did not read the book so I cannot comment on the pale comparison between the book and the film, or the unsuitability of Robert Montgomery as Lord Peter Wimsey.
I can say that I am never disappointed by Montgomery's presence in a movie, and here he was dapper and sophisticated as always - although perhaps slightly out of place with an American accent.I enjoyed the banter between Montgomery and Constance Cummings, the staid and stuffy presence of Seymour Hicks and the threatening appearance of Roy Emerton.
The solution to the murder seemed slapped together and almost an afterthought, and the whole mood of the picture seemed as though it couldn't decide if it was a romantic comedy or a murder mystery.
Montgomery fan or an aficionado of peculiar murder stories, this picture is for you.
disappointing adaptation of a good whodunnit novel.
Watchable but missable adaptation of Dorothy Sayer's novel about just married amateur detectives, Lord Peter Wimsey and crime novelist Harriet Vane (now of course Lady Wimsey) Attempts to add whimsical comic touches fall short of the mark and the detective mystery doesn't really grip either.
Shown in the UK as Busman's Honeymoon, but in the US and also these days on TCM as Haunted Honeymoon - a pointless and misleading change..
Only Hollywood would cast a very American actor as a member of the British aristocracy...but here they cast Robert Montgomery (with his very nice AMERICAN accent) to play Lord Peter Wimsey!
With that huge strike against it, can "Busman's Honeymoon" be any good?When the film begins, Lord Peter Wimsey is about to marry Harriet (Constance Cummings).
Peter doesn't know that Noakes is a total jerk who owes everyone and is a nasty piece of work.
Eventually his body is discovered and this challenges the couple, as they both promised to retire and Peter is supposed to stop his sleuthing ways and she is to stop writing murder mysteries.
Wanna make a bet as to whether or not they keep this promise?Despite terrible casting, the film works reasonably well...mostly because MGM had a great knack at making good looking movies.
Here it's newly-weds Lord and Lady Wimsey moving into a baronial mansion in rural England only to find that the previous owner has taken up final residence in the cellar.
So, Wimsey being an amateur sleuth and she being a crime writer, the Lord and Lady's honeymoon must be postponed, despite their pledges to leave detecting to the police.The film's generally too long such that the tepid script gets stretched beyond plot capacity.
As others point out, the mystery doesn't get going til the last 20-minutes.
That reluctant tasting scene is really well done, showing the Lord and Lady's comedic potential.
But a key problem is the talented Montgomery who, for whatever reason, lacks flair here for a William Powell type role.
All in all, the movie's a really minor entry in the Gentleman Sleuth Sweepstakes.
This film has the makings of a good mystery film -- detective hubby marries mystery-writer wife, and move into the house where the wife was born.Unbeknownst to them, the last owner of the house was murdered the night before!This film relies HEAVILY on "local color" and the "local characters" to keep it going.
Haunted Honeymoon (1940) * 1/2 (out of 4) British film from MGM has Lord Peter Wimsey (Robert Montgomery) marrying mystery writer Harriet Vane (Constance Cummings) but their honeymoon is very short as they investigate a murder together.
If you look at the title and are expecting some sort of supernatural film then it's best to get that out of your mind.
After viewing this film I started to look around and read some other reviews and it seems that the majority of them were negative, although very few were as negative as my thoughts on the film.
To me this was one of those films where as soon as something happens it hits your eyes, travels to your brain and then your brain forgets what you just saw in the matter of seconds.
I think there are a couple major problems with this picture but the main one is Montgomery.
There's no question that he was a fine actor but this here has to be one of his worst performances if not the worst.
Perhaps had the film stayed closer to its source material, the play Busman's Honeymoon, then the actor could have done more with it.
This film version goes for more romantic charms than mystery and the actor just suffers the entire time.
Cummings really isn't any better and the two lack any real chemistry.
Another major problem is that the director just never makes anything interesting happen on the screen in terms of style, energy or anything else that you can think of.
HAUNTED HONEYMOON is a real snoozer from start to finish..
Read Dorothy Sayer's Busman's Honeymoon, then you'll understand why this movie is so disappointing.
The very basis of the Wimsey Vane marriage was clearly outlined in the book that neither wanted to change the other and yet in the very first scene that is precisely what they proposed to do.
Please see the Bunter actors in the later TV adaptations for a much much better idea of Bunter.
Example: Lord Peter introduces Harriet Vane as Lady Wimsey!!
I cannot imagine why the screenwriters felt they had to make these fundamental changes in character.
Good but not great..
It doesn't hold up to other mystery/comedies like The Thin Man Series.
Sayers fans, who have very particular ideas about adapting stories featuring Lord Peter Wimsey.
One reviewer called the title change (from Busman's Honeymoon to Haunted Honeymoon) pointless and unnecessary.
Whatever one thinks of the title Haunted Honeymoon, the title change was understandable.
Very few in America are familiar with the phrase "Busman's Holiday," which the original title is meant to be a version of.
Not for Fans of Dorothy Sayers, But.....
When I think about whom to cast as Lord Peter Wimsey, I think of someone skilled at playing silly-ass aristocrats.
I know that Ian Carmichael appeared in several television adaptations of Sayers' Wimsey novels in the 1970s, and I hope to have a chance to see them some day.
For this one, they might have cast one of the Aldwych farceurs: Ralph Lynn (the descriptions of Lord Peter in the earlier novels make him sound like Lynn) or Claude Hulbert.
Instead, MGM originally cast Robert Donat after his success in GOODBYE MR.
CHIPS and, when he dropped out, used the visiting Robert Montgomery -- a fine actor, but not really suited for the role.
Then they rewrote it so that Peter and Harriet (played by Constance Cummings) were more like Nick and Nora Charles in this hash of BUSMAN'S HONEYMOON.Sigh.
I'd still like to see Sayers' story done right, but that's not going to happen any time soon.
Leslie Banks as Lord Peters' philosophical brother-in-law, reduced to an admiring acoylite; Seymour Hicks, really too old for Buntner, but playing the imperturbable butler.
Frank Pettingell is fine as the jack-of-all-trades Puffett, and Robert Newton as Frank Crutchley.
Like many another movie "adapted" from another medium, bearing only a passing relationship to the original, I force myself to look at it as something having nothing at all to do with the source material, and find it pretty good on its own account..
Quite similar to the The Thin Man series, a witty married couple bands together to help solve a murder in Haunted Honeymoon.
Robert Montgomery, a man who solves crimes as a hobby, and Constance Cummings, a crime novelist, are married and vow to give up that part of their lives.
However, as soon as they arrive at an English cottage for their honeymoon, a man is murdered!
There are an abundance of suspects, from the niece who was to inherit the deceased's money, Joan Kemp-Welch, to the poor handyman, Robert Newton, to the corrupt policeman, James Carney.
"You know where to find us?" Robert Montgomery asks as he and Constance physically leave the room to avoid the temptation.
The chemistry between the three leads is very funny, as is the chemistry between Robert, Constance, and their butler, Seymour Hicks.
Fans of Jeremy Swift, one of the butlers from Downton Abbey will see an uncanny likeness in Seymour's performance, from the facial expressions to the delivery of his lines.Parts of Haunted Honeymoon are very funny, but parts of the crime-solving methods are a little far-fetched.
And if you're curious to hear Robert Newton sneaking in a pre-pirate accent, which was based on his natural accent, you'll get a kick out of his rough, bad-boy role.
If you don't end up liking this movie, you can always take Robert Montgomery's advice after an unpleasant experience: "Don't mention it.
meandering murder mystery.
This was one of the MGMfilms made at Denham studios prior to the construction of their studios at Boreham Wood.Probably made in the UK to take advantage of the me quota requirements introduced by the 1938 act.This gave double quota for more expensive films.Michael Balcon was briefly in charge till he clashed with Louis B Mayer and left for Ealing.The problem with this film is that it is far too long.It spends the first 20 minutes without starting to advance the plot.The result being that by this time you have lost all interest in the film and therefore by the time the film really starts you could not care less.Looking at the credits 3 writers get credit but it probably had the input of many more.So. it becomes something of a dog's dinner.Any thriller made at Merton Park is better than this.
I don't understand how TCM gave this film four stars.
It's okay but it's no four stars.Haunted Honeymoon is based on Busman's Honeymoon, a Lord Peter Wimsey novel.
Here, Peter (Robert Montgomery) has finally married Harriet (Constance Cummings), and as a wedding gift, Peter has bought Harriet's childhood home, Tall Boys, in Biddlecombe for her.
Though they have both sworn off having anything to do with murders - him solving them, her writing about them -- they're faced with the murder of the former owner of the house, with plenty of suspects.Though I love both actors, and there was an excellent supporting cast, this film didn't hold my interest.
The end result was somewhat boring.Someone on this site mentioned that throughout the film you were reminded always that you were watching Robert Montgomery and not the character of Lord Peter Wimsey.
Montgomery was a very good actor; he was suave, he had charm, and a good sense of comedy, but most of the time I'm not sure how much effort he put into some of his films.
The end result is, most of the time I know I'm watching Robert Montgomery.I have to disagree about Constance Cummings, a beautiful actress who captured Harriet's wit and intelligence very well, and actually, the two made a fine couple.
My mom saw her in a play, Wings, later in her career.All in all, disappointing..
The Thin Man Wannabe and Wanting It Is. Some Americans have a Low Tolerance for Britain's Lord and Lady Stuff and This Movie is So Stuffy and Full of Groveling it Can Be a Hard Watch at Times.
The Cowtowing to "Privilege" is Offensive and Demeaning.Speaking of Privilege, Robert Montgomery was a Handsome, Charming Actor, but a One Trick Pony.
Getting by on His Looks and Aloof Rich-Kid (in real life) Personality.
It Plods Along Until its Over and You May be Glad it is.Note...The Honorific Title of "Lord" is said so many time in this Film it borders on Religious and is Ridiculous..
Entertaining mystery-comedy.
For me, "Haunted Honeymoon" was a perfect follow-up (although it was made almost half a century earlier!) to the Edward Petherbridge - Harriet Walter / Lord Peter Wimsey - Harriet Vane films; in the first one of those three films he meets her, in the second he courts her, in the third he finally wins her heart....and in this one they get married!
They go to the country in search of a peaceful honeymoon, but encounter murder instead.
And it is done by an ingenious murder trap - one that will be revealed only in the last 3 minutes of this fast-paced film (it may, in fact, be so fast-paced that some aspects of the mystery can be sketchy and confusing on the first viewing).
Robert Montgomery may not be aristocratic (or British) enough for the role of Lord Peter Wimsey, but otherwise he is fine, and there is something pleasingly offbeat and idiosyncratic about his chemistry with the gorgeous Constance Cummings.
Definitely disappointing, poor adaptation of original novel.
Lord Peter Wimsey has married Miss Harriet Vane and gone to live in a house named Tallboys.
So far so good, although, I'm not altogether sure the house in the novel was called Tallboys.
I think that was something to do with a later story.After that it gets disappointing.
First they have decided to give up crime, him detecting and her writing it????????
and then they arrive on the night after the death of Noakes, instead of a week later.
Bunter is supposed to have been Wimsey's batman during the Great War so should be of an age as Wimsey but instead is here played by the ageing, Sir Seymour Hicks.The accents are frightful, Deep welsh accents in the middle of Devon and the constable's name is changed from Joe to Tom. Added to that the whole banter between Wimsey and Superintendent Kirke, whom he has never met before going to Tallboys, regarding literary works is completely missing.Additionally, for some unknown reason the writers changed the village name from Pagford/Paggleham to Biddlecombe and although Harriet Vane grew up in The village, her father having been the doctor, this is never mentioned.
The villager's all act as if they have never known her when many of the elders in the village would certainly have known her as a child.The acting is very good and if you can overlook the glaring inconsistencies between the novel and the movie, then it is worth watching.
Do not read the book first, if you do not wish to be disappointed.
|
tt0093073
|
Gardens of Stone
|
A hardened Korean and Vietnam War veteran, Sergeant Clell Hazard (James Caan) would rather be an instructor at the U.S. Army Infantry School at Fort Benning, Georgia, to train soldiers for Vietnam but instead he is assigned by the Army to the 1st battalion 3d Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard) at Fort Myer, Virginia.
The Old Guard is U.S. Army's Honor Guard. It provides the ceremonial honor guard for the funerals of fallen soldiers and guards the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery. Hazard calls them the "toy soldiers" and hates his job until Jackie Willow (D. B. Sweeney), the son of an old friend and fellow veteran, is assigned to his platoon and he sees an opportunity to make sure at least one man comes home alive.
Hazard tries to warn Willow about Vietnam but the young man sees it as his duty as a soldier to fight for his country, no matter what kind of war. Hazard hates how the war in Vietnam is being fought and feels that good soldiers are being wounded and killed in the "wrong" war in which the U.S. is not fighting to win.
Among the others in Hazard's life are his longtime friend and superior, Sergeant Major "Goody" Nelson (James Earl Jones), and his girlfriend Samantha Davis (Anjelica Huston), a writer for the Washington Post who is against the Vietnam War for different reasons.
Willow marries a Colonel's daughter named Rachel Feld (Mary Stuart Masterson). Rachel at first refuses to marry Jackie as long as he is a soldier. Rachel also hates the war in Vietnam and is afraid for her husband.
Hazard is divorced and hasn't seen his son in years due to the bitter divorce. After Willow's father, who is a retired U.S. Army Master Sergeant and a former Korean War comrade in arms of Hazard's as well Sgt. Major Nelson's, dies of a heart attack, Hazard comes to look upon Willow as a "son." He tries to teach Willow all he can about soldiering and surviving in combat.
Willow in turn tries to teach his platoon mate Private Albert Wildman, a chronic screw-up, how to be a soldier. Wildman is later ordered to Vietnam, where he distinguishes himself as a heroic soldier and effective combat infantryman. He returns from Vietnam promoted to the rank of Sergeant and is a recipient of the Medal of Honor for heroism in combat. Sgt. Flanagan (Larry Fishburne), a fellow member of Sgt. Hazard's platoon, receives his orders for Vietnam at the same time.
Willow excels, is promoted to the rank of Sergeant and then is recommended to attend Officer's Candidate School, which he completes and is commissioned as a Second Lieutenant. He is ordered to serve in a combat unit in Vietnam. Willow writes Hazard from Vietnam about all the good men in his platoon that he is losing in combat. Hazard then finds out that Jack Willow has been killed in action when he sees the burial orders for Jackie's remains at Arlington National Cemetery while on duty with the "Old Guard" at Fort Myer.
Hazard requests to be sent to Vietnam for his third tour of duty as a platoon sergeant in a combat infantry unit. He places his C.I.B. Combat Infantryman Badge, on Willow's flag-draped coffin at the chapel at Arlington National Cemetery. Jackie had aspired to serve in combat and receive his own C.I.B., just like his late father had in Korea. Wildman and Flanagan, at that time sergeants and just recently returned from Vietnam, are also present at Willow's funeral.
The film ends with military honors being rendered at Willow's graveside at Arlington and Hazard speaking to the mourners prior to the firing of the rifle salute and the playing of "Taps".
|
anti war
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Military Life and the Prize of the War. In the late 60s, during the Vietnam War, the idealistic soldier Jackie Willow (D.B. Sweeney) arrives at Fort Meyer expecting to go to the Academy and then to the Vietnam War. Jackie is the son of a veteran sergeant and soon he becomes the protégé of the former friends of his father, Sergeant Clell Hazard (James Caan) and Sergeant Major 'Goody' Nelson (James Earl Jones).Jackie is promoted and gets married with his childhood friend Rachel Feld (Mary Stuart Masterson) and Hazard and Goody convince their superior, Captain Homer Thomas (Dean Stockwell), to recommend Jackie to the Academy.
He is promoted to lieutenant and asks to go to the Vietnam, returning to the Arlington National Cemetery."Gardens of Stone" is another movie by Francis Coppola (without Ford) about the military life and the prize of the Vietnam War, after one of his masterpieces, "Apocalypse Now".
The cinematography is magnificent and the cast is top-notch, and it is so good to see the actors, like James Caan, James Earl Jones and Dean Stockwell still young and actresses, like Anjelica Huston and Mary Stuart Masterson, charming and beautiful.
My son said " Coppola did a superb job of following military protocol to make the film as real as possible " The story line is so right on.
I thought the movie was very moving, lacking in nothing .It was tragic that Coppola's son was killed in a boating accident while out with Ryan Oneal's son during the making of this excellent movie.As you can tell I'm not a professional writer, but I just had to say something about how good this film is.
This is a great movie and it makes a very interesting pairing with Apocalypse Now to achieve Coppola's complete take on the Vietnam war.
While Apocalypse Now was a surrealistic view of the front lines and insanity of war, Gardens of Stone is pulls no punches with a realistic portrayal of the home front, which presented its own type of warfare during Vietnam.
This movie is little-watched compared to Coppola's other Viet Nam movie, "Apocalypse Now", which is unfortunate, because it's a gem.
Instead, like "The Persians", it considers the war through its effects on those at home, and does a generally excellent job.It is particularly good at showing the view from inside the military "family", both of that life in general, and the effects of Viet Nam in particular.
James Caan and James Earl Jones (the latter especially) turn in fine performances as veteran non-coms (the backbone of any army).
One reviewer condemned D.B. Sweeney's portrayal of the young gung-ho recruit Willow because he sounded as if he were reading his line from cue cards - which rather misses the point, which is that because the green Willow doesn't know what it's really like, the slogans he repeats inevitably sound tinny and false.Despite a few flaws (e.g. Mary Stuart Masterton's character is rather under-developed, and a few scenes are clangers), overall this is one of the greatest of all Viet Nam movies..
The movie has a great cast that includes James Caan, Anjelica Huston, James Earl Jones, Dean Stockwell and several more people.
Caan plays a solider who fought in Korea and Vietnam but is now in charge of Arlington national Cemetery and wants to train young soldiers going into Vietnam but is turned down.
It's a really great movie that is one of Coppola's best films..
War in general, and particularly the Vietnam War, is an issue which required socially conscious and intellectual rumination...This was a story about the home front, and how the overzealous, and wet behind the ears soldier wanted to get involved...Hovering around the travesty of the TET Offensive, oblivion to what was actually happening on the other side of the ocean, made acts such as combat, and grenades carried by four year old Vietnamese girls, just a little more glamorous!!
This film allows the moviegoer to look at things through the eyes of the entire military rank and file involved in the Vietnam War!!
The bulk of this film focuses on the development of a soldier, the anxious fortitude he possessed to serve his nation...While protesters balked at what they believed our government was doing was wrong, the military men and women were doing what they thought was right...THUS THEY SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR IT!!
If a soldier loses his life in combat, he is cast away in Arlington National Cemetery to THE GARDENS OF STONE...Bear in mind that a soldier has a different perspective as to whether or not a soldier's life was lost for no reason whatsoever!!
There's turmoil...A young men wants to serve his country...he gets killed!!!...Underneath it all, all of the characters in the movie are hit with the bittersweet reality that they are only human and they make mistakes..Their patriotism to the cause of War by way of contributing to the military was something they thought was in the best interest of their nation!!
There are other Americans who even believe that we should get involved in a war merely for purposes of strengthening our national resolve..."Gardens of Stone" is a film which brilliantly delegates tragedy, and appropriates anger..When a young soldier is killed in Vietnam in the line of duty, the reactions of the characters in the movie are not derivative, nor is there just an obligatory deference, rather, there is a heart felt empathy and sorrow for the loss of a picture book example of a soldier as well as a man!!
The issue that the Vietnam War was a miserable tragic error, and the issue that the Military must execute their duties to defend the honor and integrity of her nation, are dichotomous!!!
Tremendous acting performances make "Gardens of Stone" a movie worth watching...Especially if you are in the mood to just be a human being!!
Francis Ford Coppola captures the sentiments of the time in this grossly underrated movie.
When I think of Vietnam movies, I immediately think of Apocalypse Now, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, Hamburger Hill, The Deer Hunter, Casualties of War...
Both movies show the Vietnam war, without actually showing a lot of action.
It's more about the families and friends that are left behind and about the soldiers that once served in Vietnam and came back as a completely different person.While The Deer Hunter is one of my all time favorites, I can't say the same about Gardens of Stone.
He doesn't want to do that job, he wants to go where the real action is, he wants to be in Vietnam harvesting honor and medals, which eventually will really happen to him, but at a certain cost.Although I expected more from this movie, I have to say that I liked it.
Thanks to the real action footage incorporated in the movie, the good acting by all the actors and the interesting story, this movie was certainly worth a watch.
Those who fought in Vietnam had a very different experience.As a 66-year old history teacher, and an infantryman in the 1950's and a protestor in the 1960's, I feel this superb movie captures the true trauma of that war for America as a whole better than any other movie on the war which I have seen.
James Caan's best role - and perhaps James Earl Jones'.This movie captures the honor, and the tragedy, and the pain, of the professional soldier..
After 'Apocalypse Now', it's hard to believe that this film was directed by Francis Ford Coppola with such sensitivity.
Truly a testament that in many ways demonstrates that Coppola is one of film's greatest directors.This film shows the lives of many different people and their backgrounds in opposing the Vietnam war.
James Caan is a military officer working as a home guard at Arlington National Cemetery during the casualties of America's most tragic conflict.
D.B. Sweeney and Mary Stuart Masterson are great as the younger and more naive observers of the times.Part documentary style, part sentiment and all inclusive drama showcase its impact in a more sedated manner than most other films dealing with its subject but worth a look as an alternative..
Sergeant Major Goody Nelson (James Earl Jones) and wife Betty Rae set up Hazard with anti-war Washington Post reporter Samantha Davis (Anjelica Huston).
So caught up in the glory and demoralization, the film loses the family aspect (example: Mary Stuart Masterson plays a cardboard and generic character.
Perhaps detached from the *war* but not from the *soldiers*.James Caan and James Earl Jones saved this film from utter disrepair.
They made this film a hell of a lot better than it deserves to be (kind of like what Charles Dutton did to Alien 3...or what Morgan Freeman did for Kiss the Girls...) And James Earl Jones is especially good, because, as always, he plays a character that is *very* different from what would be expected from him.
He's truly one of the few diverse character actors around ('To the guys like us...Damn few left!!')Look for an unfortunately small role by Laurence Fishburne (reminiscent of Apocalypse Now...) and a *very* young Elias Koteas, and even *younger* Casey Siemazsko.Overall: The potential was there, but, as always, Coppola is a very up and down director, and this is not one of his better efforts.
The film was filled with stereotype characters; the dedicated lifer who needs to train "his boys" so they can survive the war in Viet-Nam: the soldier with two left hands who ends up winning the medal of honor: the journalist who is a hippie jack-ass: and the hero who is hated by his father-in-law, yet marries his daughter, but gets killed in Viet-Nam. As is typical in almost every Hollywood movie about the military, 99% of it is pure bull.
James Caan was his typical angry, hot headed, over emotional character that he played in most of his movies.
Gardens of Stone is the second film Francis Ford Coppola has made about the Vietnam War, after 1979's Apocalypse Now. This movie is unfairly compared to Apocalypse Now, but the films are totally different.
This film focuses more on the home front and the feelings Americans felt about the war.
The film is also a romance film and I liked the main romance between the sergeant and the reporter, but the romance played between the two kids seem a tad underdeveloped.Coppola's film is about a battle-hardened sergeant who is an opponent of the Vietnam War and is desired to save the lives of soldiers sent abroad, but is continuously denied doing so.
James Earl Jones is as always excellent as Caan's best friend.
D.B Sweeney was solid in his role, but I felt Mary Stuart Masteron's character could have been a little more developed.Overall, Gardens of Stone is a solid movie about the Vietnam War and the conflict it brought to the home front.
The proposal of Coppola was show this anti war picture under two different chains of thinking,the first one around US Army perspective where the soldiers must to defend own country in any menace situation that's means whatever will be such menace they'll get ready to fight wherever the place,in other hand as James Caan's character such thing are unacceptable starting of point of view that the Army should be maintened to defent against foreign's powers which put the USA under attack only,then the main subject about these two kind of understanding are in clash,Caan has another convincing acting like always,he don't stay alone acctually he has been accompanied by James Earl Jones, Dean Stockwell and Anjelica Huston,in time D.
It's Dec. 4, 2005 and I've just watched "Gardens of Stone" on T.V. The importance of this movie is impossible to rate as it specifically addresses the absolutely critical and horribly unfortunate issue of our collective ability to forget.
It's hard to imagine a better setting for a home front reflection on the horror of Vietnam, half a world away, but any war film so far removed from the battleground runs a risk of being too remote and detached, which is exactly what happens here.
War is seen from the perspective of those who stay at home: two officers, young soldiers, left-wing journalists.
Of course, America is a nation that has been engaged in more conflicts than most other nations in the past half-century and, while that isn't intended as a criticism, it does perhaps provide the key to America's seemingly endless fascination with the arena of war in all its guises.Coppola's return to the theme of the Vietnam war is as different from its predecessor as any two films with the same backdrop can be.
The story of Gardens of Stone takes place in America, amongst the soldiers detailed to bury the bodies that are shipped back to Arlington National Cemetery from the scene of the conflict with monotonous and terrifying regularity.
B. Sweeney) who is incredibly one-dimensional for a film that is attempting to offer an insight into the mentality of the soldier away from the battlefield at a time of war.
James Caan, in his first movie role for five years, makes good use of a much stronger role as Sgt. Clell Hazard, the experienced soldier frustrated by the impotence of his position, who believes he should be fighting in the field or at least training youngsters on how to stay alive out there instead of burying them when they come back.
Both he and James Earl Jones in another good part, display a healthily jaundiced view of the war.
At a time when Vietnam films were all the rage, Coppola is to be applauded for choosing a different but no less relevant perspective, but any message he may have wished to deliver is hopelessly weakened by a mediocre script and uninvolving storyline..
Anjelica Huston in a rather controlled, understated role is also interesting as Caan's love interest and anti-war reporter.
Lonette McKee who was so good in Coppola's Cottin Club is wasted in this flick as James Earl Jones wife though Jones uses his famous voice particularly well in this movie.
The movie itself is a brilliant overview of naivety of war versus the reality, powerful performances so deep and moving and having the real life parents of Mary Stuart makes all the difference in the reality of the movie.
This movie's score, written by Carmine Coppola (Francis Ford's father) and is beautiful, lyrical, understated and very unusual for a military themed film.
Mostly a movie on how war affects those at home, especially during times of tragedy, and the relationships involved.
Francis Ford Coppola, who gave us three of the greatest movies in history - Apocalypse Now, The Godfather and The Godfather II - plus the excellent The Conversation, is not in his best form here.
Best performances come from the old hands - James Caan and James Earl Jones - who give the movie gravitas and feeling.Anjelica Huston is unconvincing and touch irritating in her role.Interesting to see that real-life father and daughter Peter Masterson and Mary Stuart Masterson play father and daughter in the movie.Worth watching for Francis Ford Coppola fans but not a must-see otherwise..
A fine film with a different perspective on Vietnam.
Caan tries to make her see his point, that he doesn't love the war, but has the knowledge hat could save some of the men who have to fight it.DB Sweeny has some fine moments as the young soldier who is itching to be in the middle of the war.
The other huge difference is that "nothing happens" in the play in a fun and entertaining way, while the film...doesn't.James Caan tries very hard playing a military man, but he looks and sounds like James Caan wearing a uniform.
I guess (and I found myself guessing at a lot of the deeper meaning of some of the dialogue and scenes), it is to show that Caan is a soldier who has seen too much war, is in a place he doesn't want to be in (burying young dead soldier's whose sacrifice is scorned) when he would rather be fighting, and is surrounded a nation hostile to the war and the soldiers who fight it.However, if Coppola wanted to present that, he should have presented it differently than this.
The effect of the scene is to make us either want to call a cop and have him taken away, or to get the hell away from him to avoid brushing into him accidentally and having the same thing happen to us.In the end, Caan tells his peace activist girlfriend that he has decided to sign on for another tour of duty as an "errand of mercy" to try to save more young lives from being senselessly wasted.The movie ends shortly thereafter, with Caan saluting a dead soldier's coffin at a funeral.But let's back up here for a moment to the poignant moment when Caan tells Huston he is going back to 'Nam, to save young men's lives.Caan knows this is a losing war.
He would be seen as a traitor to the military of course, but he would be speaking his mind, truthfully, (as he has privately to his girlfriend and his friend James Earl Jones), could testify before Congress, and could join the cause to end the war.
I don't know why Francis Ford Coppola thought he had to make another film about Vietnam after he had made the best possible with "Apocalypse Now", but with this film he definitely destroys a part of his reputation as being critical about the United States' role in the war.
It all seems as if Coppola would use the dead soldiers' bodies or Anjelica Huston's role as an excuse for saying: "Hey, I know that maybe not everything was alright, but you have to do what your country asks you to." This movie is so obsessed with the military and tries so hard not to decide whether it's for or against the war, that it doesn't even notice, that it already has decided with its blind patriotism and denunciation of the peace movement.
|
tt0190938
|
$windle
|
A 6th grader named Griffin Bing decides to gather their entire grade in a sleepover protest in an old house about to be demolished after their plan for using a new space in their town was thrown out because of their youth. However, only Griffin and his best friend Ben Slovak show up. Griffin discovers a Babe Ruth baseball card that, unbeknownst to him, is worth huge amounts of money. Excited that the card could help his family, which is struggling financially, Griffin takes it to the local collectibles dealer, S. Wendell Palomino. S. Wendell tells the boys that the card is an old counterfeit of a valuable one, worth only one hundred dollars. A dejected Griffin later chances upon Palomino on television, stating that the card he stole was worth at least a million dollars. Enraged, Griffin and Ben try to steal it back from Swindle's shop, only to find that it has gone, and they have to break into Swindle's house. Now, in order to get the card back, Griffin must gather a team of local students with unique skills to break into Palomino's heavily guarded home to retrieve the card before the big auction where Swindle plans to sell the card. The team consists of seven people (including Ben and Griffin): Savannah the Dog whisperer, to get past Swindle's massive, violent Guard Dog Luthor; Logan the actor, to distract Swindle's eagle-eyed neighbor who spends his days watching the entire street's goings-on; Antonia "Pitch" Benson the "born to climb" girl, to scale the skylight in Swindle's house; Darren Vader who the others had no choice but to add to the team, for he threatened to rat them out (But Darren proved to be useful pulling people up the skylight); Melissa the unsociable computer genius, who was used to break into Swindle's UltraTech alarm system. The tension is piled with an unexpected visit from the auctioneer, yet another even more menacing guard dog, and a betrayal from the person who begged to be in the group. The book was followed by multiple sequels, titled Zoobreak, Framed!, Showoff, Hideout , Jackpot and Unleashed.
|
flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Predictable 'Heist' Film, Brightened by Leads....
It is doubtful that you'll remember much about $WINDLE for long; as a 'heist' film with an undercover cop (Tom Sizemore) falling for mastermind Sherilyn Fenn, it is pretty much 'by the numbers', with the mandatory 'psycho gang member' (Conrad Pla), a plot twist that isn't that surprising, and a resolution that is predictable (save for Dave Foley's unexpected windfall).
What provides the greatest pleasure in the film are the performances of Sizemore and Fenn, who are both terrific.Tom Sizemore is a fast-talking, quick-witted cop who is deep undercover as a freelance hood 'recruited' for an old-fashioned bank job, and whether he is quoting Jack Kerouac while seducing Fenn, savoring a high-stakes poker game, or trying to explain to his partner that he's not on the 'take', he dominates the screen each time he appears.Sherilyn Fenn is a marvel.
After surviving early roles best remembered for her frequent nude scenes (TWO MOON JUNCTION, MERIDIAN), she has matured into an actress of some range and a remarkable sensitivity.
When she describes men's usual 'pick up' lines ("Nice dress...It would look great on my floor"), there is a world-weariness and pain in her voice that is totally honest.
At 37, she has achieved a balance between her still breathtaking beauty and growing dramatic skills that, in a 'kinder' world, would provide her better roles in more than just 'Indie' films.$WINDLE isn't a great film, but catch it, anyway, for Sizemore and Fenn.
You won't be disappointed!.
There can be worse ways to spend your Sunday afternoon....
Synopsis : Tom Sizemore plays an undercover cop, who infiltrates a gang (led by the gorgeously curvy Sherilyn Fenn) planning a heist at a bank, where Dave Foley is the manager..
The movie unfolds as a series of flashbacks (to describe how the whole thing was set up) that occur as the robbery is taking place..
While the plans are being made, Tom semi-falls in love with Fenn and loses contact with his superiors leaving them to wonder which side he is on..
The plan is conceived as a smooth get in - get out operation, but things quickly start going wrong..
There are a couple of plot twists along the way, and the climax is satisfying if not mind-blowing..My Comments : The lead cast is pretty good since I consider both Sizemore and Fenn to be very good, underrated actors..
Though it seems as if it was made on a shoe-string budget, their acting along with the support cast is reasonably strong...
The script and dialogue, though smattered with heist movie cliches, can be witty at times..
In short, this is an eminently watchable movie for those Sunday afternoons, when you're all done with laundry and have nothing else at hand...
Funky precursor to CSI genre, TV B movie with cool music.
$windle is a cool, funky movie I landed on by accident watching TV, when I couldn't fall asleep.
I was instantly captivated and entertained by the large number of clichés.
I guess it was all tongue in cheek from the get go as far as cop shows roll.
I love cop shows.
For those of you who can read between the lines, and love CSI,loved Snatch, it would seem like this unpretentious flick could be one of the precursors to the CSI genre.
A borderline cheesy cult B movie made in 2002, starring Tom Sizemore (Natural Born Killers) and an semi-serious performance by comedian Dave Foley (Kids In The Hall)I don't want to create anticipation or spoil the plot.
It's light weight in a fun way.I wish there were more of those movies around in 2010, to pad those sleepless nights, zapping through infomercials.
We love the cheese, so I can't wait to see another cop show by KC Bascombe.
On a final note, I really loved the music score throughout, and had to go and find that El Camino song by E.P. Bergen that now plays on my I Pod all the time..
Surprisingly Good.
With a title like 'Swindle', and a score (criminal activity) as object of a movie, you wonder if it could be any good.But if you are looking for a good illustration of how a movie can be chock full of characters yet revolve mainly around two characters, this is the movie.
There is the undercover cop whose dialogue is just great, and a tough hoodlum who does not get much screen time, but whose presence looms large in the movie.
The two are a lesson in contrasts.The ending is one of those grey area endings, different people will have different takes on it.
The important thing?
A surprisingly good movie with a somewhat surprising ending..
Better than I had hoped.
** SLIGHT SPOILER **I don't usually rent a video on a Saturday night, so when I do I really want it to be enjoyable.
I got more than I expected.
I'm a sucker for movies with a twist in the end, so naturally I loved this one.
Clever dialogue, the script was not bad, direction was good, the story-telling speed was just right.No complaints, I got more than I had hoped for..
Average heist thriller that still is entertaining....
Recap: Seth George plays a risky game working his way into a crew planning a big bank job.
But it pays off and finally the day comes when the hit goes down.
But Seth gets suspicious quickly.
The plan depends on the police being alerted, creating a hostage situation, with the crew slipping out unnoticed in the end through a unknown maintenance tunnel.
But what is the mastermind Sophie really after, she is completely uninterested by the bank's money.
And partner Cisco and Seth just can't play along.
But Seth got a trick up his own sleeve, he is cop.
But he is also far over the line and can't be sure he won't be arrested when this ends.
If he can survive that long.Comments: An average heist movie starring Tom Sizemore as Seth.
Sizemore is a good actor, especially in this genre, the heist thriller.
But he got little support.
The cast is mostly unknown and though they don't fall through completely they don't impress either.
Nor does the story.
It is predictable and even though it tries to add another level by cutting in time, adding background information and extra substories through a series of flashbacks, it is still rather simple.But anyone expecting more going in is living in a fantasy world, and is up for a big disappointment.
Yes, these kinds of movies can be real gems, but to expect it?
I didn't, and therefore Swindle worked alright.
It delivered 90 minutes of good entertainment, what it was made to do, nothing more nothing less.
I won't remember it for all time, but I'm not supposed to either.
This is a movie made with an average budget for an average result.
And that it delivers.
This is movie that works very well if nothing else is on.5/10.
"BankJoB-UnderCover-Inside man".
I was not sure if i will watch the movie after i saw the trailer because there are too many movies about bank robbery (with much better actors) and undercover cop.In the begging i was not sure if i still wanna watch this movie but still i decided to give him a chance(It looks very low budget)After 20-30 min i was interested,the story is not bad its not Scorsese.But the end is with not so good.Sherilyn Fenn is very pretty and act good ,on the other side was Tom Sizemore,i find his acting very poor.(Probably with better acting crew the movie will be good).Conrad Pla was bad i didn't like his interpretation of a psycho-robber,like he was watching a lot of bad movies and copy the acting.The Screenplay is not bad (Mid 90s action),for some people will be hard to follow the story but i actually like that.Don't like that sometime the cameraman recorded the backs of the actor when they acting,speaking in the moment(Probavly Reggie/Director order).I will not recommend the movie but if you are movie fan or you have 90 min to lose its not bad movie.
|
tt0093660
|
Nuts
|
Nuts!, narrated by Gene Tognicci, documents the life and career of John R. Brinkley (1885-1942), a Milford, Kansas druggist-turned physician who, purportedly, discovered a cure for male impotence by implanting goat testicles into the scrotums of his human patients. Largely through the testimonials of his "satisfied" customers, Brinkley enjoyed a period of fame and fortune before drawing the attention of Morris Fishbein, editor of the Journal of American Medicine, and the American Medical Association, which revoked his license.
"It's because people want to believe that something as magical and as weird as this could be true. So I was less interested in telling Brinkley's story and more interested in investigating that aspect."
Brinkley is credited for building the world's most powerful radio station for the time, KFKB (Kansas Folk Know Better), popularizing country or "hillbilly" music, and inventing the infomercial with his own diatribes about public health. Brinkley ran into trouble with the Federal Radio Commission (now the Federal Communications Commission), which shut down his radio station. In response, Brinkley build the "million-watt-regulation-skirting border-blaster", XERA, in Mexico and continued broadcasting.
Brinkley ran for governor of Kansas in 1930 as a write-in candidate. It was reported he might have won had thousands of votes not been disqualified, possibly illegally, by his opponents.
Brinkley's fame and fortune deteriorated when Fishbein sued him for libel. It is revealed late in the movie that Brinkley also faced numerous wrongful death suits, had dubious academic credentials, and had an arrest record.
|
insanity, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Based on Tom Toplor's 1981 courtroom play, NUTS is definitely a dialogue-based film with little Hollywood flashiness.
Though extremely well-written (by Toplor, adapting his own work with Darryl Ponicsan and Alvin Sargent) and sharply staged and directed by veteran Martin Ritt, it is the cast whom is really responsible bringing NUTS to life.
The supporting cast is a top-notch ensemble of professional character actors (Maureen Stapleton, Eli Wallach, Robert Webber, James Whitmore, and Karl Malden), all of whom work their craft flawlessly.
NUTS' screenplay does indulge in the predictability of some of the typical courtroom-plot conventions a little too often, but Toplor's absorbing script still deserves high praise for it's fascinating exploration of what constitutes as normality and whether or not the insane should be required to receive treatment.
NUTS isn't going to win over any fans of 3-cuts-per-second action films, but it will leave lovers of thought-provoking, expertly-acted dramas fascinated..
Women were generally terrible victims of much psychiatry in the 20th century, this film, "Francis" (1982)and "Suddenly, Last Summer" (1959) are the only three movies that really demonstrate that.The cast is full of great actors and actresses in small rolls: Eli Wallach, James Whitmore, Maureen Stapleton, and Karl Malden know that less is more and underplay their roles smoothly.
Questions like, "What is normal?" and "Does the law have the right to force help upon those who don't want it?"What really makes this film worth watching though, is Barbra Strisand's bravura performance in the lead.
Director Martin Ritt keep the film going at a perfect pace and also gets strong supporting performances from Richard Dreyfss and Maureen Stapleton.This is a film that deserves more attention then it originally received, it is honest, though-provoking, and features a brilliant performance from Streisand.My score for this excellent film: 9/10!.
In New York, the public defender Aaron Levinsky (Richard Dreyfuss) witnesses the high-class call girl Claudia Draper (Barbra Streisand) beating her attorney while waiting for his hearing in the courtroom.
Judge Stanley Murdoch (James Whitmore) assigns him to defend Claudia and soon he learns that she killed her client Allen Green (Leslie Nielsen) in self-defense.
However, her mother Rose Kirk (Maureen Stapleton) and her wealthy stepfather Arthur Kirk (Karl Malden) want her declared mentally incompetent to go on trial.
Morrison (Eli Wallach) prepares a medical report stating that she is mentally unstable to support the trial, but Claudia wants to prove that she is sane; otherwise she would spend the rest of her life in a mental institution.
Along the hearing, the District Attorney Francis MacMillan (Robert Webber) and Levinsky question the defendant, her mother, her stepfather and Dr. Morring and the painful truth about Claudia's childhood is disclosed."Nuts" is one of the best courtroom dramas ever made.
Unfortunately for him the woman in question is spirited, independent Claudia Draper, (Barbra Streisand) who is desperate to have her day in court.
Barbara Streisand played Claudia Draper, and her home life was relegated to a precariously comfortable arrangement..
The only unrealistic aspect to this movie is that no public defense attorney is going to engage in complex guessing games to vindicate his client in the manner that Richard Dreyfuss' character did!!!
If everything were just a case of black or white, whereby a professional psychiatric evaluation becomes the final decree, Claudia Draper would have been dead in the water from the offset!!This movie has an amazing amount of top notch acting talent!!
It stars, Barbara Streisand, Richard Dreyfuss, James Whitmore, Eli Wallach, Lesile Nielson, Karl Malden and Maureen Stapleton!!
Other noteworthy performances are given by Richard Dreyfuss, Maureen Stapleton, and Arthur Kirk, as her lawyer, mother, and step-father respectively.
Dreyfuss plays this intersection between Perry Mason and Sigmund Freud, Aaron Levinsky, court-appointed to represent Claudia Draper, a call girl who killed a john.
Sally Field's Norma Rae, Patricia Neal in Hud.Supported by a dignified cast, Streisand and Dreyfuss pair for the first time, but they work together like practiced dancers.
Manhattan call-girl has to prove her sanity in a courtroom hearing after she has killed a client; she says it was in self-defense, but now her mental state and her lifestyle--as well as her tumultuous childhood--are on trial.
"Nuts" presents a dilemma for director Martin Ritt and his screenwriters, Tom Topor, Darryl Ponicsan and Alvin Sargent, working from Topor's play: how do you get an audience to sympathize with the heroine of your story, one who has a short fuse, a nasty disposition, and who rubs everybody else the wrong way?
Barbra Streisand obviously saw in the material a meaty dramatic role for herself as an actress and, although perhaps a bit too old for the part of Claudia Draper, she tackles the project with relish.
Once the introductions are out of the way, the film settles into a talky, stagy formula, one complete with showboating solo moments for Streisand and most of her co-stars (with the exception of Richard Dreyfuss as her legal representative, who makes a bigger impact simply by keeping a lower profile).
Still, a piece like this needs an electric personality in the lead if it's going to work at all, and Streisand does more for the role than a less-dynamic actress might have.
Barbra Streisand finally found a plum role, hired a talented director, surrounded herself with a superb supporting cast, and handed in the best performance of her career in NUTS, an intense and riveting drama definitely not for all tastes but a bold viewing choice for fans of the performer and not-quite-sold film goers who are willing to have an open mind and give her a chance.
Streisand wisely put a portion of her ego in check and had the sense to hire the gifted Martin Ritt (HUD; NORMA RAE)to guide her in this intense drama about a prostitute named Claudia Draper, whose explosive temper and outrageous personality are misinterpreted as mental illness and finds herself committed and deemed incapable of standing trial when she is arrested for murdering one of her johns (Leslie Nielsen).
As the details of Claudia's life unfold before us, evidence definitely supports mental defect, but Claudia says she is perfectly sane and wants her day in court because she killed the john in self-defense.
Streisand is backed up by a first rate cast including Richard Dreyfuss as her defense attorney, Maureen Stapleton as her mother, and Karl Malden as her stepfather, but this Streisand's show all the way, a searing and extraordinary performance that permeates the screen and scratches at your heart.
If you want to wear my panties, that's another hundred" and "Don't judge my blow jobs, they were sane." All makes for a rather unintentionally campy movie and this camp factor is only ratcheted up by the serious way the film was made.Streisand, admittedly, is entertaining in the role, even if the constant muttering to herself gets a little old after 30 minutes and becomes a little too theatrical in a look at me "I'm acting" kind of way.
Nuts was based on a play originally produced in the 1970s and this film version, directed by the great Martin Ritt, is unable to overcome its original theatrical limitations.
Moreover, the premise is awfully limited and despite Streisand's star power and the over the top concept of a nutty hooker killing one of her clients this film at its core is just a standard TV courtroom drama..
I guess because it needed a title and every other court room title was taken.Anyways, it's a decent movie - nothing too exuberant and nothing award winning, but the roles for most actors were pretty darn good and because of Richard's screen charisma, it get's a 7..
And while the movie fails to deliver the goods on how the trial is all played out, we will never see the real court case, the movie just simply demands the "yes" or "no" question.
This isn't a typical court room movie where we find out if she's guilty or innocent, Nuts just simply asks the question...can a woman deemed crazy be qualified to be her own lawyer at trial.
Barbra Streisand herself must have seen the potential of the play Nuts for a big screen drama.
In fact a whole bunch of players got their turn to strut their stuff in Nuts.The play by Tom Topor only ran 96 performances on Broadway, but the producers were wise enough to retain Topor to expand his work so it is not just confined to a courtroom in the same way A Few Good Men was adapted to the big screen.
The issue is whether the lawyer hired by Streisand's parents is acting in her best interests in getting her declared not mentally competent enough to stand trial.
To some degree Whitmore, prosecutor Robert Webber, court psychiatrist Eli Wallach, and Dreyfuss is defending "the system" and their role in it.Barbra's a high class hooker who gets $500.00 a night and she is accused of killing client Leslie Nielsen who's a brutish sort of lout and we see what really went down in flashback.
But speaking of vested interests it's clear that Streisand's wealthy parents Maureen Stapleton and Karl Malden have clear vested interests in getting her confined to a mental institution instead of a public trial.Like A Few Good Men a great ensemble cast brings this story to life and it's riveting.
In fact one of the things you'll question is whether Streisand herself is acting in her own best interests.Nuts is a great drama asking questions with deep implications about our mental health system as it applies to criminal justice.
Dreyfuss' incompetence as an attorney in this mental competence hearing at first suggests he's off his game, but it slowly dawns that the actor is portraying a mediocre lawyer, a creature nigh-extinct in today's movies and programs.
As Dreyfuss' character puts it after Streisand has "excused" her first, high-priced attorney, "You had good.
Now you've got me." That is precisely the character Dreyfuss portrays.The film forces comparison with another Dreyfuss-courtroom drama, "They Shoot Horses, Don't They?" also based on a play.
In `Nuts,' Barbra Streisand throws her weight around while pretending to play a prostitute who has lost control of her life.
In her commentary on the newly released DVD, Barbra smugly remarks that she has often gotten into trouble by bluntly speaking the `truth' just like her character in `Nuts.' Of course, when her character, `Claudia Draper,' screams `listen to me, listen to me' as she often does in the film, who's going to argue?
That's right, we're expected to believe that an older man in his 50's or 60's would pay $500 an hour for a woman in her mid-40's who looks like Barbra Streisand!
Based on Tom Topor's 1979 play by the same name, 'Nuts' is an affecting & slightly heavy courtroom drama, that is compelling & also offers strong performances to empower the show.'Nuts' Synopsis: A high-class call girl (Barbra Streisand) accused of murder fights for the right to stand trial rather than be declared mentally incompetent.Much of 'Nuts' benefits from its strong cast who bring in their A-Game.
The direction is solid and its fast-paced editing combined with first-rate performances from such established talents as Richard Dreyfuss, Maureen Stapleton, Karl Malden, Eli Wallach...
On the contrary, he has the intelligence of putting emotions and entertainment first, making meaning derive from the action instead of inducing it the way they do in heavily demonstrative 'thesis films'.A lot of reviewers keep complaining about Barbra Streisand being hammy as Claudia Draper, a woman accountable to no-one whose parents want to pass off as insane.
Honestly I feel Streisand was wise to make this movie during this era, but she should have produced and directed with either Jessica Lange or Glenn Close playing Claudia..
The movie's only saving graces are a taut script and terrific acting by the rest of the cast, particularly Richard Dreyfuss, Maureen Stapleton, and Malden, who despite his age, 75, could have passed for a man many years younger.
This film is one of those old-fashioned, court room dramas that unfolds a mystery about the protagonist (Claudia Draper), played by Streisand.
Unfortunately, it is almost impossible, no matter how good the role or how well acted, we just cannot forget that we are watching Barbra Streisand PLAYING a role, much less a high priced call girl accused of murdering one of her clients.
The movie he is thinking about is Richard Dreyfus' 1981 film "Whose Life Is It Anyway?".
Aaron Levinsky (Richard Dreyfuss) a public defendant is forced to take on a defendant being tried for competency.The District Attorney (Robert Webber) sees this as a simple case of mental incompetency.
Claudia Draper (Barbra Streisand) is the high class call girl who is determined to prove that she is not nuts.
Dreyfuss is actually enjoying himself as defendant lawyer Levinsky trying to get a handle of his rich girl client and then seeing his face when he twigs what the real tragedy might be.Streisand on the other hand never convinces me that she is a high class hooker who has been roughing it on the seamy side of life.
This could have been a great film were it not for Streisand's performance.
It's interesting, in looking through the "official" reviews of this film that such questionable illuminaries of film criticism as Roger Ebert seemed to miss the point: the desire to mark Claudia as insane seems to run strongly through reviewers, much as it does through the courtroom that the film portrays.Streisand plays an abrasive, uncooperative, deeply rebellious person.
It's passe to suggest that sexism plays a role in how we view movies, but this one points it out on two levels: Claudia's trap, in the film, bears an uncanny resemblance to the trap the film's been placed in by reviewers: the fact that she isn't a nice housewife seems to suggest to many that she's unstable.Sure, the movie (like the play) uses the facile psychological excuse of childhood molestation to explain her refusal to play the good-girl game.
And Nuts is a film which definitely dives beneath the surface, and brings up some intriguing issues.Nuts is based on the true story of Claudia Draper (Barbra Streisand), a high priced call girl who killed a john (Leslie Nielsen) in self defense.
However, with Claudia as a client, Levinsky has his work cut out for him as they try to convince Judge Stanley Murdoch (James Whitmore) that Claudia shouldn't be institutionalized for the rest of her life.This is a fascinating story, told with a great deal of skill.
POSSIBLE SPOILERSA top notch cast: Barbara Streisand, Richard Dreyfuss, Eli Wallach, James Whitmore, Maureen Stapleton, and Karl Malden star in this excellent courtroom drama about a high priced prostitute who is declared mentally ill and unfit to stand trial for manslaughter.Claudia Draper (Streisand) lives in a plush condo on 66th Ave. in NYC.
"Nuts" is one of those set-piece courtroom dramas that feel too slick, too pat, too contrived to really work, despite some excellent work by Richard Dreyfuss, Eli Wallach, and especially Maureen Stapleton.
Even Barbra Streisand (definitely NOT one of my favorites) isn't too bad when she's not too busy chewing the scenery to pieces.However, this movie drones out like a late-80s morality play, or even an acting-class extemporaneous psychodrama.
I read that Barbra Streisand considers "Nuts" her most personal movie, due to how her stepfather verbally abused her.
It may be hard to determine how that affected the movie itself, but the movie certainly did come out pretty good.Streisand plays mentally unstable Claudia Draper, charged with murder.
Martin Ritt directed another really good movie, and Karl Malden, Maureen Stapleton, James Whitmore, and Leslie Nielsen (yes, THAT Leslie Nielsen) all play excellent supporting roles..
NUTS was a play that was turned into this film that has a first rate cast headed by Barbara Streisand, including Richard Dreyfus, Maureen Stapleton, Karl Malden, Eli Wallach, Robert Webber, James Whitmore, and Leslie Nielson and a top director (Martin Ritt).
In this movie, Barbra Streisand is victimized by everyone -- her parents, the justice system, the johns she entertains -- and therefore the movie qualifies for entry into the genre of fantasy.Streisand, a hooker, has a court hearing before a judge, the always admirable James Whitmore, to decide if she's too crazy to stand trial for manslaughter one, after killing a client who was apparently about to kill her.It's her intent to be judged sane enough to stand trial and what she wants, she gets.
Her parents, Maureen Stapleton and Karl Malden, attend the two-day hearing.Streisand's character was raised in a rather well-off middle-class family, but her life has been chaotic, misbehavior in high school, the collapse of a ten-year marriage, smoking (gulp) marijuana, and finally becoming a high-end prostitute.
This movie just serves as a star vehicle for Barbra Streisand.
When the movie starts Barbra's lawyer is trying to prove to a judge that she is mentally ill, so that her parents are saved the embarrassment of a public trial, which will surely reveal that their daughter is a hooker.She punches her lawyer who abandons the case and the judge appoints a new lawyer for her.
l watched this picture for the first time in early 1991 on television and more twice after that,now a first time on DVD this could be a good movie if Streisand didn't spoiler the movie with a bad behavior and every time leading on trial and disrespecting everyone on the picture..that's impossible to happen on courtroom...mainly the subject is wrong...in a court didn't have defense attorney and prosecutor in the same side,besides that the story is good,telling a high class prostitute accused by a murder in self defense take on trial your defense attorney declare insanity to escape of prison so your past is discovered she was molested by stepfather since 9 years old and you mom knew everything...by the way the casting are fantastic in special way Richard Dreyfuss as always!!.
A weak film by the underrated Martin Ritt, "Nuts" stars Barbra Streisand as a prostitute who is arrested on a manslaughter charge.
|
tt1320236
|
A Closed Book
|
Sir Paul (Tom Conti) is an art critic and writer who was blinded in a car crash. He lives alone in a large mansion in the UK. He is looking for an amanuensis or "ghost writer" to help him write his final book, an autobiography, and interviews several unsuccessful candidates until Jane Ryder (Daryl Hannah) applies for the position. Because she is intelligent and forthright, Sir Paul hires her, and he explains to her she will now be living in the house and introduces Mrs. Kilbride (Miriam Margolyes), the cook and housekeeper. He then goes on to divulge his claustrophobia and "terrific fear of the dark," despite him being blind, and asks that the lights be switched on at, "exactly the same time as they would be in any normal house."
Jane begins to explore the mansion by herself, noting how a good amount of the furniture is covered in white dust cloths, before stumbling upon a teddy bear with one eye. She picks up the bear and snaps the eye off of its face. A shot of a painting is then inexplicably shown along with the sounds of a child's laughter.
They have breakfast together and discuss their pet annoyances, with Sir Paul getting disproportionately angry about Jane saying "no problem" repeatedly. He asks her to bring to his attention anything he does that she finds irritating, if any. She then states that his saying, "poor," as an adjective, describing it as patronizing. Sir Paul then tells Jane that he can both hear her smile and think. Sir Paul begins dictating his book, which he decides to call, "A Closed Book," to Jane while she types on her computer. Sir Paul again gets very angry at Jane for not taking his instructions. After they finish writing, Sir Paul asks Jane to buy a puzzle of a specific painting as a favor, which she agrees to do. He later asks her to call his agent to deliver the news about his new book being in the works. Jane dials the phone and speaks with someone before telling Sir Paul that his agent is currently out of the country and not available. Things run smoothly until Jane starts changing things ever so slightly, like taking paintings out of their frames and turning them upside down. Her true purpose at the mansion starts to become even more questionable when she begins to lie to Sir Paul, stating that she had been wearing a red gown when she was wearing jeans and a shirt, and sets a few of his books ablaze in the fireplace. Sir Paul begins to question Jane's personal life, specifically her love life, but she is divulges little and asks that the subject be changed. Sir Paul starts to suspect Jane when she sends Mrs. Kilbride home for a week without consulting him.
While singing in the bath, he keeps hearing strange noises, which are really Jane attempting to scare him. While he is in the bath, someone turns the light off, and then Jane comes in naked and claims that the light is still on, to reassure him. She leaves the bathroom and the audience is then shown another shot of the teddy bear followed by a painting of a young girl playing with a teddybear and the sound of children's laughter.
Jane's lying and sneaking becomes more and more obvious as she lies to him about Madonna dying and O. J. Simpson committing suicide. Sir Paul becomes very suspicious when Mrs. Kilbride returns to the house and she finds a puzzle that Sir Paul asked Jane to purchase, and it turns out to be the wrong puzzle. This particularly matters to Sir Paul as he wrote about the painting in his book, and he gets very angry at her and begins to lose trust in her. Jane assures Sir Paul that nothing like this will ever happen again. Later, Mrs. Killbride calls to inform them that her husband may have lung cancer and that she won't be able to work again for some time.
Sir Paul's suspicions are assuaged when a Conservative MP visits his house to persuade him to vote for the Conservatives. Because of her fear of Sir Paul, she responds positively to all of his questions, and she reads aloud what Jane has written in his book after he insists she do it for him. Fortunately for Jane, her transcription of his words on the computer are accurate. Jane later escalates her campaign against him, and one day she leaves a suit of armour lying on the floor, and displaces several desks and a number of books. She knows that Sir Paul will walk into them, which will cause him to trip and fall down the stairs. She then comes back into the house. Sir Paul dials his agent for the first time in the film and finds out that he was in fact at his office the whole time and had never taken a trip.
Eventually, Sir Paul realizes that Jane is attempting to kill him, and he has a confrontation with her, in his bedroom. She tells him that her late husband, Ralph, had once had an art exhibition at a prestigious gallery, where he had been severely criticized by Sir Paul. It is revealed that the quick shots of paintings shown throughout the film are in fact the works of her late husband. Due to the subject material of his paintings, Ralph had been arrested and accused of being a pedophile. He later killed himself. After comparing Sir Paul to "a closed book," and declaring that she must destroy him the way he destroyed Ralph, Jane shoves him into a wardrobe and she leaves the house, with Sir Paul screaming after her. However, when she returns to the house out of guilt, and because she lacks the capacity to kill someone, Jane discovers that Sir Paul has escaped from the closet. He had called Mrs. Killbride with a phone that he had forgotten was in his pocket from a previous scene, telling her that he had locked himself in the wardrobe. Then, Sir Paul points a gun at Jane, and explains that Ralph killed himself because he could not stand the truth about himself, that he knew what Sir Paul had written about him was true. Sir Paul then confesses that he saw this "proxy child abuse" in the paintings because he saw his own secret in the paintings. Sir Paul, too, is a pedophile. He invites Jane to shoot him, but she leaves the house instead. As she drives away, Sir Paul shoots himself inside the mansion.
|
revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Ruiz transcends mediocre material.
As A Closed Book begins, distinguished author Sir Paul is planning on writing his first book since a head injury that made him completely blind four years previously.
In order to do this he needs a helper so he hires Jane Ryder, an intelligent but mysterious woman who agrees to live with him in his baroque mansion five days a week.
Sir Paul is unsurprisingly a fussy, arrogant man who would likely be hard for anyone to deal with.
Still, it's hard not to feel sympathy for him as it quickly becomes clear that Jane takes sadistic pleasure in deceiving him.
This starts out harmlessly enough with lies about a jigsaw puzzle and made up news stories about the murder of Madonna and the suicide of O.J. Simpson but progresses into harmful territory as she begins to rearrange the furniture and leave books on the stairs.
The last few minutes of the film involve some hastily applied twists that don't really give the viewer much of a chance to comprehend the way the situation has changed before the next one appears.
As suspense thrillers go, this is pretty standard fare in the plot department.Since this is a film by maverick auteur Raoul Ruiz the writing is naturally the least important part of the film; as usual his films rely on his unique sensibilities to succeed.
For a Ruiz film A Closed Book is fairly low key: there are plenty of unusual angles and the frame tends to be filled with sumptuous details but the camera movements are standard save for the scene in which Jane brazenly tells Sir Paul nonsensical lies as the camera spins wildly directly overhead.
There is also an emphasis on the house's architecture, particularly the baroque exterior with its spirals and turrets.
A Closed Book is not a film that breaks new ground for Ruiz, in fact the style calls to mind all of the Ruiz films I've seen from the past decade or so including Time Regained, Comedy of Innocence, and That Day but his style is so rich that he could easily spend another twenty years working within it and not exhaust its possibilities.Somewhat perversely for a film released this year, A Closed Book has already been released on R2 DVD.
It's also worth noting that the film seems to have been universally judged by the least important aspect of this particular work: the script.
This surely accounts for its absurdly low IMDb score (4.7 as of this writing) and the score of negative reviews it has received from critics who view it as a genre film..
Not as bad as some reviews make out.
I have just finished watching the film and as I have never read the book, I viewed it with no expectations.
If you're after action a fast paced movie then this probably isn't for you as the drama unfolds at a slow to medium pace.
Tom Conti and Daryl Hannah do a pretty good job in the role and are the glue that hold the film together.
I won't go into what the film is about as that would render it pointless to watch but I will add that this is the not the kind of movie that you can watch over and over again but will find satisfying for the one viewing if you like suspense mysteries.
In conclusion, it's not the best film i've seen, but I did enjoy it so I gave it a 7..
Hammy But Good Fun. Saw this in a preview today.
If you like Sleuth, then this is a poor man's relation.
Very theatrical, and in fact best suited to the stage than the big screen, this film documents the mind games played out between a reclusive blind author and his new live in assistant.
Daryl Hannah can't act for toffee in the latter role but does please the boys by getting her kit off, although how it advances the plot defeats me....Tom Conti plays the eccentric art critic author to a tee, and holds the whole thing together...just!
Elaine Paige plays a very strange cameo role (the casting in this film is a little odd to say the least).
Lots of Gothic overtones and a creaking old mansion in the country fit the stereotyped mould of the film but at least if doesn't overstay its welcome at 90 mins.
Suspend disbelief and ignore the plot holes, and the film is weirdly enjoyable.....
Quickie satisfies.
It is very strange to my mind that such a celebrated director as Raoul Ruiz is making straight-to-video movies in the UK!
However the English-language world has a goldfish memory for foreign giants and so perhaps I shouldn't be so surprised.
Maybe he needs to get Spike Jonze or Quentin Tarantino to "sponsor" him ^^.
Nucingen House didn't even get a DVD release, so we shouldn't look a gift horse in the eye with this one.So we have an art critic living in a country pile who has gone blind following some nasty maiming.
He wishes to publish a final book and thus sets about hiring an "amanuensis" to assist him with this.
Tom Conti plays the role of blind critic Paul pretty well, he has just the right mix of pomposity and fragility.
The film is quite surreal, but nowhere more so perhaps than when we see a selection of self-absorbed characters interviewed for the position of amanuensis.
In this country we never really hailed the arrival of the Surrealist movement, which is perhaps strange as we are about as surreal as it gets.
So surreal that we understandably have problems rising out of the fog and making well-realised films about ourselves, although Patrick Keiller's London and Peter Greenaway's The Falls are notable successes.
Yes the UK is a nightmare of prejudice, public conformity, self-repression, snobbishness, and reverse snobbishness; all the more bizarre as it's totally unenforced.
British lives collectively are a myriad of uncorrelated banalities.
We live in post-colonial anomie.
Another example in the film is the political canvasser who is timid and petrified at the idea of engaging with someone on a non-superficial level, even if that were to be a well-to-do blind man, and even if that were, ostensibly, her mission.
Our politics are quite funny, although we have again an ostensibly socialist party in government, it's just come to light that, in effect, Tesco are able to pay to get proposed legislation torpedoed!
The amanuensis (Jane) is eventually selected and is played by Darryl Hannah.
She's fairly clearly hostile to him from the start, but is gentle enough in resting demeanour that it's clear we're seeing a vendetta from an aggrieved party, rather than the acts of a psychotic.
There's a lovely example of female passive aggressive behaviour here, which, as someone who is as pompous as they come, though with a strong twist of self-deprecation that most don't ever seem to get, I have experienced myself.
Jane sits listening to the usual enthusiastic and self-indulgent discourse, carefully choosing her moment to burst his bubble, when Paul mentions that it was always a bad thing to do for writers to drink, she coldly brings up Bukowski and Hemingway.There is camera-work here, though the movie is obviously a quickie.
The best example would be when the camera floats dreamily as we are told of Princess Diana's appearance in Bhutan.
The opening shot of the spires of the pile are suitably surreal, however the atmosphere of the very comfortable gentrified interior is in contrast to that making the opener look slightly contrived.
Being a quickie we also have a generic soundtrack over the top, which must have taken all of half an hour to select and edit in during post-production.
I doubt anything was shot twice in the movie either, hence the zoom shots when Paul takes his glasses off, which are a bit silly.For people who care about such things, the twist at the end regarding the critic himself, was pretty obvious in the first act if you are used to looking at paintings with anything other than a blank stare, or have knowledge about the meaning behind the travel itineraries of British men.Though this is a quick production, done with a minimum of fuss and cost, there's enough artistic value to make this worth a watch.
You even get to hear a good recital of the poem Jenny by James Henry Leigh Hunt..
Worth more than the current score.
I think the top review by derektrottersk says it all.
The reviews are too harsh on this movie.
It's actually an intelligent, theatrical drawing-room drama about a sophisticated but blind art critic and his quiet and beautiful amanuensis.
Each turns out to be not as they seem.
Some of the dramatic tension comes from Sir Paul's blindness, and how he and those close to him deal with it.
Some drama arises out of the scenario of a beautiful new woman living together with a difficult, handicapped old man in this grand manor house.
I thought it was well played by both Conti and Hannah.
Not a movie to be avoided..
Well written, superbly acted.
A tense, well paced mystery that delivers a superb, unexpected ending.
I felt very intellectually energized after it ended.
You think you know what it's all about and then when you're settled in your sofa you get a jolt.
The main character makes you feel a bit uneasy throughout.
Conti plays him brilliantly with understated panache and a great sense of self.
Hannah is very convincing as the soft spoken aide with a secret agenda.
As she starts to get under his skin, and yours, the story keeps you in a tight grip.
I like how the horrific creepiness is left off screen, mentioned briefly, like a lightning bolt that changes the very air particles in the room.
Never melodramatic, the story is bare, harsh, and proves the startling power of truth..
Strange but rather compelling.
I wasn't sure what to expect of this film but thought the cast list made it worth a look.
Having just finished watching it, I'm still not entirely sure whether or not I enjoyed it but it was certainly interesting and somewhat compelling.It is a thriller and there are several moments of suspense and moments where I found myself taking a sharp intake of breath, but it is certainly not particularly scary or shocking.
The best moment, for me, was the ending which, even though I realised what was going to happen, was well-executed and did make me jump.Elaine Paige is a very strange choice for one of the cameo roles and I'm not sure what prompted her casting, and (sorry if it sounds trivial) I found Daryl Hannah's "new" facial appearance rather distracting.
Tom Conti's character is rather wooden at times and, at other times, is rather moving and interesting.
Miriam Margolyes is one of my favourite actors but is given no opportunity at all to shine.All in all?
As I said in my title, strange but rather compelling.
Definitely worth watching but just don't set your expectations too high..
Not Many Thrill In This Thriller.
In the vein of What Ever Happened To Baby Jane or Misery, the movie A Closed Book deals with a woman who is mentally torturing a blind man.
Daryl Hannah is virtually unrecognizable as the (for whatever reason) unemotional person who has ulterior motives who is hired by a blind author to help him write his autobiography.
Hannah looks like a cross between Catherine O'Hare and Loretta Swit, if they were both on Lexapro on bad hair days.
Too bad she didn't revamp her role in Kill Bill: that would have been scary.
Tom Conti has a few good moments as the blind author, but his character is ultimately a confused mess, at one point highly acute to sounds and smells (even though he's only been blind for a few years), and at the next point completely helpless and stumbling over his own feet.
But the most distracting flaw in Conti's character is that he has eyes that don't even exist, with skin that has grown over the sockets like something out of a Twilight Zone episode.
Now how can we believe that?
Why not just give him empty holes or ghost white eyeballs or something else that is believable?
I was looking forward to seeing what Ellen Page had to offer to this film but to my disappointment the actress turned out to be someone named Elaine Paige.
Guess I should read the credits more closely.
We never find out what happened to the housekeeper and the ending comes out of left field as intensely as a wiffle-ball.
There was some real potential here to do some really creepy things and if they had played upon the theme of claustrophobia and the fear of the dark, they might have delivered some tense moments, but unfortunately it turned out to be an average night of off-Broadway theatre..
Intriguing film, hard to categorize.
"A Closed Book" is a rare English-language project from the extremely prolific Chilean director Raul Ruiz, and it's also one of the last films he completed before his death.
"Poirot" and "Marple" (see also "4:50 From Paddington" and "The Secret Of Chimneys") fans will feel right at home in the magnificent Knebworth House where most of this is filmed and set, and "Sleuth" or "Deathtrap" fans will appreciate the two-character format (90% of the movie is between Tom Conti and Daryl Hannah; there are only three supporting characters, two of whom have one short scene each).
This is almost a terrific film: Ruiz's use of the camera is masterful (you must be careful to notice some telling details in the background - a mirror removed, for example), the dialogue (very important in a film like this) is well-written, and the story keeps you wondering.
The main problem is that there aren't enough clues for the viewer to figure out the motivations of the characters for him/herself before they are revealed, so these revelations seem to come out of nowhere.
An intriguing film, but not for all tastes.
|
tt1602098
|
Albert Nobbs
|
Albert Nobbs (Glenn Close) works with extreme dedication as a hotel butler in 19th-century Ireland. Assigned as female at birth, and initially raised as a girl, Albert has spent the last 30 years living as a man. Albert has been secretly saving money to buy a tobacco shop to gain some measure of freedom and independence.
Meanwhile, recently unemployed Joe Mackins (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) arrives at the hotel to repair the boiler. Flirtatious maid Helen Dawes (Mia Wasikowska) is attracted to him, and they become lovers. However, Joe soon shows himself to be an alcoholic bully.
At this time, a Mr. Hubert Page (Janet McTeer), who was tasked with painting the hotel, discovers Albert's secret, only to reveal that he is keeping the very same secret about himself.
Albert visits Hubert at his home and meets Cathleen (Bronagh Gallagher), who lives with him as his wife. Albert tells Hubert the story of his life: born a bastard and then abandoned, Albert was raised and educated in a convent before being kicked out after the death of Mrs Nobbs, Albert's mother. One night, aged 14 and still presenting as female, Albert was brutally gang-raped and beaten by a group of men. Immediately afterwards, after hearing there was a need for waiters, Albert bought a suit, was interviewed and was hired, and began his life with a male identity. Albert's former name is not revealed.
Believing Helen may be the ideal wife to run a shop with, Albert asks her to 'walk out'. She refuses, but Joe, believing that Albert will give Helen money that could help the pair emigrate to America, encourages her to lead Albert on. She agrees to this approach, allowing Albert to buy her expensive gifts. Helen is uncomfortable with Albert and the arrangement that Joe forced her to make. Albert tells Helen about long-kept plans to buy a shop, though she only wants to leave Ireland for America.
A typhoid epidemic breaks out in Dublin, and when some staff fall ill, customers avoid the hotel, causing financial problems. Albert becomes infected but recovers, while Helen discovers she is pregnant with Joe's child. Joe is terrified, fearing he will become like his abusive father. Albert goes to Hubert's home and learns that Cathleen died, leaving Hubert devastated. As a tribute to her, Albert and Hubert don dresses Cathleen made and take a stroll on the beach. Though both at first are extremely uncomfortable, they eventually enjoy spending the day together dressed as women. They take a walk along the beach where Albert, feeling free, runs in the sand. But a stumble and fall bring Albert back to reality. The pair return to Hubert's, change back into their men's clothing, and go back to their lives as before.
Back at the hotel, Albert learns Helen is pregnant and offers to marry her. She refuses, saying Albert does not love her, though Albert voices a fear that Joe will abandon her and the child and go to America alone. Later that evening, when Joe and Helen get into a loud fight, Albert intervenes. Albert physically attacks Joe when he attempts to hurt Helen in a fit of rage. Albert is thrown against a wall by Joe, sustaining a head injury. Albert retires to bed, bleeding from one ear. Later that night, Albert dies, presumably as a result of the head injury.
Mrs. Baker discovers Albert's hidden money and uses it to revitalize the hotel. In the following months, Joe has gone to America and Helen has given birth to a son, Albert Joseph. Mrs. Baker makes further use of Albert's money by hiring Hubert to paint the entire hotel. Hubert sees Helen again, who breaks down and reveals that she will be separated from her son and thrown out into the street. Hubert tells her, "We can't let that happen, can we?", implying that he will look after her.
|
tragedy
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0293832
|
Hansel & Gretel
|
Hansel and Gretel are the young children of a poor woodcutter. When a great famine settles over the land, the woodcutter's second, abusive wife decides to take the children into the woods and leave them there to fend for themselves, so that she and her husband do not starve to death, because the kids eat too much. The woodcutter opposes the plan but finally, and reluctantly, submits to his wife's scheme. They were unaware that in the children's bedroom, Hansel and Gretel have overheard them. After the parents have gone to bed, Hansel sneaks out of the house and gathers as many white pebbles as he can, then returns to his room, reassuring Gretel that God will not forsake them.
The next day, the family walk deep into the woods and Hansel lays a trail of white pebbles. After their parents abandon them, the children wait for the moon to rise and then they followed the pebbles back home. They return home safely, much to their stepmother's rage. Once again provisions become scarce and the stepmother angrily orders her husband to take the children further into the woods and leave them there to die. Hansel and Gretel attempt to gather more pebbles, but find the doors locked and find it impossible to escape.
The following morning, the family treks into the woods. Hansel takes a slice of bread and leaves a trail of bread crumbs for them to follow home. However, after they are once again abandoned, they find that the birds have eaten the crumbs and they are lost in the woods. After days of wandering, they follow a beautiful white bird to a clearing in the woods, and discover a large cottage built of gingerbread, cakes, candy and with window panes of clear sugar. Hungry and tired, the children begin to eat the rooftop of the house, when the door opens and a "very old woman" emerges and lures the children inside, with the promise of soft beds and delicious food and a hot bath. They do this without knowing the fact that their hostess is a bloodthirsty Hag who waylays children to cook and eat them.
The next morning, the hag cleans the cage in the garden out from her previous captive. Then she throws Hansel into the cage and forces Gretel into becoming her slave. The hag feeds Hansel regularly to fatten him up, after three weeks Hansel gets nice and fat. On the final night she mutters to her self that he will be good to eat. The next day the witch prepares the oven for Hansel, but decides she is hungry enough to eat Gretel, too. She coaxes Gretel to the open oven and prods her to lean over in front of it to see if the fire is hot enough. Gretel, sensing the hag's intent, pretends she does not understand what she means. Infuriated, the hag demonstrates, and Gretel instantly shoves the hag into the oven, slams and bolts the door shut, leaving "The ungodly creature to be burned to ashes", screaming in pain until she dies. Gretel frees Hansel from the cage and the pair discover a vase full of treasure and precious stones. Putting the jewels into their clothing, the children set off for home. A duck ferries them across an expanse of water and at home they find only their father; his wife died from an unknown cause. Their father had spent all his days lamenting the loss of his children, and is delighted to see them safe and sound. With the hag's wealth, they all live happily ever after.
|
psychedelic, fantasy
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0159920
|
Total Recall 2070
|
In 2084, construction worker Douglas Quaid (Arnold Schwarzenegger) is having troubling dreams about Mars and a mysterious woman there. His wife Lori (Sharon Stone) dismisses the dreams and discourages him from thinking about Mars, where the governor, Vilos Cohaagen (Ronny Cox), is fighting rebels while searching for a rumored alien artifact located in the mines. At Rekall, a company that provides memory implants of vacations, Quaid opts for a memory trip to Mars as a Secret Agent fantasy. However, during the procedure, before the memory is implanted, something goes wrong, and Quaid starts revealing previously suppressed memories of actually being a Secret Agent. The company sedates him, wipes his memory of the visit, and sends him home. On the way home, Quaid is attacked by his friend Harry (Robert Costanzo) and some construction co-workers; he is forced to kill them, using elite fighting skills. He is then attacked in his apartment by Lori, who states that she was never his wife; their marriage was just a false memory implant, and Cohaagen sent her as an agent to monitor Quaid. He is then attacked and pursued by armed thugs led by Richter (Michael Ironside), Lori's real husband and Cohaagen's operative.
After evading his attackers, Quaid is given a suitcase containing money, gadgets, fake IDs, a disguise, and a video recording. The video is of Quaid himself, who identifies himself as "Hauser" and explains that he used to work for Cohaagen but switched sides after learning about the artifact and underwent the memory wipe to protect himself. "Hauser" instructs Quaid to remove a tracking device located inside his skull before ordering him to go to Mars and check into the Hilton Hotel with a fake ID. Quaid makes his way to Mars and follows clues to Venusville, the colony's red-light district, primarily populated by people mutated as a result of poor radiation shielding. He meets Benny (Mel Johnson, Jr.), a taxi driver, and Melina (Rachel Ticotin), the woman from his dreams; but she spurns him, believing that Quaid is still working for Cohaagen.
Quaid later encounters Dr. Edgemar (Roy Brocksmith) and Lori, who claim Quaid has suffered a "schizoid embolism" and is trapped in a fantasy based on the implanted memories. Edgemar warns that Quaid is headed for lunacy (his description loosely predicting later events) and a lobotomy if he does not return to reality, then offers Quaid a pill that would waken him from the dream. Quaid puts the pill in his mouth, but after seeing Edgemar sweating in fear, he kills Edgemar and spits out the pill. Lori alerts Richter's forces, who burst into the room and capture Quaid, but Melina rescues him, with Quaid killing Lori in the process. The two race back to the Venusville bar and escape into the tunnels with Benny. Unable to locate Quaid, Cohaagen shuts down the ventilation to Venusville, slowly asphyxiating its citizens. Quaid, Melina, and Benny are taken to a resistance base; and Quaid is introduced to Kuato (Marshall Bell), a parasitic twin conjoined to his brother's stomach. Kuato reads Quaid's mind and tells him that the alien artifact is a turbinium reactor that will create a breathable atmosphere for Mars when activated, eliminating Cohaagen's abusive monopoly on breathable air. Cohaagen's forces burst in and kill most of the resistance, including Kuato, who instructs Quaid to start the reactor. Benny reveals that he is also working for Cohaagen, and that he alerted Cohaagen's forces.
Quaid and Melina are taken to Cohaagen, who explains that the Quaid persona was a ploy by Hauser to infiltrate the mutants and lead Cohaagen to Kuato, thereby wiping out the resistance. Cohaagen orders Hauser's memory to be re-implanted in Quaid and Melina programmed as Hauser's obedient wife, but Quaid and Melina escape into the mines where the reactor is located. They work their way to the control room of the reactor, and Benny attacks them in an excavation machine. Quaid kills Benny, then confronts Richter and his men, killing them too.
Quaid reaches the reactor control room, where Cohaagen is waiting with a bomb. During the ensuing struggle, Cohaagen triggers the bomb, but Quaid throws it away, blowing out one of the walls of the control room and causing an explosive decompression. While reaching for the reactor controls, Quaid knocks out Cohaagen, and he is sucked out onto the Martian surface, killing him. Quaid manages to activate the reactor before he and Melina are also pulled out. The reactor releases air into the Martian atmosphere, saving Quaid, Melina and the rest of Mars' population. As humans walk onto the surface of the planet in its new atmosphere, Quaid momentarily pauses to wonder whether he is dreaming or not, before turning to kiss Melina.
|
sci-fi
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
This is a great show, with underrated production values and subtlety.
People who watch movies, unfortunately do not always read books.
Some complains that it does not follow the Total Recall novel.
No, this is not an "action" series like the "Ahnold" movie "TR" was.
It's a mixture of sci-fi, mystery, police procedural and a lot of Red-Serling like philosophizing and speculating about the future and human nature.
Somebody who judges this series based on one episode seems to be a bit short-tempered.
Dick's novels and short stories and only connect him with the movie Blade Runner.
This is unfortunate because PKD's stories were more entertaining, layered and intellectually versatile than what is offered in Blade Runner.
Total Recall 2070 is less of an amalgamation of Blade Runner and Total Recall, and more a mix of their literary sources: 'We Can Remember It For You, Wholesale' [short story] and 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' [novel], both by PKD.
Both of these have very real, flawed characters with a quirky, inventive mood that always entertain.The story of Total Recall 2070 was nearly that of '...Sheep.' For the benefit of the movie going masses' recognition, the names of things from the movie version of Total Recall were used.
The story was about the philosophy behind automated sentiency, mechanized religion and the need for humanity to regain its sense of purpose above the machine, while also living beside it.
This is something the series was only beginning to touch before it was canceled.The lack of knowledge about the show's true roots has led to a complete misunderstanding of it.
People call Total Recall 2070 a rip-off of the movies when in reality the movies were a pale shadows of their sources.
Total Recall 2070 is the most genuine incarnation of Philip K.
When I read this show was very much Philip K Dick inspired, using many of his ideas, rather than just a spin off, I knew I had to see it.Total Recall 2070 shows a futuristic world dominated by multinational corporations, many of them operating on Mars as well.
The backgrounds show us but a glimpse of a grim world that is rebuilding itself on technology, nature having been destroyed mostly.Unfortunately the show is not addictive at all and there are some important elements missing to make it great: humor, a clear direction of storyline, well- motivated and consistent emotions.
It too often feels as just another bland cop show, just set in the future, although it's really much deeper than your average police fare.
Some characters, like David Hume's wife, or the female lab researcher,Olan Chang, are underdeveloped.
But Hume and Farve, his android partner, are excellently casted.
Hume is the cool, but emotional and aggressive agent, while Farve is the brilliant investigator, looking for his unknown origins.The ambient synth music fits very well with the whole Blade Runner feel.
It would be unfair to compare it all with what Vangelis and Ridley Scott did for atmosphere: for a TV show they've done a good job transferring the script to a very watchable programme.Total Recall has occasional swearing and some sex but it is all functional, not just for the heck of it.
Overall a very smart show with a lot of conspiracy, cover ups, tensions, but most importantly very relevant issues regarding humanity's fate in a world where technology can be one's friend or worst enemy, depending who is using it, who wants to have it, who owns it and who decides what is legal to do with it.So, there's some good and some bad.
I hope to see a nice new cyberpunk/futuristic show soon, right now Westworld is the best one to watch.In particular avid Philip K Dick and sci fi fans should give this show a shot but you may get bored after an episode or 6..
At last someone has created characters that are flawed and full of insecurities; nobody is a jock or a superhero.I have tried to participate in a "Save the Program" campaign, along with others who have enjoyed the series, but it seems that our efforts have been unsuccessful so far..
Easton & Pruner play a perfect pair of cops who work off each others strongpoints and makes for enlightening scenario of the future mental battles of crime.
Pruner is great as an android partner who craves human traits and feelings so he can fit in with his human counterpart Easton.
Great series set with a toned down "BladeRunner" motif.
In the first time I watched Total Recall 2070 I was just thinking "Blade Runner".
The backgrounds, the style, the futuristic look of the sets and the technology, all of them look like "Blade Runner".
Should have been called Blade Runner 2070..
Dick's other famous movie adaptation: Blade Runner, and not entirely from the movie Total Recall.
It also reminded me alot of the series TekWar with its future cops trying to thwart criminals that use the future's techno devices to commit their crimes and spread chaos in the uncertain times of the 21st century.
This show was great, although everyone who sees it is reminded of another P.K. Dick Movie Bladerunner.
Lets get them to release the entire show on DVD, once again its more like Harrison in Bladerunner than Arnold in Total Recall(pee ewe)..
I'm a huge fan of "Total Recall" (1990) with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sharon Stone so I was interested in this TV show too.
They changed the story a little bit and added some new interesting moments here.
Second, the acting was great except for Cynthia Preston who played Olivia Hume.
I don't understand why this wonderful series lasted for only one season - it deserved much more and had a big potential..
Based on glowing 'must see' IMDb user comments (and in turn wanting to like it), I watched about half of the first season before giving up on this problematic series.The biggest problem stems from the distant, restrained writing which leaves us with the shell of a typical cop show that's been relocated to a corporate-controlled future.
Flat characters and low production values seal the series' fate, removing whatever potential might have otherwise remained.As others have noted, comparisons to Blade Runner (1982), Total Recall (1990), and Star Trek: The Next Generation (at least as far as the Data-Farve android connection goes) are hard to avoid (and I am a fan of all three).
The series has far more in common with the android-laden themes Blade Runner offers than with the Schwarzenegger movie with which it shares little more than a title and a few images.
Thanks to user comments, I avoided comparing this series directly with the 'Recall' movie (as should you).Poor writing remained the series stumbling block.
Det. David Hume and his wife Olivia both start the series out having deep-seated feelings against trusting androids, yet Hume's android partner Farve gets accepted by both with only a whimper, after which the issue gets shelved.
In particular, Hume occasionally brings up trust issues with Farve, but moments later is willing to act as if he trusts him with his life.
We briefly see Olivia deal with her android-related issues, but this seems to be largely forgotten in favor of relegating her to the typical 'cop's wife' role.
The result is that Olivia's presence distracts from the plot, as opposed to revealing something about their respective characters.
In another character switch, Assessor agent James Calley at first seems to support Hume (allowing him to keep an illegal weapon), only to later set up Hume to clean up his dirty work (when he kills 'The Technician').
Questions of whether androids are sentient beings are mentioned occasionally, but are never the focus, only serving as a plot smokescreen.
Farve is taunted as being 'only a machine', but this question is forgotten before the next scene.Lesser irritations surface throughout the series.
With such prevalent communications, why don't the CPB officers contact Captain Ehrenthal when questions arise (the 'unauthorized surgery' scene from 'Brain Fever' comes to mind)?
Farve seemed resilient to some weapons, but he avoids getting in the line of fire (as opposed to Data, who had a willingness to sacrifice himself so that humans might live).
In one scene, Farve's gun lights up but no CG shot comes out, an error that could have easily been edited out given that the previous several shots worked.
Based on other production shortcuts that were taken, the sporadic dips in acting quality could be attributed to not allowing for necessary retakes to enable the actors to hit their marks.
Unfortunately, no amount of polish will bring any real shine to this series.
The writers just didn't tackle any big issues, not to mention the low production values.
This isn't to say that the series is completely without merit - it just doesn't warrant going to any great lengths to see.
If you want to see a Sci-Fi series done (nearly) right, try Battlestar Galactica (2003)..
The new offering from Showtime for their Sci-Friday lineup has promise - their sets live up to the hype and were shamelessly showcased a few times in the premiere, but overall the look is radical and consistent but not intrusive.
You may recognize Easton (Hume) from the somewhat obscure series "Two" on UPN and the even more short-lived show "VR-5".
The actor who portrays Hume's android partner does it flawlessly..
More Blade Runner than Total Recall.
Having just seen the first episode of the series the overwhelming impression was that it was a remake of Blade Runner.
The the gloomy sets, the constant advertising hoardings, the evil companies (Rekall is no longer a minor holiday company but is the equivalent of the Tyrell Corporation)were all more Blade Runner than Total Recall.
Infact the plot itself whereby androids are trying to extend their life was that of Blade Runner.
There was a minor plot involving fake holidays and an unnecessary trip to Mars to keep a link with the movie but throughout there was a sense that this was not the movie the producers wanted to make a series of.
The production values were good and if the plots become more original then it could be promising.
Oh..It did answer the question left hanging at the end of the movie ...was it reality or an implanted memory?
The movie ended with an atmosphere being restored to Mars but in the series there are still BioDomes and a red sky.
This above average television movie is a good sequel to "Bladerunner." While containing the basis elements of "Total Recall" in terms of virtual reality and brain-washing and the red tone color of Mars, this android-like movie (replicant isn't used in the movie) has many of the trappings of Bladerunner, the music, the rain, the Asian population, the outside, neon advertising.
Except for loose ending (as if the producer ran out of money or there was hope for a television series), this movie is tight, intelligent and steers away from the usual stereotypes.
The law enforcement administration plays it straight for the most part (a big change, a refreshing change), the forward movement of plot development from "Bladerunner" makes this movie a good sequel, building on "Bladerunner" instead of just copying it.
(January 25, 2019 update: This review possibly refers to the first and second episode of what eventually turned into a Canadian television series)..
Odd Late-night Gold.
This actually made the show work for me even more.What it seems like some people don't understand about this show is the creators didn't want to make just another spin-off.
Dick's questioning of what it means to be human.
The show takes the themes and style of Dick's writing and builds a unique story around it.
Having grown up immersed in the genre, I totally became enthralled with the plot.
Pure gold..
Although it tries to be "Blade Runner", Michael Easton is no Harrison Ford.
Karl Pruner's "Farve" tries hard to be ST:TNG's Mr. Data, but his character lacks Data's depth and 'humanity'.Having seen every episode so far, I still have no idea what the show is about, other than that this amoral company has some insidious plan to take over the world.
The one character we, the audience, care about - Olivia Hume - has almost nothing to do, which is a shame because the lovely and talented Cynthia Preston is the best thing about the show.Although the sets are interesting in a Blade Runner-esque sort of way, the lighting is so overdone that everything looks flat and fake.
Total Recall 2070 was a 22 episode series which premiered on the ON TV Canadian channel and was later introduced to US audiences on the ShowTime cable channel.
Being on a premium cable channel meant minimal exposure for the series and as such it was not only under-appreciated but also difficult for a wide audience to actually view it and give it a chance -- and so the show never really got any kind of head start and was condemned from the get go to the point where it had to be scrapped after one season--But what a season it was.
A real shame because Total Recall 2070 was one of the most original, cutting edge and unique shows to ever appear on television.Total Recall 2070 has absolutely nothing to do with Verhoven's Total Recall film except for a few references (the Mars colonies, Virtual Trips, the Dystopian future concept and of course the name of the show).
In fact, Total Recall 2070 has much more relation to Blade Runner and many dub it simply "The Blade Runner Series".
To an extent this is true, however Total Recall 2070 goes far beyond Blade Runner in almost every aspect imaginable.
It's just as dark, foreboding, hard-core and intelligent as Blade Runner was.At an early glimpse the show looks like just another one of those cop shows that have littered our screen for years, but a deeper, more focused look reveals just how good this show really is.
If ever there was a show that rewarded repeated viewings of episodes--this is it.Total Recall 2070 follows the escapades of two cops in the Citizens Protection Bureau (The CPB).
During the pilot episode, Detective David Hume (the human cop) and his partner go on to check a simple disturbance call in a Rekall facility (Rekall is one of the Consortium mega corporations).
Hume's partner is killed during the shootout with the Androids and this sets the stage for Hume's new partner, Ian Favre.
Hume learns that his new partner is in fact not human, but rather an Android--A Flesh and Plasma based Alpha Android, the first of its kind.
Hume is of course reluctant to partner with an Android, but eventually learns to work with him.
The extremely complex relationship between Hume and Favre is what this show is about.Needless to say, the show contains many subtleties and nuances one does not pick up on first viewing (again, a similarity shared with Blade Runner).
Detectives Hume and Favre solve different cases as the show goes on, but many of these cases simply serve as a background to the real dilemmas and questions this show poses.
Total Recall 2070 has no such episodes.
With every episode, one learns more about Hume, Favre, the world in which they live in.
I was finding myself eager to learn more and more about the world, about the characters (all of whom are very interesting, deep and complex characters).The show's background seems fairly simple at first.
As the show progresses one realizes how much that world affects its characters and how complex it really is.
The year is 2070, the moral breakdown of society is evident, the sun is nothing more than artificial lighting, the world is dark, people are paranoid, Consortium companies (Mega Corporations) have unlimited control over the citizenry and over the government who are no more than puppet figure heads supported and funded almost exclusively by the Mega Corporations.
And so, Hume and Favre solve cases (all involving a Consortium company in one way or another) and try to restore some order into an extremely chaotic world where moral and legal boundaries are nothing but extinct.One truly has to see this show and appreciate it to realize just how great it is.
Granted, it's not nearly as revolutionary as films like Metropolis, Blade Runner, Brazil, etc.
I can only hope more shows like this arise in the future.
Such intelligent shows are an extreme rarity on today's pop television and eager and curious minds are hungry for something different, something unique--Total Recall 2070 was exactly that.P.S. Unfortunately only the pilot episode was released on DVD and on its own it is rather useless as the story truly picks up later during the season.
and as result, I can truly appreciate everything the creators of this series were trying to do.
Yes, it is is in the "Bladerunner" universe with SOME elements of "Total Recall" (otherwise know as "We Can Remember it for You Wholesale") but, it does so much more.
We recall the cliffhanger episode that ended the first and last season and get an intimation of the direction the creators wanted to take the show.
I have seen few series so far ahead of their time as was this one...
This movie is very stylish and sexy in its less than appealing future.
Though very watchable, it wasn't very re-watchable with some episodes going nowheres fast.The series revolves around 2 detectives protecting the rights of the underprivileged.
Made of flesh and blood.It also involves trying to prove that the organization known as REKALL, from the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie, is one of the most evil organizations on the planet, yet though their methods are questionable, there is no proof that they are.
Reacting on prejudice in a way.Total Recall 2070 has a great style and atmosphere well suited for the series, and a questionable amount of sexual situations, including nudity and near nudity.
|
tt0097371
|
Food of the Gods II
|
Dr. Neil Hamilton (Paul Coufos) receives a call from his mentor Dr. Kate Travis (Jackie Burroughs) about a young boy named Bobby, whose deficient growth has been treated with Travis' experimental serum. Bobby has swiftly and unexpectedly grown larger than a full-grown adult and become violent. To find an antidote, Neil takes a sample of the serum back to his lab at a university science complex. There, animal-rights activists led by Mark Hales (Réal Andrews) and Neil's girlfriend Alex Reed (Lisa Schrage) are protesting the work of Prof. Edmund Delhurst (Colin Fox), who claims to study cancer but in fact subjects animals to experimentation seeking a cure for baldness.
Neil and his assistant Joshua (Frank Pellegrino) inject the serum into some lab rats. That night, the activists (minus Alex) break into the complex to trash Delhurst's lab and accidentally release the now-giant rats, which kill Mark and escape into the campus' utility tunnels. Police Lieutenant Weizel (Michael Copeman) does not believe the surviving activists' statements despite Neil's corroboration about the serum, and Dean White (David B. Nichols) hires a pair of exterminators to handle what he believes are normal-sized rats.
The giant rats kill several people, including one of the exterminators and the surviving activists, Al and Angie, escape. But the giant rats apparently kill whoever tried to hunt the animals down themselves. Delhurst's assistant, a janitor named Zeke, is attacked. But, the surviving exterminator, despite taking several rat bites to his arms and face, appears and burns this rat. Later, a night watchman tries to escape some rats, though he is killed off screen. Alex discovers the body of a workman (a Mexican forced from his car and chased by rats) while two other men killed by the rats, whose bodies are still in the car, are discovered by the police. Although Lieutenant Weizel is convinced of the threat, Dean White remains skeptical and refuses to shut the campus down because of the upcoming grand opening of the university's new sports complex. When Joshua falls victim to the rats, Neil attacks the Dean and is fired.
Delhurst steals the serum sample and tests it, first on Neil's pet rat Louise, then on a sample of cancer cells. He accidentally contaminates himself wiĺth treated cells and dies within minutes as his entire body develops massive tumors. Neil returns to the lab to retrieve the antidote he has created, testing it by destroying Delhurst's transformed corpse. Meanwhile, the rats attack the swimming competition being held in the new sports complex, killing several people including Dean White.
Neil uses the enlarged but still-docile Louise, who is in heat, to lure the giant (male) rats into the university courtyard where Weizel and his men gun them all down. Neil phones Dr. Travis to inform her of the antidote, but it is too late; Bobby, now psychotic and larger than ever, kills Travis while she is on the phone and escapes.
|
tragedy, cult, entertaining, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Once again my ability to be entertained finds it's happy place at the near lowest common denominator one can possibly find: A movie about growth hormone mutated rats chewing their way through the supporting cast of an unnamed Canadian university.
Packed with in jokes, sight-gags and made by people who were using their brains for more than shoulder ballast, I found this to be a rip-roaring entertainment heightened by the ingenious way that miniature sets, forced perspective shots and other gimmicks were used to create monster rats, an over-sized university professor, and a giant mutant kid who's escape at the conclusion of the film was the perfect open ending.
And I hope nobody ever makes a FOTG Pt3 to show what happens to him: some things are best left to the imagination.Anyone familiar with the abysmal 1976 film of more or less the same name can rest assured: Part 2 has absolutely nothing to do with the original FOTG, setting off on a totally independent storyline which produces more or less the same results -- giant rats eating people, a universally frightening concept -- though this film is correctly played for laughs where the original was a semi-serious ecological horror flick unable to overcome it's underlying stupidity.This one works because it embraced that stupidity & went with it.THE PLOT: An overachieving researcher develops a growth hormone formula, tests it on some tomatoes which are then eaten by a cage full of lab rats who get big and eat people.
End of story.Along the way, the film takes hilarious pot-shots at such deserving targets as animal rights activists, liberal university administrations, the police, Clint Eastwood, and synchronized swimming.
In fact the minute that the evil Dean character voiced concern that an effort to corral the mutant rats might interfere with the opening of a new pool complex I knew that the climax would be fun, though the bigger laugh came when he referred to "all the rich alumni with their checkbooks" who would be in attendance.
Like research work.Look, if you're going to be sitting down and watching a film about mutant rats on the rampage the last thing in the world you're really going to fret over are convincing performances, slick special effects and a coherent plot, so why not approach the material at an angle & have some fun?
On that level of consideration this film is a minor masterpiece, and anyone who finds it to be prurient or juvenile in nature is simply refusing to play along with the fun.Highly recommended as a "party movie", with plenty of laughs, some repulsive gore and even a few bared breasts here & there.But if you're looking for a serious film, well that's why they make DVDs of CITIZEN KANE, and you'd be advised to stick with that.
There are, in addition, some fine touches of melodrama (re: a man and his lab-rat and the mutual love/jealousy that ensues), a memorable performance by Jackie Burroughs ("Road to Avonlea"), and an even more memorable one by the kid who plays the "small boy who gets big and therefore foul-mouthed, mean and homicidal".To those with a penchant for the ridiculous: only you can prevent GNAW!
Lots of human error adds up to one colossal mess in this follow-up (rather than true sequel) to the 1976 film adaptation of H.G. Wells' "The Food of the Gods".
A growth hormone, initially used on produce, is injected into one rat, and the effects spread to other rats, which all develop a taste for human flesh after they become giants.
The monstrous rodents then terrorize a college campus.Almost all of the human characters are stupid beyond belief, so ones' instincts will be to side with the rats and enjoy watching these people become rat chow.
Parsons is pretty absurd at times, adding to the comical feel.Among the highlights: a subplot about a giant kid (Sean Mitchell), a memorable nightmare sequence, and the riotous climax where the rats run amok during the grand opening of the colleges' brand spanking new sports complex, disrupting some synchronized swimming.Paul Coufos ("The Lost Empire", "Chopping Mall"), who somewhat resembles Jeff Fahey, makes the mistake of taking himself too seriously, while at least some of the others here know they're performing in utter schlock and deliver goofy performances (like that priceless janitor Zeke (David Koyle)).
While trying to find a way to reverse rapid hormonal growth, university professor Dr. Neil Hamilton (Paul Coufos) accidentally creates a pack of giant man-eating rodents that escape into the sewers under the campus, emerging to attack students and staff.As unbelievable as it might seem, someone (well, director Damian Lee, to be more precise) actually went and made a sequel to Bert I.
Gordon's cruddy '70s eco-horror Food of the Gods; almost as hard to believe is that FOTG2 proves far more enjoyable than the dismal original.
Lee is far from a great film-maker, as anyone who has seen Abraxas, Guardian of the Universe (1990) can testify, but he loads his film with enough demented lunacy—including some welcome OTT gore and a little female nudity—to ensure that it easily surpasses Gordon's film in terms of sheer entertainment value.Admittedly, it takes a while for Lee to get into the swing of things, but once he does, he lets loose with a series of wonderfully daft scenes: we get a cheesy science montage with a naff synth rock soundtrack; there's a ridiculous dream sequence in which hero Dr. Hamilton injects himself with an experimental hormone, and then grows while having sex with student Mary Anne (actress Kimberly Dickson kindly ticking the nudity box); a rat exterminator with a flamethrower does an impersonation of Clint Eastwood; a guy gets his ass mauled by a rat while taking a leak; the rodents chase a maintenance man on an electric cart through tunnels at high speed; an unscrupulous scientist is infected with dog cancer and melts; and in the magnificent finale, the rats attack a synchronised swimming contest before being massacred by machine gun.As if that wasn't enough for fans of B-movie silliness, there's also fun to be had from numerous cameos by the boom mic and a special FX guy, armed with a pair of syringes loaded with goop, who surreptitiously sneaks into shot during the melting scene..
Food of the Gods 2 followed 16 years after the original movie and is a lot more gory than Food of the Gods and less enjoyable but not total trash.An experiment on growth hormone goes wrong and this results in rats growing into giants and going on the rampage.
I laughed at the melting man sequence.Food of the Gods 2 is worth looking at, despite all that gore.Rating: 2 and a half stars out of 5..
I didnt see what there wasnt to like about it there is rats and countless deaths bad special effects but who cares.
The teacher asks her favorite student to do some more experiments to see if something can be created to reduce the size of the child who is not only still growing but his attitude is getting violent.Back on the college campus, PETA members are throwing a fit because the school is doing experiments on live animals.
The original was a flat out bomb because the director took the material way too serious but thankfully Lee doesn't do that and instead delivers a rather comical horror spoof that takes shots at everything from Gordon to PETA to even Jaws.
This certainly isn't a good movie either but if you've got nothing better to do and it's three in the morning then you should find yourself laughing.Since the story isn't important that means there must be something worth watching and that's the animal attacks that are downright hilarious.
All of the attacks are rather violent in a comic book way and the director certainly had enough in the budget to throw around the red stuff, which is what horror fans want.Outside the gore the next important thing is the humor that is scattered throughout the film.
I'll let you use your imagination on this one.Food of the Gods 2 is in no way shape or form a "classic" film but it isn't trying to be.
However, if you appreciate films like The Cyclops and Attack of the 50 Foot Woman then you should get the comic nature of this movie..
It's like "Demons", but with giant wet rats in a swimming pool instead of a movie theater.
Gordon's (Mr B.I.G) original 1976 film of H.G Wells 'The Food of the Gods' (which I haven't seen) sees a growth hormone accidentally transform a horde of rats into giant man-eating rodents that feed there way through a college campus.
Still it's filled with stupidity and we end up with an abrupt open-ending (I'm sure a sequel was in mind) of a sub-plot (involving a young boy being injected with the growth hormone and College Professor Neil Hamilton being asked to help find a cure to stop the uncontrollable growth by use of experiments) that starts of proceedings, and is the main reason for the rat mayhem to occur and when it centres back on this angle, it glazes over it despite probably being more interesting than the rat chaos.
Food of the Gods II tells the legacy of a group of giant, man-eating rats who infest a college campus.
Biologist Neil Hamilton succeeds in synthesizing a growth hormone and uses it to create giant tomatoes.Unfortunately the tomatoes are eaten by caged rats which then grow until they become the size of dogs.When animal rights activists break into the lab,they accidentally succeed in freeing the rats which escape down into the tunnels beneath the campus and start preying on people."Food of the Gods II" is one hell of a bad movie.The acting is lousy,the characters are painfully stupid and there is plenty of gore with ripped-out throats and severed limbs to boot.The film has its share of riotously unintentionally funny sequences too.In spite of its New York setting this amusing crap was actually made in Canada.So grab some beer,invite a couple of friends and laugh how stunningly bad "Food of the Gods II" is!.
The climactic set piece involves giant rats terrorizing a synchronized swimming display commemorating the grand opening of the college swimming pool (that was a mouthful!).
Boring, predictable, by-the-numbers horror outing at least has pretty good special effects and plenty of (mindless) mayhem and gore to satisfy (mindless) genre fans.
If you're still having any thoughts of wasting your time on this snore fest I'll summarize the plot so you can see how horrible it is.So Dr. Hamilton brings the growth hormone back to his cheap lab at a community college to find a cure.Dr. Hamilton also just happens to be giving extra credit lessons to one of his students who's joined an animal rights group protesting the community college's animal experiments on...
I had no idea there was a save the lap rats movement.PETR People For the Ethical Treatment of Rats breaks into Dr. Hamilton's lab and frees his lab rats whom predictably get into the super growth hormone.Giant killer rats on the loose at a community college.
They're hard to miss.Of course they're would be other easy ways to kill giant rats like...
This one is about this growing boy and a scientist that is trying to help him so he accidentally creates giant killer rats...you know how it is.
The concept appeared in H.G. Wells' "Food of the Gods" story, but it was, by far, the weakest part of the book, so it shouldn't have been touched upon for this movie.I won't spoil the ending (should you even care to watch the movie in the first place), but I will mention rats intermingling with college kids packed in to see a swimming meet (!), as well as a scene in a subway that might have been meant for another sequel.
An experimental growth hormone causes lab rats to grow to giant size.
Numerous touches and moments of inspired (and often unintentionally hilarious) absurdity abound throughout: A foulmouthed and ill-tempered titanic brat, insipid scientist hero Neil Hamilton (a hopelessly cardboard performance by Paul Coufos) dreaming that he starts to grow to gigantic size while in the middle of making love to enticing coed Mary Anne (foxy brunette Kimberly Dickson), a macho cigar-chomping Clint Eastwood clone rat exterminator, a rat attacking a dude who's urinating behind a bush (we're even treated to gut-busting shots of this guy's bare butt as he runs away screaming!), the ultimate agonizingly nasty fate of Hamilton's unscrupulous jerk rival Edmond Delhurst (ripely overplayed to the obnoxious hilt by Colin Fox), and, best of all, the vicious vermin making a bloody hash out of a pool full of synchronized swimmers (!) during the delightfully berserk climax.
Nobody, of course, but director Damien Lee thought it was a good idea, anyway, and he put together a belated sequel that stands as one of the most redundant movies in horror history.
"Gnaw" is a sequel in name only, as the setting moved to a typical late 80's location (a university campus) and also the cheap & cheesy gore effects perfectly illustrates the 80's.
Due to some incredibly stupid animal rights activists, the huge and ravenous rats escape and devour pretty much everyone on campus.
"Gnaw: Food of the Gods 2" is terribly bad and therefore a lot of fun to watch!
The characters do and say unimaginably stupid stuff (like descending into the sewers unarmed while they KNOW it's infested with rats), the acting is atrocious and there's a genuinely bizarre sequence involving the hero having sex under the influence of growth-serum!
In case you just can't get enough of this junk, there are quite a lot of creature-features revolving on mutated rats, like the Italian schlock film "Rats: Night of Terror", the modest 70's cult film "Willard" and its lame sequel "Ben", the 2003 "Willard" remake starring Crispin Glover and the surprisingly good recent rat-movies by once-famous directors Tibor Ticaks ("Rats") and John Lafia ("The Rats").
Sure, the movie is cheesy as hell (come on, those giant rats!) but it will surely entertain you.The poorly done f/x and make-up add a sense of B-movie but I'm sure that the producers tried to make a serious Horror...
This is an extremely cheesy Horror movie with lots of gore, and rat violence.
Also, when the rats attack in the pool (a cool scene) you can say that in order to create the effect of a giant rat, the director focused on the rat's head with a zoom.
A pretty good horror film, I kind of liked it..
Later that night animal rights activists Mark, Al and Angie break into Hamilton's lab and in an accident all the infected rats escape.
Directed by Damien Lee I liked this, even though the way it's filmed is very flat, the production design and photography screams made for T.V. It certainly kept me entertained me for an hour and twenty odd minutes.
The stand-out scene perhaps is the rats attacking a swimming pool full of synchronized swimmers.
By far the best scene in the movie is the swimming pool massacre.
The rats looked more real than ever and the acting and special effects were great.
WARNING: THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS!!!This giant-rat movie would be worthless, except for FOUR wonderful redeeming features/moments/scenes.1.
And the special-effects are cheesy and funny--they're filming ordinary rats in a miniature swimming pool, and also obviously superimposing the rats' images on the images of the fleeing people.
A funny line: a professor warns the president of the university that the campus may be infested with giant rats, and advises him to cancel the synchro-swim event.
It's cheap, it's got way too many perverted and LSD-looking sex scenes that just make you want to say "what the hell?" and it doesn't follow the original film at all.
~Spoiler~When I found out that there was a sequel made to The Food of the Gods some 13 years later, I thought it was one of those cases where someone had made a movie about giant rats and coincidentally owned the rights to use the title.
The scientists trying to find a cure for the child accidentally use lab rats which grow out of control and start feeding on students and faculty around a privately owned college campus.
It's probably the best movie about giant rats who terrorize a synchronized swimming event only to be brutally gunned down by the police in a scene that rivals the sheer intensity of the finale to Sam Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch.
Yep, it's the kiss of death when you either name your movie Gnaw, or at least begin with it.So
let me get this straight: there was such a high demand, that after 13 years they absolutely needed to make a sequel to The Food of the Gods?
Heck, it's barely a sequel in name only; the only similarities from part one and Gnaw: Food of the Gods Part 2 is that they have a growth hormone (this time produced, and not "found from the 'Gods'") and rats appear in both movies.
And they even toned down the size of the rats this time, à la Jaws's shark from parts 2 through 4.I don't want to waste too much time, but I saw this as a kid and I'm always, regrettably, drawn to When Animals Attack movies.
Strangely, this sounds like 28 Days Later that won't be released for more than a decade later.At any rate, he's trying to find a cure, warn everyone, help Bobby, a boy that's grown both in size and temper and find time for love with his "dreamy" big hands and big
well, let's say his mate can now give birth without any pain.Oh, and throw in the Jaws, Piranha and every other rip-off big "Grand Opening" finale that will make or break the place of concern.
|
tt0102797
|
Robin Hood
|
Alan-a-Dale introduces the story of Robin Hood and Little John, two outlaws living in Sherwood Forest, where they rob from the rich and give to the poor townsfolk of Nottingham, despite the efforts of the Sheriff of Nottingham to stop them. Meanwhile, Prince John and his assistant Sir Hiss arrive in Nottingham on a tour of the kingdom. Knowing the royal coach is laden with riches, Robin and Little John rob Prince John by disguising themselves as fortune tellers. The embarrassed Prince John then puts a bounty on their heads and makes the Sheriff his personal tax collector, who takes pleasure in collecting funds from the townsfolk including hidden money from the crippled blacksmith Otto and a single farthing from a young rabbit, Skippy, who had just received it as a birthday present. However, Robin Hood, disguised as a beggar, sneaks in and gives back some money to the family, as well as his hat and a bow to Skippy in honor of his birthday.
Skippy and his friends test out the bow, but Skippy fires an arrow into the grounds of Maid Marian's castle. The children sneak inside, meeting Maid Marian and her attendant Lady Kluck. Skippy "rescues" Marian from Lady Kluck, who pretends to be a pompous Prince John. Later, when she is alone with Kluck, Maid Marian reveals she and Robin were childhood sweethearts but they have not seen one another for years, and Kluck consoles her not to give up on her love for Robin. Meanwhile, Friar Tuck visits Robin and Little John, explaining that Prince John is hosting an archery tournament, and the winner will receive a kiss from Maid Marian. Robin decides to participate in the tournament disguised as a stork whilst Little John disguises himself as the Duke of Chutney to get near Prince John. Sir Hiss discovers Robin's identity but is trapped in a barrel of ale by Friar Tuck and Alan-a-Dale. Robin wins the tournament, but Prince John exposes him and has him arrested for execution despite Maid Marian's pleas. Little John threatens Prince John in order to release Robin, which leads to a fight between Prince John's soldiers and the townsfolk, all of which escape to Sherwood Forest.
As Robin and Maid Marian fall in love again, the townsfolk have a troubadour festival spoofing Prince John, describing him as the "Phony King of England", and the song soon becomes popular with John's soldiers. Enraged by the insult, Prince John triples the taxes, imprisoning most of the townsfolk who cannot pay. A paltry coin gets deposited into the poor box at Friar Tuck's church, which gets seized by the Sheriff. Enraged that government has meddled in his church, Friar Tuck lashes out at the Sheriff, to which he is quickly arrested for "attacking a lawman, interfering with the Sheriff's legal duties and high treason to the Crown". Prince John orders Friar Tuck hung, knowing Robin Hood will come out of hiding to rescue his friend and give the potential for Robin to be caught and a "double hanging".
Robin and Little John, having learned of the plot, chose to sneak in during the night, with Little John managing to free all of the prisoners whilst Robin steals Prince John's taxes, but Sir Hiss awakens to find Robin fleeing. Chaos follows as Robin and the others try to escape to Sherwood Forest. The Sheriff corners Robin after he is forced to return to rescue Tagalong, Skippy's little sister. During the chase, Prince John's castle catches fire and the Sheriff figures he has Robin where he wants, either to be captured, burned, or make a risky jump into the moat. Robin Hood elects to jump. Little John and Skippy fear Robin is lost, but he surfaces safely after using a reed as a breathing tube. Sir Hiss says he tried to warn Prince John, and now look what he did to his mother's castle, causing the Prince to exclaim "Mummy!" and suck his thumb and chase the terrified snake into the burning castle.
Later, King Richard returns to England, placing his brother, Sir Hiss and the Sheriff under arrest and allows his niece Maid Marian to marry Robin Hood, turning the former outlaw into an in-law.
=== Alternate ending ===
The alternate ending (included in the "Most Wanted Edition" DVD) is a deleted version of the story's conclusion, primarily utilizing still images from Ken Anderson's original storyboard drawings of the sequence. As Robin Hood leaps off of the castle and into the moat, he is wounded (presumably by one of the arrows shot into the water after him) and carried away to the church for safety. Prince John, enraged that he has once again been outwitted by Robin Hood, finds Little John leaving the church, and suspects the outlaw to be there as well. Sure enough, he finds Maid Marian tending to an unconscious Robin Hood, and draws a dagger to kill them both. Before Prince John can strike, however, he is stopped by his brother, King Richard, having returned from the Crusades. King Richard is appalled to find that Prince John has left his kingdom bleak and oppressed. Abiding his mother's wishes, King Richard decides he cannot banish Prince John from the kingdom, but does grant him severe punishment (which explained how Prince John, Sir Hiss, and the Sheriff ended up in the Royal Rock Pile). King Richard returns Nottingham to its former glory (before leaving for the Third Crusade), knights Robin Hood as Sir Robin of Locksley, and orders Friar Tuck to marry Robin Hood and Maid Marian.
A short finished scene from the planned original ending, featuring King Richard and revealing himself to vulture henchmen Trigger and Nutsy, appeared in the Ken Anderson episode of the 1980s Disney Channel documentary series Disney Family Album. This scene, at least in animated form, does not appear on the Most Wanted Edition DVD.
|
cult, action, murder, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Everyone knows that Costner's Hood was a bomb, but too few people have seen this superior version, shown on TV and then perversely released only on VHS by Fox.
Patrick Bergin is spot-on as a darkly-mooded Robin, and the backstory on his loss of rank and property is both historically plausible and dramatically effective -- a welcome change from other film versions.
The supporting case is excellent, particularly Uma Thurman as a liberated Maid Marian -- handy with a broadsword -- and Jeff Nuttall as the best Friar Tuck I've ever seen.
The highly underrated Patrick Bergin makes a fine Robin Hood, a worthy successor to Errol Flynn -- he is a flawed man (when it comes down to it, it is his pride that gets him outlawed), but still noble and heroic.
Uma Thurman is a dream as Marian, and the rest of the cast slip comfortably into their roles.But the thing I really love out this movie is the way the villain, Falconet, meets his end.
This version focuses on the Norman - Saxon struggle at that time in history and that is the pervasive influence throughout this superb motion picture....Most of the characters are quite different from those you've come to expect from the afore-telling of this story, in particular Uma Thurman's very special Maid Marian and Patrick Bergen's unique and coup d'etat performance in the title role...The cinematography is outstanding, giving the story a somewhat darker but more realistic tone and feel, and the direction is about as flawless as I have seen in this type historically-based film...Unfortunately, this film was conceived and distributed around the same time as the AWFUL Kevin Costner version and consequently was swept aside by that highly marketed but substantially inferior 'Hollywood' version released in the same year and about the same time...
One can only imagine what a masterpiece this film would had been if the circumstances surrounding its release had been different...It was said in the print media that when the English producers of this film learned Hollywood was producing a similar movie on the same subject, they pared their losses, and opted for this final product that even with a lower budget than originally planned, is a MUCH better and more accurate re-telling of the classic Sir Robert Hode, 4th Earl of Huntington (a real person) legend...Well written and adapted for the screen, expertly cast, and superbly directed by English director John Irvin, this relatively low budget production has never received the accolades it deserves...Look for some stellar performances by Uma Thurman as Maid Marian, Patrick Bergin as Robin Hood, Jürgen Prochnow as Sir Miles Folcanet, Owen Teale as Will Scarlett and an unforgettable performance by Dutch actor Jeroen Krabbe as Baron Roger Daguerre...Also worthy of mention was a brief but commanding performance by Edward Fox as Prince John, and memorable performances by David Morrissey as Little John and Carolyn Backhouse as Nicole, Roger's Mistress...If you have seen the "Hollywood formula", American version of this story with Kevin Costner, but not this one, or if you have seen neither, do yourself a tremendous favor and see this film....This movie will transport you back to another time and place, to see an accurate glimpse of medieval history come alive on film...
(If you're lucky.) I've seen most of them, and the best by far is Robin Hood, directed by John Irvin and likewise released in 1991.
Sure, there's a list of noble reasons why Robin Hood takes to the forest to fight Norman oppression and protect the unfortunate Saxon serfs from tyranny.
On the Norman side, Jurgen Prochnow is the malicious knight, Sir Miles Folcanet, who pursues Robin through the forest, and Jeroen Krabbe is Baron Daguerre, a greedy lord with a conscience.
One, at least to me, has always been that, while each new version will be watchable, no remake of Robin Hood will be the equal of Michael Curtiz' and William Keighley's 1938 masterpiece.Richard Green would make the story a weekly part of childhood.
Two Kevins (Reynolds and Costner) would add an interesting back story and Mary Elizabeth a fetching Marian as Morgan integrated the tale.But who could compete with Errol Flynn as the most dashing hero ever to stand before a camera, Basil Rathbone as the most compelling villain, or Olivia de Havilland as the most winsome damsel ever to be in distress?
Certainly not Patrick Bergin, at best a journeyman actor, Uma Thurman, a pulp film star, or John Irvin, a second tier British director.Then I finally saw their 1991 effort, and the truism is true no more.Bergin's hero is less perfect and less disarmingly charming than Flynn's, yet more compelling and much less comic bookish.
The good guys triumph because of their wit and ability, not just inevitability.This Robin is a hero fighting for his downtrodden people, not Richard Coeur de Lion, who ruled from Aquitaine, spoke no English and seldom set foot on English soil.I still love Errol and Olivia and will always treasure an hour and a half spent watching the Adventures of Robin Hood.
Uma Thurman is absolutely spectacular as an ass-kicking Marian, and the actor who plays Robin Hood is by far the best yet.
This is by far the most authentic version of a Robin Hood tale I've seen.
The timing of the release was unfortunate due to the publicity being generated for Costner's version (which I won't even waste my time reviewing), but if you're looking for a real genuine and human rendition of this timeless classic, set a few hours aside to watch Umma Thurman set the eternal bar for Maid Marianne.
This is an unfairly overlooked version of the Robin Hood story, with the misfortune of coming out in the same year as the bloated Kevin Costner film.
What makes this movie work -- and what makes it unusual -- is that it combines gritty, dirty medieval settings with charm, wit, and the feel of a great swashbuckler.More so than any other Robin Hood film, this one delivers a degree of realism.
Patrick Bergen is an odd choice for Robin, being neither English nor particularly well-known, but he makes the role a lot of fun to watch.This is certainly not the biggest or most expensive version of the story, being outspent by Errol Flynn, Kevin Costner, and now Russell Crowe.
The action scenes had a touch of authenticity about them that is all too often missing (for example when Robin was handed a staff by Will to battle with John Little it was a thick branch, forked at one end and obviously from a tree, not a martial arts supplier - just the sort of thing that might have been picked up in a real situation <accepting that something like that might well not have been lying around unless it was rotten>).
This version is my second best one of Robin Hood tales on screen after "Robin and Marian."Though the direction is uninspired, the performances are notable.
Modern recounting in which some Hood aficionados will appreciate the painstaking effort taken to adapt the vintage story to recent times ; including great action scenes with some fun images about the Merry Men .
In 13th century England , Robin is a noble Xaxon , he escapes from a nasty baron , the powerful Normand called Roger Daguerre (Jeroen Krabbé who had previously worked with John Irvin in Turtle Diary ,1985) , and the extremely villain Sir Miles Folcanet (Jürgen Prochnow) .
The legendary Sherwood forest's hero Robin Locksly and again the graceful Lady Marian (Uma Thurman) along with his Merrie Men , Will Scarlett (Owen Teale) , Friar Tuck (Jeff Nuttal) and Little John (David Morrissey), facing off the really malicious Daguerre and Sir Miles , two extremely crazed , wicked Normands .
Although is a little revisionist about characters , history , townsfolk , and time when is developed the action in a dirty , gritty Middle Age , as spectators generally disapproved the changes of Robin Hood's classic canon .
Please don't waste your time with that other film if you want camp that is aware it is camp then watch the much Better Errol Flynn RH if you want history and fantasy combined brilliantly with a superb cast and well thought out version of the mythos then see this version or the BBC Lionheart TV series.
I thought this was a wonderful version of the Robin Hood story.
Few subjects for a movie have been more thoroughly worked over than the (hi)story of Robin Hood.
Looking through the very crowded page of the IMDb database listing films with Robin Hood in the title we can see that they fall into several different groups - some were prepared for the cinema and others for TV.
In fairness any reviewer should first give some indication of what he or she is looking for - apart from the essentials of a movie with good film-script, acting, direction, lighting, and camera work.
I am one of those with strong childhood memories of reading about Robin Hood - I enjoy watching any good swashbuckler film, but I do not like watching when it misleads me about a real and not unimportant historical character.
The various Robin Hood films I saw many years ago differed greatly in the story they told, and were often very skimpy about the historical background that is so necessary to make the story meaningful.
He was perhaps a little old (40 I believe) when playing Robin Hood (perhaps the epitome of a youthful adventurer), but I correctly trusted his acting ability and the work of the makeup department would minimise this problem.Make no mistake, this is a fine film, not a great one but it belongs in the same stable as the 1922 version by Douglas Firbanks and the Errol Flynn version of 1938 (which is still widely regarded as the one to beat).
Admittedly it starts slowly but it is one of the few films to give adequate attention to the history of the period, and in the second half Douglas is spectacular, exactly portraying the character I somewhat romantically like to think Robin Hood would have had.
My response is so what?) and you'd be especially better off with the Flynn version, which is the most accurate representation of both the Robin legends and history (making mention of Richard's regent Longchamps and his capture by Leopold of Austria.).
Whilst nearly keeping close to the traditional Robin Hood Theme apart from the missing Sheriff of Nottingham (Replaced by a Baron for some reason) this film starts well but is of course sadly lacking in any real acting talent apart from the actor playing Much The Miller and perhaps Ms Thurman.However for those that like to see really really badly directed movies then there's a treat for you in the last five minutes of the film.
- (To Uma) "you are the most beautiful bride in England" followed by a cut to Uma looking more like a rejected model for ET.Certainly the worst ever Robin Hood film EVER made, even the many TV series put this in the shade..
It might be a more traditional film, but I actually prefer the Costner version, despite the many faults, errors and cheesiness, purely because it's a lot more fun.ROBIN HOOD gets a lot more of the facts right but it's lacking as a decent piece of drama, mainly because the characters, although carefully depicted, are all rather unlikeable.
Another of the many film takes on the legend of Robin Hood, from my point of view, two essential things were missing from this version: proper character development and any real sense of nobility.
In regards to the latter point, I didn't feel that Robin came across as particularly noble in this movie (although he does decide to return the taxes to the common folk) but rather he seemed interested primarily in Marian (Uma Thurman).
The only truly noble scene in the movie (aside perhaps from the decision to return the taxes) was the exchange near the end of the film between Will Scarlett (Owen Teale) and Daguerre (Jeroen Krabbe) about the future of England.
1991 was the year which saw two films on the legend of Robin Hood.
"Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves", a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster starring Kevin Costner, is by far the better-known of the two.
As in "Prince of Thieves" and several other films on this subject, Robin is portrayed as a Saxon earl, here named Robert Hode.
The film includes all the usual cast of Merry Men, including Little John, Will Scarlett, Friar Tuck and Much the Miller, as well as Maid Marian, but, oddly, not the normal villains.
One similarity which links this film with the Russell Crowe version is that both aim at a more "naturalistic" view of the Middle Ages to the romanticised "Merrie England" view presented in the Errol Flynn classic "The Adventures of Robin Hood" from 1938 and, to some extent, in "Prince of Thieves".
There is nothing particularly wrong with the performances of Jeroen Krabbé as Daguerre or Jürgen Prochnow as Folcanet, but neither of them makes as memorable a villain as Basil Rathbone's Gisborne in "The Adventures of Robin Hood" or Alan Rickman's Sheriff of Nottingham in "Prince of Thieves".
This "Robin Hood" is certainly better than "Robin and Marian" from the seventies, which manages to be both dull and unrealistic, but I would not rate it as highly as either the 2010 version or "Prince of Thieves", both of which could generate greater excitement.
As for "The Adventures of Robin Hood", that set a very high standard, and in my view none of the versions since 1938 have really lived up to it.
For those that say this version that came out the same time as the Kevin Costner version was better, I don't know what movie you saw.
While Patrick Bergin's Robin Hood might have been more enjoyable on it's own and Marian a stronger character in this version, the overall movie wasn't good enough to make it better than the Kevin Costner version.
In Robin Hood - Prince of Thieves, the story and Alan Rickman's Sheriff of Nottingham were VERY entertaining as was Little John, Friar Tuck and the other members of Sherwood Forest much more so than the ones in this film.
I think if it had been about something other than Robin Hood and been more a historical focus on the Norman and Saxon struggle, I would enjoyed it more.
Like I said, this movie by itself is decent but if someone said I had to watch a Robin Hood movie and gave me a choice between this one and Kevin Costner's, I would pick KC's every time.
Whether or not this film portrays English life at the time as "historically accurate" is completely overshadowed by thew dismal acting performances I've seen from any of the main characters.
because we can hardly imagine Thurman turning Prochnow down.Sorry to all, it is like that, admit it or not.To me, every second of the first two series of "Robin of Sherwood" is totally convincing, this series (maybe not the third one with that Connery-son), I took up into my heart's deepest regions.I cannot do that with this movie, sadly.
It is well done is many, many aspects, but the display of all the important personal relations is making a joke out of the whole movie.Many here said it was "WAY" better than Costner's Version.
Anyway, this version of "Robin Hood" is actually at a pretty good length.
I guess I haven't seen that many Robin Hood films, but this one at least had a very well known actress, Uma Thurman, in it.
A different version of "Robin Hood" that came out the same year (1991) as that Kevin Costner version, so nobody saw it.
One of the best Robin Hood movies.
There are the three Musketeers, King Arthur, Sherlock Holmes and of course Robin Hood.In the history of movies are so many adaptions of this legend and each is different in what style and atmosphere they set the piece.There f.e. is the flamboyant, tight wearing Robin of Errol Flynn (and Cary Elwes), who takes his life as an outlaw with jest and humour.There is the avenging Robin, out for revenge to some slights done to him and/or family and friends like the Costner Robin Hood.There are some, really trying to help the poor while having some fun and laugh at the cost of the ruling government as in the Disney cartoon version.There are many differences in the opponents who are battled by Robin, though the Sheriff of Nottingham is the constant one.
This way his fight begins....The look of this movie is the darkest and bleakest Robin Hood there ever was.
The forest looks not friendly, many scenes play at night, and the merry men get real dirty (unlike the Flynn Hood).
The story behind the whole movie may be the most "political" ever, because of that division of being saxon or norman.The acting is very good, in my opinion it even supersedes the Costner Robin Hood from the same year.
This is by far the best Robin Hood I have seen (since the flashy classic with Errol Flynn).
this movie is the most worst robin hood ever made bad choice of cast!
Patrick Bergin and Uma Thurman's acting looks quite decent (if it weren't for Costner and Mary Mastrantonio, I'd say even "defining", though that's really arguable).Baron Daguerre (Robin's main enemy in the film) is not that bad, he's just been insulted and needs to gain his former friend's trust once more.
For example, the celebration in the end (led by the Baron, not by the King!) Naked fat men in a so-called "garment" of branches and leaves -- Ah and Aw for all that Celtic stuff...The film is good to watch, and if you want to compare which of the 1991 versions was better, I think it senseless.
|
tt0107482
|
Magic Kid
|
The film is about Kevin Ryan, an 11-year-old karate-champion from Kalamazoo, Michigan, who spends his summer with his uncle, Bob Ryan and his girlfriend Anita in California. His older sister Megan is coming with him. Bob owns a management bureau for clowns-acts. He has money problems and owes $10,000 to a mafioso named Tony. Because of all his problems he starts and ends his day with a bottle of Jack Daniels, even in his morning-coffee. Tony wants his money back and sends his nephew and two collectors to Bob. Bob is still in bed when the Mafia arrive, but Kevin sees the three thugs entering the house to take $15,000 off Uncle Bob. Tony is very pissed about it, so Bob takes his niece and nephew out of the house. Kevin offers to help his uncle against the bad guys. Megan gets in trouble when she goes to a club to meet her hero Tommy Hart. The bad guys recognize her and want to kidnap her, but Bob and Kevin, who were looking for Megan, arrive just in time. Kevin takes out the thugs, but then comes 'The Animal', a big, very large though guy. And then comes Don 'the Dragon' Wilson to save the day.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The Karate Kid and his Valley Girl Sister Meet The Godfather.
Chris Mitchum and Lauren Tewes need some quality time together without the kids so they decide to pack the two kids off to his brother in Los Angeles.Brother Stephen Furst is an agent, fallen on hard times, and owing some really heavy bread to the local syndicate boss for some foolishly placed wagers on some sporting events.
The last thing he needs is these two kids to be saddled with.The kids, Ted Jan Roberts and Shonda Whipple, have their different interests and ideas about Tinseltown that they've developed from what they hear in Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Young Ted is a juvenile kick-boxing champion, his hero is martial arts champion and now film actor, Don 'The Dragon' Wilson.
His sister may be from Michigan, but her ideas definitely come from The Valley and she just wants to meet her soap opera hunk crush, Jason Iorg.With syndicate boss Joe Campanella and his less than sharp nephew Billy Hufsey chasing them, the uncle and his relations have little time to rest.
But of course it does all work out in the end.Stephen Furst was both funny and had pathos in his character, young Ted Jan Roberts if not the world's greatest actor did come across as sincere in his part.
Shonda Whipple though kind of spoiled the film for me.
This is a kid's film so I don't expect Shakespeare or O'Neill here, but her Valley Girl character was too too much.
I can't believe how dumb this one is in the face of all the dangers manifesting themselves around her and her relations.
All she wants to do is party and meet her sex object.
As Snagglepuss used to say, "YOIKES."Magic Kid is a pleasant enough film for kids and for martial arts fans, but I don't think it has any appeal beyond those two targeted audiences..
Mindless fodder.
I remember watching this film when I was about twelve and even then I found it rather pathetic.
The characters were all wooden and the props in the background could have acted better.
I mean, ask yourself why grown men- supposedly hardened criminals- would be struck down by a ten-year-old boy.Speaking of the kid, he was just too odd and arrogant to pass as a popular, normal boy.
His uncle is being stalked by criminals and here is this brat nattering on nonsense about ninja codes (not to mention, by his facial expressions, he looked quite constipated in the scenes he was using his karate).
Meanwhile his teenage sister had the spine of a jellyfish.
She just stood back like one of those pathetic fifties female characters while her kid brother fought off adult men.
Those minutes she was on screen must have set women's lib back decades.Seriously, if you want a martial arts film for your kids, you're better off watching '3 Ninjas' where the children are realistically portrayed and the acting is half-decent..
worth only below 5$.
First of all: This is not one of those movies you will want to see again.
But its neither one that you would turn off right in the middle (unless you have anything else to do, and I mean anything).This film is so "the 90's children's movie".
It got pure classic themes regarding this.
I really enjoyed it on this level, it reminded me of the good ol' days.
Modern kids above the age of 11 wont consider this movie anything but mindless fodder.
But you have to remember that in 1994 this movie would probably rate as an average.
Today, its definitely below average, but thats the way it goes.
I got this pretty cheap, so I ain't complaining.
But whatever you do, don't spend more than 5$ on this title..
Tied with The Wedding Planner as worst movie ever made.
I have never posted any comments on any movies, but I had to let you all know about one of the worst movies of all time.
"Magic Kid" is so horrible that it transfixes you and you can't turn it off.
You can't believe that dialogue could be this cheesy and that acting could be this comically bad.
The lead child actor is uncomfortable to look at, he has the weirdest facial expressions, especially when he is doing his karate thing.
Scary.
I know it seems like I am describing a "good-bad" movie, but no this is a "BAD- BAD" movie.
The worst moment is the 20 minute Universal Studios commercial in the middle of the movie.
Doesn't get worse than this my friends..
Okay film.....
The film itself it not that bad.
Sometimes the acting in the film is nerve-racking.
The action in the film is good and the story- line is all right, but that acting.In order to have a movie, you have to hire good, capable actors.
Ted Jan Roberts, and Stephen Furst does not count as good actors.Think really hard, what have you seen them in?Explain that one.
I have nothing against them personally, however they need to get some more acting skills.Besides that, the film wasn't really bad.Two and a half stars out of four.
|
tt0046755
|
Battle of Rogue River
|
In the Oregon Territory prior to the American Civil War, Chief Mike (Michael Granger) has fought the US Army and the white settlers to a standstill. As a result, the post commander Major Wallach (Willis Bouchey) is replaced by Major Archer (George Montgomery). On the way to the fort, Major Archer's troop of cavalry accompanied by two field guns spot an ambush by Chief Mike's Indians. Major Archer orders one of the guns to fire knocking down a tree and panicking the "braves" who suffer no casualties.
On arrival at the Fort, Major Wallach has allowed the use of his barracks to recruit more Irregulars for Stacey Wyatt (Richard Denning) who accompany the regulars on their military expeditions. As the recruiting involves free alcohol and kisses by women to the volunteers (and to their Regular comrades-in-arms) Major Archer is furious and immediately takes command of the post to reinstall military discipline, retrain the men and plan another expedition. No one is more outraged than Sergeant Major McClain's (Emory Parnell) daughter Brett (Martha Hyer) who thinks Archer inhuman.
An emissary of Chief Mike comes to arrange a meeting between the new commander to discuss peace but Major Archer initially refuses until orders come for him to negotiate with the Indians. The Major and Chief meet with each respecting each other and arranging a thirty-day truce with the Indians and whites not crossing either side of the Rogue River.
Wyatt is secretly employed to keep the Indian wars going by a consortium of the territory's business community (mining, ranching, lumber, fur trade) who oppose Statehood that would ruin their profits. Wyatt tricks Sgt Major McClain into breaking the treaty by telling him the Indians have attacked a white settlement leading to all but McClain killed after they attack an Indian settlement.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Minor western with a decent cast..
Probably the most distinguishing feature about this "B" western is the choice of names for the characters.
One of the leading men is named Stacey, the leading lady is named Brett and their Native American adversary is named Chief Mike!
Montgomery plays a zero-tolerence, by-the-book Major who comes to an Oregon fort with orders to solve the Indian problem.
There have been skirmishes back and forth across the title river and he's been given instructions to end the conflict, one way or another, to pave the way for Oregon statehood.
(It does complicate matters that his orders from headquarters change on a dime!) Denning is the head of a civilian militia who is also heavily involved in the fighting.
Both men have their eye on a Sergeant's daughter (Hyer) who has a mind of her own.
Finally, some misunderstanding and manipulation leads to a final stand off between the Cavalry and the Indians.
There isn't a lot that's particularly special about this film, one of dozens of this kind, but it does entertain and is brief enough not to drag much.
Montgomery is handsome, stalwart and charming, even through his icy exterior.
Hyer is spirited and flirtatious.
Crawford looks as if he's going to have a decent role (and it's great to see him looking young and handsome), but it only goes so far before he's lost in the shuffle.
The Indians, aside from Granger as the Chief, don't come off as particularly authentic or menacing.
At least the dialogue has a few decent lines.
Other films have covered this territory better, but it's not a bad time killer.
Directed by infamous showman William Castle just prior to his horror spree, it's a wonder audiences didn't get a clamp that looks like an arrow went through their head with each paid admission!.
Fast-paced and enjoyable "B" Western.
12 O'Clock High Meets Virginia City in Castle-directed "B" programmer.
George Montgomery is adequately tight-lipped as non-nonsense Major taking over failed outpost.
Richard Denning gives a marvelously multi-dimensional performance as Stacey Wyatt, as militia leader with a hidden agenda.
John Crawford adds an interesting interpretation of the Hugh-Marlowe-type role of reformed reprobate.
Martha Hyer provides eye candy and adds a bit of sass to boot.
Good, clean, fast, and unchallenging fun..
Average Western.
Battle of Rogue River (1954) ** (out of 4)Set in Oregon, the Army and Major Frank Archer (George Montgomer) are ordered to make peace with the Indians once and for all.
Archer manages to make a deal with the Indian leader but someone goes against both sides and gets a war started.BATTLE OF ROGUE RIVER is your average Western that features a rather familiar story and in all honesty it really doesn't stand out in a very crowded genre.
These type of stories go back to the silent days as you've got good Americans and bad Indians trying to make peace but of course something happens and the good guys have to rise to the fight.Director William Castle was probably just trying to bring this film in on budget and on time.
I'm going to guess that was much more important than actually delivering some sort of masterpiece.
As it stands, the film is pretty much average on every level as the story isn't original, the performances are decent and the director at least keeps things moving at a decent pace but there's just nothing here that stands out.
I will say that the cinematography was quite good and the final battle sequence was nice..
Mighty Despicable Treason.
Battle Of Rogue River is fought by George Montgomery as a newly arrived major in the Oregon territory who is charged to bringing the Indians under Chief Mike down and when that's done the path to admission as a state will be smooth.
A very important issue for many reasons, those expressed in the film and with the Civil War looming another free state in the union.
Curious that that fact was never brought up in the film.Montgomery finds the discipline lax at the fort and soon puts that to right.
As for the Indians and the tribe is never mentioned it is probably the Shoshone and they've been causing havoc the way Cochise and the Apaches were in Arizona.
It's either beat them or deal with them.His new orders opt for the latter, but some sinister forces have their own reasons for keeping Oregon wild and free.
They pull some mighty despicable treason to do it.
Evenly matched against Montgomery is frontier girl Martha Hyer who's full of sass, she's the daughter of the post sergeant Emory Parnell.
And leader of the civilian militia Richard Denning has more than a passing interest in her.Battle Of Rogue River is produced by Sam Katzman who over at Monogram Pictures never saw the kind of budget this B western had.
A good western it's still the kind of item that was showing up frequently on the small screen for free..
Assembly Line Western Demands Nothing...Competent Not Compelling.
There are a Few Things of Interest in this "Assembly Line" Picture that was made in the Middle of the Decade Long Love Affair with the "Western".Directed with a Surprising Lack of Style by Horror Manipulator William Castle.
It has a Strong B-Movie Cast Playing Cookie Cutter Characters.
Nothing here Elevates but it is Competent, in Color, Widescreen and Short (71 min).It is one of those Professional Only Entertainments that 1950's Movie Going Audiences were Offered that didn't Give a Hoot about Anthony Mann or Budd Boetticher.
It's sort of a Pedestrian Escape and one of Many Traditional Following the John Ford Mantra.Try and Catch all the Interesting Names of the Leading Characters.
Slightly Above Average of its Kind and Plays it Safe all the way.
It Stars Middle Budget Stalwarts George Montgomery, Richard Denning, Michael Granger, as "Chief Mike" the most polite and even handed "Savage" You're likely to see, and Martha Hyer as the Only Woman in the Movie, a Feisty Female with Brains and Beauty..
Step Up to the Mike!.
"Battle of Rogue River" is another of the Producer Sam Katzman, Director William Castle collaborations.
This one takes place in pre Civil War Oregon Territory where the U.S. Army is having trouble with the Indians who are continuously resisting their attempts to drive them out.Major Frank Archer (George Montgomery) is assigned to take over the task.
A hard nosed by the rules commander, Archer at first meets with opposition for his no nonsense command.
Civilian Stacey Wyatt (Richard Denning) and his civilian volunteers fight along side the army against Chief Mike (Michael Granger) and his tribe.
Archer is at first, ready to attack the Indians but a change of orders comes in ordering him to negotiate a peace with the Indians.
Archer meets with Chief Mike and a mutual respect develops.
They eventually negotiate a 30 day armistice where neither side is permitted to cross from their side of the Rogue River.Sgt. McLain (Emory Parnell) ia assigned to patrol the Army's side of the river during the armistice.
One day Wyatt rides up and informs Mclain that his daughter Brett (Martha Hyer) has been taken by a group of maverick Indians and are holding her just across the river.
Sgt. McLain thinking his daughter is in danger, crosses the river with his men who are ambushed and killed by the Indians except for McLain.
This provokes Archer in to prepare an attack on the Indians.Wyatt returns to the fort unaware that McLain has survived and continues his treachery.
Unscrupulous businessmen including Matt Parrish (Charles Evans) have been using Wyatt to prolong the Indian crisis for their own gains.
Sgt. McLain returns to the fort exposing Wyatt and Parrish .Meanwhile, Archer has planned an attack on the Indians using his artillery when he learns of Wyatt's treachery, but it is too late to prevent the artillery barrage and...................................................
I have to admit that I was caught off guard with Denning's treachery,.
He usually was a good guy.
I was also awaiting the explanation of the name "Chief Mike" which is used in all seriousness.
I expected some sort of humorous back story.
It never came.
Martha Hyer, tight leather pants and all, was just starting to emerge as a an "A" features player.Castle gives us some exciting battle scenes and a few surprises.
The color photography is excellent as well.
Also in the cast are John Crawford as Captain Hillman the second in command, Willis Bouchey as Major Wallach who turns over his command to Archer, Steven Ritch as Chief Mike's right hand man and Kathleen Freeman with a nice little bit at the recruiting sequence.
|
tt0025423
|
The Lost Patrol
|
During World War I, the commanding officer of a small British patrol in the Mesopotamian desert is shot and killed by an unseen Arab sniper, leaving the Sergeant at a loss, since he had not been told what their mission is. He decides to try to rejoin the brigade, though he does not know where they are or where he is.
Eventually, the 11 men in his unit reach an oasis. During the night, one of the sentries is killed, the other seriously wounded, and all their horses are stolen, leaving them stranded. One by one, the remaining men are picked off by the unseen enemy. In desperation, the Sergeant sends two men chosen by lot on foot for help, but they are caught and tortured to death, before their bodies are sent back. Abelson, suffering from heat exhaustion, sees a mirage and wanders into deadly fire. The pilot of a British biplane spots the survivors, but nonchalantly lands nearby and is killed before he can be warned. The men take the machine gun from the aircraft then set the plane on fire in a desperate bid to signal British troops. Sanders, a religious fanatic, goes mad and walks into deadly fire.
In the end, only the Sergeant is left. When the six Arab soldiers finally show themselves, he manages to kill them all with the machine gun from the aircraft. Moments later, another British patrol arrives, attracted by the smoke from the burning aircraft.
|
insanity
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
A brave group (Wallace Ford , Boris Karloff , Reginald Denny , among others) of British cavalrymen lost in the desert are shot by the Arabs (Francis Ford , John Ford's older brother , appears in an uncredited role as an Arab) , one by one and twelve battered fighting men battle it out to the finish .
Dead the commander officer they are subsequently commanded by the sergeant (Victor McLagen) , then arise boiling passions in the burning sands .The movie gets brief psychological remarks about diverse character studios , especially the religious fanatic Karloff and although is completely developed on the wide desert , the tale results to be claustrophobic .
Magnificent direction by the master John Ford and excellent interpretations make this a very good film .
The second film version of an archetypal adventure story is arguably the best despite some dated elements; John Ford deftly handles the proceedings and Max Steiner's stirring score - which at times foreshadows his later one for CASABLANCA (1942) - is a major asset.
The solid cast of character actors is highlighted by Boris Karloff's remarkable turn as a religious fanatic who is slowly driven crazy by the amorality of his comrades and the futility of their struggle against unseen Arab attackers.
The film can not only be seen to form part of the "British Empire" sub-genre of adventure films - with THE LIVES OF A BENGAL LANCER (1935), THE CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE (1936), THE FOUR FEATHERS (1939) and GUNGA DIN (1939) being its most notable contemporary examples - but, if one were to stretch it a bit, also paves the way for more modern stuff like John Carpenter's ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13 (1976).
A fine Max Steiner soundtrack with excellent performances by Victor McLaglen, Boris Karloff, Reginald Denny and rest of cast.
THE LOST PATROL from the British Army in Mesopotamia desperately defends itself in a tiny oasis from Arab attackers.John Ford directed this powerful Great War tale of agonizing heartbreak and desperate perseverance.
Ford craftily keeps the Arabs unseen for an hour, making the implacable desolation of the sun scorched desert the men's worst enemy.British actor Victor McLaglen is the absolute backbone of the film.
Beefy McLaglen--who had his own distinguished military career in World War One--is perfectly believable as the stalwart sergeant with the task of keeping his men alive at the water hole until relief can arrive.
Bullying, blustering, brave, his is a heroic performance of a man fighting titanic odds.Gaunt Boris Karloff appears as a religiously fanatical private; his final scene, carrying a large cross up a dune, is especially memorable.
A dozen British soldiers on patrol in the Mesopotamian desert are attacked by an unseen force of Arabs.
This is a rip-roaring adventure film set in the Mesopotamian desert during the First World War. It concerns a detachment of British soldiers holed up in a desert camp, where they are picked off one at a time by Arab snipers.
Victor McLaglen's the star of the show, and very believable, as he had in fact played this sort of role in real-life, as a soldier, and always looked good in a uniform.
Somehow this works in the movie's favor, as when McLaglen lurches at another character and the music accompanies his movement in such a way as to evoke King King, which Steiner had scored the previous year.
Karloff's religious fanatic is so over the top that he might have thrown the film off, yet Ford, rather than diminishing the character, decides to give him more screen time.
John Ford's critically acclaimed film has lost some of its punch, but still delivers an emotional feeling of helplessness, as the lost patrol is menaced by unseen Arabs, and are picked off one by one until few are left.
The lost patrol in this story is a group of British enlisted men, who've gotten separated from the main body of their regiment, and are in complete disarray due to the death from sniper fire of their patrol leader, which we see at the start of the film.
In attempting to hold ground, they are routinely eliminated by the Arab population of the region through the action of snipers, leaving only their Sergeant (McLaglen) to be rescued when the rest of the column finds the patrol location at the close of the film.The plot of the film is built around the trauma of battle fatigue, and the exhaustion of men sent to fight a war in a culture that is not their own.
I was pleasantly surprised to find in viewing this film that John Ford strove to keep the portrayal of the racist current and cultural supremacy ideas that always exist among invading armies to a minimum, and instead chose to focus on the contradictions in the lives of these men so far away from their homes in England.
Victor McLaglen leads the cast, with able support from Reginald Denny as a mercenary, Wallace Ford as a displaced vaudevillian, and Boris Karloff as a religious fanatic.
Among the many fine supporting cast members is Alan Hale Sr. in an almost invisible part, but for the few seconds he's on, he's really on.Like many others, I'd heard from the very first review I'd seen of this film written by Denis Gifford in his biography of Boris Karloff "The Man, the Monster, the Movies" (1973) that Karloff is way over the top in his portrayal.
But that's just an opinion.THE LOST PATROL is an interesting period piece, and for admirers of the work of John Ford, I believe it's a must see.
Karloff, taking a break from a string of horror films he was making during the time, is horribly over-the-top as a religious fanatic.
The Lost Patrol (1934)A John Ford war movie five years before his breakthrough movie, "Stagecoach," is interesting at least in relation to his career.
It doesn't get more basic than that.The Lost Patrol is a short running film, but manages to pack in a lot of good characterization.
The various military types are shown here, everyone from the hedonistic Reginald Denny, to the fanatically religious Boris Karloff, to the callow youth Douglas Walton, to the tough professional soldier Victor McLaglen in charge of them all.
John Ford directed this film and in McLaglen used one of his favorite players, a year before getting an Oscar for that other Ford classic, The Informer.
As typical in a Ford film, there are some beautiful shots of the vast Mesopotamian desert over which our own troops now fight with a lot better communications and weaponry than these guys had.
Most later films, including lesser Westerns of the 1950s, did it a whole lot better.So many of the characters and parts of the plot of "The Lost Patrol" were to become clichés, and this word is one that sprang to mind many times when viewing the film.
All too often in movies the military characters are just cyphers there to spout lines and despite some criticisms of how the parts are played you do believe that these guys are a very good cross section of the British army in 1917 .
And of course all the tension centres around on who gets killed off next , a bit like TEN LITTLE INDIANS set in the desert A flawed film whose dated qualities stop far short of it being called a classic .
This early Black and White film depicts the story of a British Desert Patrol, written by Philip MacDonald and is directed by John Ford.
From then on, the cast which has Victor McLaglen playing The Sergeant arrive at a desert Oasis and do their best to survive against desert tribesmen who are systematically killing the soldiers.
Boris Karloff plays Sanders, a conscience ridden soldier who succumbs to the desert isolation by becoming a religious fanatic.
With Wallace Ford, Reginald Denny and Alan Hale in the cast, the movie becomes a study of men, each with his own thoughts on life.
By the time he made The Lost Patrol, Ford was already an accomplished director, with a good number of silent and sound films to his credit, and you can see his skill here with pictorial composition, action shots, and landscapes.
Then again, one of the few Ford movies I find unwatchable is a much-praised Irish movie full of fighting and other "colorful" behavior--The Quiet Man.Max Steiner's score for The Lost Patrol has also been praised.
With this film now being 80 years old, I believe that it deserves to be at least cut some sort of slack in spite of its many flaws and irksome short-comings.But, with that said, the truth is, when it comes to a "War" picture (this time it being WW1), The Lost Patrol was actually quite a bore for the most part.This picture's story suffered considerably from it containing far too much talk-talk-talk and not enough action.As well, this film was very racist in its depiction and attitude towards Arabs who were never given a fair chance to be viewed as "real" people (as the English soldiers were).Instead, the Arabs were clearly portrayed as being vicious (almost unseen) assassins (always dressed in traditional Arab garb) who were pretty much summed up perfectly in the saying that goes - "There's no good Arab like a dead Arab." I'd say that these Arabs (who never utter a single word) were even more dehumanized than were the Indians in so many of director John Ford's later pictures.Set in the year 1917, one of The Lost Patrol's pluses was the impressive setting which took place in Iraq's Mesopotiama desert (which was in reality the Arizona desert).The stark, desolate beauty of this location was very nicely photographed and this greatly enhanced the "lost" and hopeless situation of the British soldiers who were being stalked across this vast, sandy plain by their cunning enemy who knew this endless wasteland like the back of their own hand.One of this film's biggest deficits was Boris Karloff as Sanders, the raving, religious nutter who spewed out passages from The Bible as if he were doing it while in the midst of a painful defecation.Believe me, Karloff's over-the-top, unintentionally laughable performance was so bad that it literally stank to the high heavens.Filmed in b&w, this picture (with its all-male cast), thankfully, only had a running time of just 72 minutes..
Boris Karloff in a John Ford Movie?
A patrol of British soldiers is lost in the Mesopotamian desert in WWI.
We join one such patrol as the senior officer is killed by a sniper and the group are left with no orders and no idea where they are in the desert.In theory this film should be a dark and tense film that starts with the type of sunny, "lads together" squadron of men but gradually descends into tension and in fighting as the unseen forces close in on them.
The limitations of the film are obvious early on because this is very much of its time and it hasn't dated that well in areas such as acting but as the film goes on these slipped away for me as I got sucked into it more and more.Ford contrasts the wide open space of the desert with the confines of the oasis hut really well to produce the two effects at the same time like dying of dehydration in the middle of an ocean.
Karloff was pretty poor early on because he did tend to exaggerate everything as he does, however later in the film this doesn't stand out as badly (although it is hardly "good" at any point).
A bunch of men get lost in the windy desert oasis of the Foreign Legion, and can't help but get picked off by unseen Arab enemies.
Led by intrepid (and Oscar winner for 1935's The Informer) Victor McLaglen and tempted by super-religious Boris Karloff (in another "pre-Frank role") to turn to God, this disbanded band of soldiers must fight to the death in 100+ degree heat.
These movies set in minimalist, claustrophobic locales have to rely on dialogue, internecine squabbling, and rescue of some sort to prevail to its viewers...The Lost Patrol is no different, and early Karloff gives an eerie view into what was to come in his future roles and his effective use of that Britich baritone, slight lispy voice.
This starts out on a very dramatic note as the officer in charge of a British patrol somewhere in the desert (it's presumably World War I and the desert is presumably in Iraq, since later in the movie there's a mention of "Mesopotamia") is shot by a sniper as he leads his troops.
This provides water and shelter, but also makes them a fairly easy target for the mysterious snipers, who start to pick the patrol off one by one.This is a pretty good movie.
In addition to Victor McLaglen as the Sargeant, the cast is highlighted by Boris Karloff as a soldier who's also a religious fanatic.
Perhaps because the sound quality was so bad, perhaps because nothing much seemed to be happening, but I didn't really like this film.It was rather downbeat, frankly.However, Victor McLaglen gave one of his best performances.He was not a bigger-than-life character, not a stereotype, but very life-like.Wallace Ford also gave one of his best performances, in what was one of his best roles.Watching this on TCM, I heard Robert Osborne say Boris Karloff's performance drew mixed reviews, and I come down on the side of those who said he was exaggerated.Since it is a classic, I believe everyone ought to see this, at least once.
THE LOST PATROL plods along in the desert sun accompanied by a Max Steiner score that gives some life to the proceedings, as a small group of British cavalry gets lost on the hot desert sands and takes refuge in an oasis.VICTOR McLAGLEN is head of the patrol and he's his usual blustery self and BORIS KARLOFF is a Bible quoting soldier devoid of his usual horror make-up.
DOUGLAS WALTON is sensitive as the nineteen year-old soldier comforted by McLaglen when overcome by fear and fatigue.Once the lost patrol reaches the oasis, it becomes clear that there's a stagey quality to the dialog in an attempt at character development, but McLaglen remains genuinely convincing as the tough but tender-hearted man who has to keep his men alert in the face of Arab snipers.The action is slow, but Steiner's music has a mixture of exotic flavors mixed with the feeling of wind, sand and military themes.
Karloff, with a mad stare in his eyes, eventually goes out of his mind and has an unusual final scene.The story ends with McLaglen the last man standing by the time the cavalry arrives and everyone marches off into the desert dunes while Steiner's music reaches a pitch of military flavor.Not bad, but not the best of John Ford either.
the lost patrol showed up on tv the other day,and being a movie buff I was surprised i had never seen it.the film seemed a bit stilted and john ford should have told boris karloff to can the silent movie histrionics,but it was good for it's time,and remade probably a hundred times.i'm glad i saw it..
The three remaining soldiers are: Morelli (Wallace Ford), the sergeant(McLaglen) and Sanders(Boris Karloff), a religious nut!
About the only character who came off really well in the film was Victor McLaglen as the sergeant in charge of the lost group of British soldiers.
There's also a very "horror-like" scene where they are almost rescued by a man in an airplane who is killed by the Arabs, a device that reminded me of "almost" rescue attempts in horror films such as "The Shining".Speaking of horror, how bout that Boris Karloff?
There were times when his performance was good, in a silent movie kind of way.
Having seen Victor McLaglen in any number of support roles, particularly in John Ford's later Westerns with John Wayne, it was cool to see him here leading a group of lost men in the Mesopotamian Desert during World War I.
What follows is the harrowing ordeal of the men in the Sarge's company summarily picked off by enemy fire or succumbing to madness resulting from fear, heat exhaustion and an unknown fate.Other reviewers for the film here on IMDb find Boris Karloff's performance to be rather over the top and maniacal, however I thought he built on the persona of a religious zealot over the course of the story until he could no longer maintain his grip on reality.
The commanding officer is killed by a sniper's bullet taking with him the orders under which the patrol is to proceed.The sergeant (Victor McLaglen) is left in charge with no idea of what their mission was supposed to be.
They are now marooned in the middle of nowhere with no hope of escape.Snipers begin picking off members of the patrol one by one until.........Victor McLaglen long a John Ford regular, stands out as the sergeant who tries to keep his men under control and hopeful of an eventual rescue.
***SPOILERS*** Cut off in the fighting against the Turks a British patrol is lost in the vast Mesopotamian Desert trying to find it's way back to it's brigade.
The religious fanatic starts to think that he's in some way on a mission from God to not only save his lost patrol but what seemed like the whole world from the horrors of war.
John Ford was to become a great director so he was just learning his trade at the time this was made but he lost his way on this one !!
In brief, a British patrol of some half dozen men are lost in the Arabian desert in World War I.
One by one, they're picked off by unseen enemy snipers until only Victor McLaglen, the top sergeant, is left.In these movies, there are always a couple of adumbrations of tragedy.
|
tt0418325
|
Die Wilden Kerle 2
|
In the English translation of the Wild Soccer Bunch stories, the events take place in a small neighborhood in Chicago. The team is made up of a cast of colorful characters, each of them bonded by their passion for soccer. The team plays their beloved game according to five unbreakable rules: "1. Be Wild! 2. Everything’s cool, as long as you’re wild! 3. Never, ever give up! 4. One for all and all for one! 5. Once Wild, always wild!" The logo of the Wild Soccer Bunch is inspired by the original logo created by Masannek's children for their own soccer team.
|
fantasy
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Wild love, v1.01. Early 2016 I purchased four very low cost DVDs as a speculative purchase. Would they be fun second childhood food or not? One was Mean Girls 2, which I was not expecting much of. However the price was low and I do remember a review that suggested that it was a lot better if one did not expect it to be a true sequel. This is made to very different production values and is much meaner than the original, but that could be the direction rather than the script.The others were Die Wilden Kerle 1 to 3. The DVD boxes were fully in German, but the distributor was Buena Vista so I assume that there was likely to be an English language alternate soundtrack, or at least subs. The first feature turned out to be German only, but the other two had English subtitles.If I had read the IMDb reviews before purchase I would have avoided these. As is I found both 2 and 3 to be fairly typical of average quality features for kids. Technically weak but interesting none the less. I accept that such stories often get poor IMDb reviews. Personally, I found these imaginative Wilden stories to be a breath of fresh air.The second feature involves a feud between a mostly boys sports team and its banker. The story flow is based on a pseudo vampire luring the team's best player away by careful use of romance, something that the team itself does not have a clue about. A quality story.The third feature centres on a feud between the team and someone who left them in the early years, friendship destroyed, a different sort of love being central. All good stuff even though the acting feels weak. A nice extra for me is that this is a transgender story.I was impelled to get the disk of DWK5 and that is up to the same standard. In this the love theme is the bad guy having a type of love that sucks the victim into eternal chains, eternal death. It also does not get good reviews, but some should be able to get a lot of fun out of these stories, despite that.In comparison, Mean Girls 2 felt weak. It also reminded me of Disney stuff such as Camp Rock 1 and 2, but weaker. I can still find entertainment in Mean Girls 2, though.. Complete rubbish. This wild guys sequel is just as much nonsense as the first film and the three next movies. A prime example of what a movie should not be. Rufus Beck and Cornelia Froboess did good in not returning and I wonder what the German Film Academy was thinking when they nominated this piece of crap for Best Children's film a second time??? It came out 1.5 years after the first and the only known cast member really is Uwe Ochsenknecht who is probably only in it because his kids are. The director and writer is Joachim Masannek again and his sons are back as are most of the other child actors.i have to say Uwe Ochsenknecht has a scene here and there where he put a smile on my lips, but his sons are just useless in terms of acting and would never have a career without their established father pulling the right strings. Here the enemy is a pale vampire guy (long before the Twilight hype) who looks like a young retarded Jack Sparrow and that the female main character is interested in. Of course, she is. In the end an evil witch is brought to life and she may have been the biggest wtf-moment in the entire series. The way she is depicted is plain horrible and it was so random as nothing before indicted any kind of supernatural characters in these films. Cringeworthy beyond belief. As is the music. Bananafishbones suck so much here and in the other films. Especially their closing credit songs are rubbish. The idea of making and using songs that depict the mood of the characters is a good one, but the execution was a complete mess. The same can be said for pretty much all other aspects of these films, especially the whole rambling about being wild. The plot deals with finding out who your real friends are, but the whole script is not worth the paper it was written on. And why is the smaller Ochsenknecht son suddenly the love interest of Gries' character? In the first film, it was still somebody else who randomly disappeared. Do yourself a favor and stay away. Oh wait, the best thing about this film? It's the shortest of the five, does not even run for 80 minutes (not counting the credits), so the torture ends soon.
|
tt0406706
|
Devour
|
The story follows Jake Gray (Jensen Ackles), a young man who's been having bizarre visions of murder and self-mutilation, and his experience with a live roleplay-like online game called "The Pathway" (a similar roleplaying as seen in The Game).
Following the deaths of his friends Conrad (Teach Grant) and Dakota (Dominique Swain), who introduced him to the game, Jake soon learns that "The Pathway" is actually being run by a man named Aiden Kater (Martin Cummins) and his band of Devil-worshippers. They've been using it to look for a specific person, even as they manipulate others into killing. As their final acts, the victims of "The Pathway" commit suicide in various gruesome ways.
With help from Marisol (Shannyn Sossamon), a new friend who dabbles in the mystic occult, Jake learns from a man called Ivan Reisz (William Sadler) that his wife, Anne Kilton, and their unborn child were taken by Kater and sacrificed to the devil. Soon after, he tracks down Kater and learns that Anne was not in fact sacrificed to the devil, that she gave birth, and that her child was stolen by mortals, and raised as a human. He is that child, the person whom "The Pathway" was created to find, and Anne is really Satan (devil) herself.
Ultimately, Jake confronts his birth mother (who has killed his adoptive parents) in the very place where he was stolen from her, he then learns that Marisol was, in fact, Satan/Anne. Following his rejection and attempted murder of her, Jake is shown a vision of the night he was born. He awakens covered with blood on the ground the next day, only to be arrested for the murder of his parents. The movie ends with Jake wondering if everything (including Pathway itself) really was not created by his imagination and if he had committed all those murders.
|
horror, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Once the film starts, you realize there is a lot going on, and there are many twists and turns that lead you to the ultimate ending of faith, belief, power, imagination, and an important story.
In all these movies a character does something (like visit a website, watch a video, play a video game, or start a rumor) which starts into motion a chain of events (usually unleashing something evil) that result in a blood bath.
I thought Jensen Ackles (Jake) and Dominique Swain (Dakota) did an excellent job portraying and acting their parts...
If a different person were playing Marisol, if they'd kept the beginning and the basis of things being connected to the website, but found a way to make various parts and the ending more realistic and added a bigger budget to pull all of that off, then this had the potential to of been a great movie.
I've seen horror movies a lot worse than this one, such as "American Nightmare", that I couldn't even bring myself to get through completely without laughing or sleep, but Devour kept my attention.
I rented this movie just because I thought he was cute (lame, I know), but then I ended up actually liking it, so I wouldn't say that I wasted my money..
It could be considered good cause it definitely got my jumping out of my seat, it could also be bad seeing as I wasn't really paying that much attention to the movie.I'm not a sucker for happy endings or anything but the ending was somewhat disappointing.
The acting was alright, all though I've seen the actors act better in TV series or movies.I don't consider watching this movie a waste of my time, I've seen better horrors sure but like I said before, I kinda tend to pick the bad ones out.
(maybe that's because I've seen the good ones :D) so I guess if you like horrors, you could give this movie a shot, just don't expect a masterpiece.
When I come across an actor who clearly cares about their career (male or female), I make a point of watching films they have appeared in because I know that they will choose good material.Jensen Ackles (of Supernatural) is such an actor.I think everyone can say at one point or another that they have watched a film because of a certain actor / actress who stars in the film and I want to be clear that my reason on this occasion is not because I am a groupie.I have started off with this because of some reviews on the internet that include "the film's not so good but Jensen is easy on the eyes" etc.
I am not a film-making expert so in layman's terms; the acting is good (not always perfect but never bad either), the relationships between the characters are believable if not always fully developed and the film had a strong beginning, middle and end.
Some were (possibly) due to neglect (i.e. with the writing / directing etc.) and some are clearly just budgetary and I will not score a film lower for that because you know a film's limits before watching one which has a lower budget.Incidentally, a high budget was not needed and the film was shot in a professional way so you only really notice during a couple of special effects scenes which did not impact on my enjoyment.I did watch the film without expecting much and I accept that this can influence a person's enjoyment of a film but really, there is nothing wrong with it.Ultimately; a good script and an interesting mystery.
I rented this DVD because it has Dominique Swain in it, who I think of as the new LOLITA, but I was pleasantly surprised that the movie kept my attention all the way through.
His friends Conrad Dean (Teach Grant) and Dakota (Dominique Swain) apply him in a weird game called "The Pathway".
Jake blames the game, which might be connected to the devil, for the deaths of his friends and decides to investigate the mystery.The beginning of "Devour" is a promising but miscast teen horror movie.
i waited a long time to see it, and it was hard to find...maybe they could make more copies...well Jensen's did a great job, and he is so amazing at portraying the character...i think the girl who plays Marisol did better in a night's tale though!!
i just thought that it had a pretty good story line, it actually had a plot that you could follow, it wasn't one of those horror movies that you just cant understand!!
Jake Grey (Jensen Ackles of the hit TV show "Supernatural" and "My Bloody Valentine 3D") gets drawn into a seemingly demonic game called 'the Pathway' that his friends, whom are already addicted to the game, sign him up for it.
Now he's stuck on a path that may have disastrous consequences.While you'd be forgiven for thinking this movie would be akin to similarly-themed horror films such as "Brainscan" or "Arcade", the actual plot device of 'the Pathway' game falls into the background (whether this is due to numerous rewrites I don't know) as the film goes in a decidedly different path of demons/possession.
If you like horror movies that concentrate more on messing with your mind than cheap jump-out-at-you type scares & gore, I think you'll enjoy this one!.
Boy was I surprised, Jensen Ackles did a great job, Shannyn Sossamon is always a pleasure to watch and Dominique Swain was trippy good.
It's pretty neat to see that Jensen Ackles Dad, Alan Ackles, was also in this movie...I thought the story line was pretty good, and I really liked how the movie ended.
The only thing I really liked about this movie was Jensen Ackles.
Was it the fact that Jensen Ackles was acting in it or the fact that the story line kept you wanting to know the end.
If you want to watch a good Satanic video game movie choose Evilspeak instead..
They were, in fact, the reason why I purchased this movie.The story is about Jake (played by Jensen Ackles), who sees macabre visions that turn into reality, as he has been introduced to an online game named "The Pathway".
Trying to make sense of the disturbing events, Jake seek help from his newly met friend Marisol.Story-wise then "Devour" was mediocre and nothing extraordinary happened throughout the course of the entire movie.
The movie wasn't particularly scary or thrilling, and it was sort of an ordeal to make it through to the end."Devour" is not groundbreaking in any sense, and not even Shannyn Sossamon and Dominique Swain could do only that much to lift up the movie, given the restraints of the script and the directorial hand of David Winkler.
A key factor for somewhat liking the movie is also the presence of Jensen Ackles, he has great looks and acts fairly well too, he is certainly a newcomer to watch out for.
Without giving away the plot, I would like to say that the movie manages to scare and at the same time it isn't just a series of mindless screams and gore.
I've been a fan of Jensen Ackles for a while and I think I liked the movie more than most would because I did go in wanting to see him.The plot wasn't bad, but I felt that it could have been a much better film if they had taken a few plot twists in different ways.
Plus, I predicted a few things before the ending rolled around.The Acting was good, especially from Jensen Ackles who plays the lead.
You were able to like and dislike the character at the same time, which is not an easy feat for an actor, and Jensen did it well.I recommend this film if you are a fan of anyone in it.
The one thing that really got to me was, though I truly enjoy horror films, I don't like excessive gore.
I didn't have high expectations going in, but was pleasantly surprised Movie had an excellent cast of both big and small name talent.Movie had a familiar theme but awesome twist on the classic horror plot.The ending was not very predictable, and although it was strange, it was well executed.The scenes were pretty gory at points but this is a must for any cheesy horror flick.Although it is not heart stopping amazing, it has replay value, it has character, it has an excellent atmosphere about it, and it should be a staple for any good b-budget flick evening..
I originally watched Devour, I admit, because I am a serious Jensen Ackles fan and from the cover/description it looked like an extremely promising movie.The movie has a heavy theme of duality, the fine line between right and wrong, and the choices we have to make.
The graphics were actually pretty good for a movie on the indie list of my paper view.There were certain scenes that added to the movies "vibe" it sent out, as in a scene where he cuts his own tongue off, or when he finds his red head friend (butt ugly guy from that Cher movie "mask") dead, sitting on his desk with pencils through his ears and blood everywhere.The music though was horrible, It seemed like the same instrumental kept playing over and over again, but to look past that I'll give it a 4.I think they could have found better actors, the main guy just seemed too pretty and cocky looking, the one actor that did the best job was the redhead best friend.The ending was a bit horrible, the whole movie was trying to make its bad plot logical, but the end ruined it, his mom tried saving him from a horse demon mother and father, just seconds after birth in some back woods back yard?
I'm not going to fully bash it as the acting wasn't half bad, but almost went O.C. on me, noting the token black basketball player getting beat up by the clean cut white guy who has a "GANGSTERISH" pothead brother who totes a gun like hes from the hood??The pothead almost looks like that thing from Cher's movie Mask, yet it's the guys real face.
WOW that one was scary enough to give this 4 stars, add 1 for the black white guy, add 2 for him bonin a white chick, minus 3 for the Game that this movie is based around, but you never know where it came from or what it really is, gore ill give 2, but story gets a -1 so....
Jensen Ackles performed rather well as did Dominique Swain, Teach Grant and Shannyn Sossamon (as Jakes' girlfriend "Marisol").
We enjoyed the plot twists and we also enjoyed how the twists did not play as overtly cheesy.Right when this movie is about to get lame, it does something cool again.Right when you think you've nailed down what's going on with this film, it switches it up just enough to make you wonder what might be next.This is a an above-par straight to DVD horror flick and it does not put us to sleep.
I wasn't expecting much, but the main character is actually very good, and the supporting cast is better than you would expect in a B rated film.Overall, this movie is worth seeing once.
The movie revolves around a character named Jake Gray and his friends that have been playing a deadly game called "The Pathway", which eventually spirals out of control and threatens a worldwide epidemic of violence.After reading the plot outline and the cool cover art, I decided to give it a go.
It's the type of set-up that gets you thinking "Oh god, this is going to be lousy and look really cheap!" but alas the first half of the movie is the most entertaining.The story behind this film is interesting yet executed in a fairly poor manner.
The best chance you'll have to get a decent view is near the end but like I said, you may be battling your eyes once you get there.Devour could have been really good and pulls you in for the first 30 minutes or so, but due to poor character backgrounds, a confusing story and the constant switch between horror and drama, it really is hard to make it worth your 90 minutes of viewing time.Ah, what the hell, go have a watch.
Take a dot.com movie (good looking youngsters barely leaving the teen age using computers), add a bit of Devil for spice, shake it a bit (with shaky text like in se7en, but none of the subtlety) and drop a small bit of The Game and you get Devour.I can't say than any of the actors played bad, but since all of the characters where cliché they didn't really need to make an effort.
Not if you count actors with a lot of red die on them showed for fractions of a second scary.And in the end there is something interesting, we find who the bad guy is, he suddenly appears and starts explaining things to the main character.
Devour feels like several movies have been thrown into a blender by writers Adam and Seth Gross, and then wolfed down by director David Winkler, only partially digested, and finally excreted onto the screen; some of the original ingredients are still identifiable, but on the whole, it's just one big stinky mess.Part The Omen, part Brainscan, Part FeardotCom, and part Rosemary's Baby, the Gross's screenplay sees high school student Jake Gray (Jensen Ackles) experiencing hellish waking nightmares after his pals Conrad (Teach Grant) and Dakota (the perfectly toned Dominique Swain) sign him up for an online game called 'The Pathway'.
To cut a long and very confusing story short, the game is controlled by the devil herself (yes, she's a woman, just as I suspected), who is searching the world for her missing son.No prizes for guessing who turns out to be the spawn of Satan...Decent acting from its young (but perhaps not young enough) cast, the odd gruesome moment, and a gratuitous sex scene between Ackles and a fully clothed Swain (what, no nudity?) cannot help Devour from being a disappointment; and with a final comment from Jake which suggests that the whole devil thing might have been a figment of his twisted imagination, it's hard to see this film garnering praise from anyone other than fans of its lead actor..
It was an honest way to end the movie.Acting 9/10 Direction 9/10 Plot 6/10 Production Values 9/10 SFX 7/10.
This could have been a good movie but I have no idea what it was about because it got so convoluted that it ended up being completely different than it started out.This started out as some kind of computer game then a lot of distracting stuff happened then last thing we see is Jensen Ackles being arrested for some kind of devil worshipping stuff.A few thoughts-Dominique Swain starred in a remake of Lolita when she was younger.
"Devour" is a somewhat decent but not that impressive entry.**SPOILERS**Troubled by strange visions, college student Jake Grey, (Jensen Ackles) begins to find that his friends Dakota, (Dominique Swain) and Conrad Dean, (Teach Grant) are becoming a little unpredictable.
I've seen this storyline so many times on television but it was nice to see Jensen Ackles in a feature film rather than just on his hit series and as I suspect most people (like me) had to look up his resume to go and rent this one.
I liked the trailer for this movie so I bought it.I liked how it started out.Good special effects and got really interesting even though it's not an original idea.I thought all the actors playing these roles were really good.
At first I assumed Jake and Dakota were a couple and not just friends,so it made no sense the way they were acting towards each other,and I didn't like the way Jake was treating her since she seemed to have a thing for him.I really liked the Conrad character(played nicely by Teach Grant) and was hoping he would have been around until the end.It was disappointing that he was killed off so early on since there was a lot more about him which should have been explored.This movie started to annoy me once the mystery unfolded and Jake(Played very well by Jensen Ackles)found out who he really was and the truth about his parents.This part of the story was way too rushed and not explained properly.There were a lot of holes in the story I liked Jake's uncle.His character was also a local cop and I was convinced he would survive and help solve the mystery,but instead gets killed in a stupid,senseless way.His uncle had absolutely no connection to the pathway and wasn't hated by the main 3 characters who were playing the game.
I did not rent this movie expecting greatness.I rented it for one reason and one reason alone: Jensen Ackles.I've very recently become a fan of his because of his awesome performance on the new WB show "Supernatural" and I was eager to check out some of his other work.But on to "Devour".
Then the whole thing ends with a completely ambiguous and unsatisfying fizzle.So yeah, the Jensen Ackles eye candy is pretty good (and he does the best he can with the mediocre material), but don't watch it for the plot or you'll be disappointed by the end..
One main thing i can say about the movie is when Jensen Ackles was reading through the script one thing that passed his mind could of been "Man, I'm going to get laid!" I think the whole storyline was confusing and especially the quote at the end from Jake "...Our child.." it had me confused.
Jensen Ackles is good in what I think is his first title role.If you're a fan of Jensens, you'll love this film, he's in nearly all the scenes.
|
tt0020929
|
Good News
|
The film is set in 1927 at fictional Tait College, where football is all the rage. ("Tait Song"/"Good News")
Tait's football star Tommy Marlowe (Peter Lawford) is a prime catch for the college girls. Tommy tells his friend and non-playing teammate Bobby Turner (McDonald) that the trick to attracting girls is to show no interest. ("Be a Ladies' Man")
New student Pat McClellan (Marshall) resists his advances, cutting Tommy down to size at a party. ("Lucky in Love") Pat is interested in French, so Tommy enlists part-time school librarian Connie Lane (June Allyson) to help him study the language. ("The French Lesson")
He gradually falls for Connie, who comes from a poor background, which does not bother her. ("The Best Things in Life are Free") Meanwhile, Babe Doolittle (McCracken) is seeking to leave a relationship with football player Beef (Tindall) so she can get involved with Bobby Turner.
At a local soda shop, Babe advises Pat not to lose her temper. ("Pass the Peace Pipe")
Connie grows attracted to Tommy, who she feels is not interested. ("Just Imagine") Tommy asks Connie to the prom, but reneges when Pat shows interest. He changes his mind again. In the end, Tait wins the big game, Tommy pairs off with Connie, Beef pairs off with Pat, and Babe pairs off with Bobby Turner. The college bursts out into song in a production number. ("Varsity Drag")
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The Varsity Drag and the Great Bessie Love.
GOOD NEWS is an MGM musical based on the smash 1927 Broadway musical that ran for 16 months and starred Mary Lawlor and Inez Courtney as Connie and Babe, and Gus Shy as Bobbie.In the film version, Lawlor and Shy repeat their stage roles, but Bessie Love takes over as Babe.
While many fans of musicals are familiar with the 1947 version (starring June Allyson), the original film version sticks close to its theatrical roots.
This is both good and bad.
While this version has a ton of pep and some imaginative staging and choreography, the acting is mostly wooden, and the dialog and slang were already creaky in 1930.
The sound recording is surprisingly bad in many spots.What this film has going for it is a terrific central performance by Bessie Love as the zippy co-ed who gleefully chases after her man (Shy).
While Love's musicals numbers have been largely lost on other MGM films like CHASING RAINBOWS, here she gets to sing a little and dance a little.
She also gets to throw herself into the physical comedy, like the scene where she's hiding (along side a cake) under a bed from her old boyfriend, Beef (played by future writer/director Delmer Daves).
Before he leaves he sits on the bed, shoving Bessie's face into the cake.
She's terrific.
Also great are MGM stalwart Cliff Edwards (Ukulele Ike) as Pooch and Penny Singleton (billed as Dorothy McNulty) as Flo. Singleton is pretty amazing as lead dancer in the "Varsity Drag" and "Good News" numbers.
Stanley Smith is OK as Tommy but sings well.
Lola Lane is thrown away as Pat. Gus Shy (who looks about 40) is way too stagy to be effective.
MGM scuttled a few of the songs as the craze for musicals died while they were filming this one.
Pity.
The songs are really good and very representative of the era.
Still, GOOD NEWS was a hit at the box office, probably due to the popularity of Bessie Love.
The best number is the lively "Varsity Drag." As the prof leaves the classroom and admonishes the students to use the free minutes to study, they instead push back the chairs and launch into a torrid version of the famous dance.
Singleton sings and dances here and the number becomes truly cinematic when, in a great shot, the camera zeroes in on the blackboard where chalk figure of Roman generals start doing the drag.
The bottom of the screen shows only the heads of the dancers who are in front of the blackboard.
Later the camera zooms in on the dancers' shoes, which are smoking from the workout.
It's great stuff.Singleton again leads the dancers in the "Good News" number, which also features famed rubber-legged dancer Al Norman.
Also in the cast are Ann Dvorak (chorus) Vera Marshe (the pretty blonde), Billy Taft, Thomas Jackson (the coach), Buster Crabbe (football player), Frank McGlynn (Kenyon), and for no reason at all Harry Earles.
GOOD NEWS was Love's last Hollywood musical and Lawlor's last film.
The 2-strip Technicolor wedding finale is now sadly lost..
A lively early musical with some fascinating performances from Penny Singleton and Gus Shy..
Watching Penny Singleton in this movie was a revelation, and for those who think of her only as the staid title character of the "Blondie" series should catch this movie if only to see her.
She's billed 11th (as Dorothy McNulty) but is the centerpiece of two of the big production numbers involving singing and dancing: "The Varsity Drag" and the title song "Good News." Her immense talent is evident as she does her high kicks, somersaults, cartwheels and splits and delivers the rapid-fire lyrics with uninhibited abandon.
She was an absolute joy to behold!
In addition, Gus Shy, the Danny Thomas look- talk- and act-alike, provides some good comedy that is complemented by that of Bessie Love and Cliff Edwards, while Lola Lane, Mary Lawlor and Stanley Smith provide the love interest.
With 11 or so songs, including the ever-popular "The Best Things in Life Are Free," this movie is definitely worth seeing and compares favorably with the 1947 remake.
My one complaint was the lack of closeups, although there was a good full-head closeup of Singleton singing "The Varsity Drag." It was very effective.Before the movie was shown on the Turner Classic Movies (TCM) channel, some titles informed us that the last half of the final reel was filmed in an experimental color process and is now lost.
But the ever-resourceful station put together some stills at the end with subtitles to describe the outcome.
The movie ran 84 minutes instead of the original 90 minutes..
The supporting players and the musical numbers make this film.
Unlike the 1947 version of this musical comedy, the two leads here are rather stiff, are not given too terribly much to do, and lack any perceivable chemistry.
Top billed Mary Lawlor and Stanley Smith as Connie Lane and Tom Marlowe, respectively, play an unlikely collegiate couple.
Tom is the star player on the football team at mythical Tait College.
He has to pass a make-up exam in astronomy or he won't be able to play in Saturday's big game.
Tom goes to his steady girlfriend, Pat, for help with studying.
She says that astronomy is really the field of her friend Connie.
Connie is a rather homely looking girl when the audience and Tom first see her, and Tom begrudgingly relents but is not looking forward to their study sessions.
Connie's friends do a makeover on her before her first study date with Tom and - voilà - suddenly Tom is in love, even proposing almost from his first encounter.
I know this is a musical comedy, but, really!
Suppose the girl has annoying bad habits, insanity in her family, or layabout relatives or something.
Someone should tell Tom that rushing is good in football, not in life.
However, he learns this soon enough.
You see, before Tom has had a chance to say anything to Pat about his newfound feelings for Connie, Pat announces their wedding plans.
It seems Tom forgot that pesky marriage proposal he made to Pat, but Pat didn't.That's the overriding story that gives us an excuse to see the really entertaining parts of the film which amount to a bunch of mini comedy sketches and musical numbers by the supporting players that I thoroughly enjoyed.
Although I have to admit that Cliff Edwards appears to be the world's oldest underclassman, he is so entertaining with a remark here and a song there, in particular the catchy "I'm pessimistic", that I'll forget all of that.
Penny Singleton - who isn't even billed in the top ten here - gives the blow-out musical performances of this film with "Varsity Drag" and her rendition of the title song "Good News".
Bessie Love may be a musical talent in a musical film, but her contribution here is mainly as comedienne as the spritely mischievous coed Babe.
The bad tempered and aptly named Beef thinks he has romantic claims on her but she has eyes for Bobbie, a less talented player on the team, and he has eyes for her.
However, Bobbie would like to keep those eyes along with his teeth and nose, and if Beef finds out the chances of him keeping these things seem unlikely as Beef is very jealous of Babe.Do note that the finale of this film is lost, but TCM has inserted publicity stills and title cards indicating what happens in this final scene.
Although made in 1930, this film is based on a 1927 hit play, thus it is very much steeped in the Jazz Age, with even a mentioning of raccoon coats in the prologue.
If you like early talking films I do recommend this one..
College musical.
There is a college football game coming up at Tait college and the team captain and star player Stanley Smith (Tom) has dunced out in his exams which means he needs to take a re-test and pass Astronomy or he won't get to play and the college will undoubtedly lose the match.
His girlfriend Lola Lane (Pat) fixes it so that her cousin Mary Lawlor (Connie) studies with him to ensure that he passes.
Big mistake.It's a college-based musical with some amusing sequences coming courtesy of students Bessie Love (Babe) and Gus Shy (Bobbie) who also dance and sing.
The musical dance numbers are entertaining, and they include 2 chorus numbers led by student Penny Singleton (Flo).
Unfortunately, the final dance sequence is missing but we are provided with title cards explaining what happens at the film's end.
I quite like this as it gives the film a mysterious quality.
I wonder what that musical finale was like?The best in the cast are Bessie Love who is very funny - her dialogue delivery is hilarious, and she works well with Gus Shy, who also gets to deliver some entertaining dialogue.
Cliff Edwards also shows up with his ukulele and Al Norman crops up in a dance sequence where he gets to show off his rubber legs and comic dance moves..
It's Hotter Than Hot and Newer Than New!!!.
Bubbly Dorothy McNulty and vibrant Bessie Love are the real reason to watch this film that was the stage origin for all those collegiate musicals.
By the time MGM bought "Good News" to the screen it was not only compared badly to other college films around (the stage show had been the instigator) but people thought it was old hat!!
What was worse was that originally it had been advertised as containing no fewer than 15 songs but as the studio became worried over the dive in popularity that musicals were taking, many of the already filmed production numbers were canned.
The two that were retained were the show's highlights.
Bubbly Dorothy McNulty from the Chicago production played flapper collegiate Flo who's "let's make Tate known for the Varsity Drag" - as desks are cleared away for dancing co-eds (Ann Dvorak among them) to take centre stage which includes frenetic Flo with tapping so energetic, shoes start to smoke!!
and she is wheeled off at the end, exhausted through so much energy!!
Even Harry Earle jumps out of a paper bin!Forget the leading lady - Mary Lawlor was from the original Broadway cast but her role could have been played by any half decent ingénue - she plays Connie, a "four eyes" college swat ridiculed for her dowdy dress sense but within minutes of being assigned to help Tom (Stanley Smith) pass his astronomy (!!!) exam so he can play in the big game, is given a make over by Flo and Tom realises that she is the girl for him.
Alas, he has already pledged his love to Pat (Lola Lane who is very cute) who is holding him to his promise of marriage - if he wins the big game!!!
As Ukelele Ike sings "I'm Pessimistic"....
about how this will all pan out!!Far more interesting is zippy Bessie Love as Babe, the campus vamp - "I'm not hard to get but hard to get away from"!!!
She sets her cap at Bobby Randall who for all his years at college has never been called to play and he is getting pretty fed up.
Gus Shy was also from the original Broadway cast and probably the oldest looking college kid on film - he was in his mid thirties and didn't look a day over 40!!
He reminded me of a youngish Harry Green.
but he and Bessie were responsible for "Gee, But I'd Like to Make You Happy", first reprised in a risqué version then sung straight with a cute novelty dance.
"Ladies Man" is featured as background music as Bobby sorts through photos of his "would be" romantic conquests and the lovely "The Best Things in Life Are Free" is thrown away as Smith sings one verse and then is cut off.
The "Good News" number is filmed as it was on the stage with lots of zippy tapping college cuties led by Flo with front flips and splits then Al "Rubberlegs" Norman comes on for a "you'll have to see it to believe it" eccentric dance!!
Lost is the Technicolor "Football" "jazz wedding" finale where all the muddled love affairs are sorted out.
And Thomas Jackson who was so memorable as the detective in "Little Caesar" plays the football coach!!Even though at just under 90 minutes it played a bit disjointedly, Variety said "it's too fast, too peppy and too entertaining to flop" and I reckon they were right!!!Highly Recommended..
Whilst Filming from a Phonebooth.
This is not the most awful movie musical MGM made.
As a matter of fact, in some respects, it is much better than the Peter Lawford/June Allyson version.
But it shows its age terribly and either misuses or abuses some rather fine talent.
I agree with others that Penny Singleton steals the film.
Her renditions of Good News and Varsity Drag hold the film together.
What is so disturbing is the total mishandling of Bessie Love, who could entertain with charm and grace, and Cliff Edwards, whose musical efforts are poorly staged and weakly conceived.
The others in the film are best forgotten, not because they are bad actors but because they are so badly directed and completely uninspired that they chew up the scenery and mug incessantly.
One wonders about MGM's selection of director, usually a sensible and sensitive choice.
Perhaps Thalberg was on vacation.There is little or no camera movement and the one or two good moments in the film, such as the brief and crude animation sequence, are too soon forgotten.But worth sitting through the first half for Penny Singleton's tour de force as a singer/dancer.
And once that is finished, you'll be as happy as I that some kind soul lost the final reel.
|
tt0772181
|
Krabat
|
When the Plague sweeps across Europe after the Thirty Years' War a boy named Krabat (David Kross) is left without family, food, or hope. An old Mill Keeper takes him in as an apprentice. There are eleven other boys working at the mill, and Krabat develops a friendship with one of them, a young man named Tonda (Daniel Brühl). Soon, Krabat learns that the apprentices are also taught dark sorcery by the master, and one of the rituals (during Easter) lead to an excursion to the nearby village Schwarzkollm where Krabat meets a young girl and falls in love with her. There, Tonda also talks to one of the girls; both seem to be in love with each other. Later, Tonda warns Krabat that the master must never know the name of his girl.
One day, while protecting the nearby village from soldiers, Tonda makes an error and his girl's name (Worschula) is revealed to the master. The next day, Worschula turns up in the creek, dead. Krabat mistakenly blames Lyschko, another apprentice. Tonda becomes a recluse and anticipates the end of the year. Krabat's first Silvester (New Year's Eve) brings to light the true horror of the mill. Every Silvester, one of the boys must be sacrificed so the master may remain young. And so at midnight, Krabat's best friend Tonda is viciously murdered, and when Krabat tries to help him he is stopped by the other boys who tell him that "there is nothing we can do". Before he dies, Tonda tells Krabat there is another boy in the mill Krabat can confide in. He also tells Krabat to take two sacks of flour to the village.
Krabat is distraught over Tonda's death, but does as he is told. Bringing the sacks of flour to a tree near the village, Krabat once again meets the girl he first met while protecting the village. He is in love, but does not let the girl tell him her name, fearing for her life. Instead, he calls her Kantorka (Choir leader). During the ritual at Easter night, he goes to the village to meet her, this time along with a boy called Juro who appears to be mentally disabled and not able to learn the trade or properly do magic. When Juro tells Krabat that they must leave and go back to the mill, Krabat insists that he will stay with Kantorka. Juro then uses powerful magic to convince Krabat to come back with him, revealing that he is in truth highly intelligent and powerful, even able to change the weather. Juro promises Krabat that he will help him escape the master, and tells him that his girl must ask for him on Silvester to set him free. Krabat tells Kantorka that she must do so, and she agrees and gives Krabat a lock of her hair, telling him to have another boy deliver it to her when the time is right.
When Krabat returns, a series of climactic events are set in motion.
|
dark, fantasy, boring, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0464196
|
Severance
|
The film opens with George (David Gilliam) and two women (Juli Drajkó and Judit Viktor) running through the woods. The women fall into a large pit trap while George is caught by a snare. As he hangs helplessly, a masked man approaches and disembowels him with a knife.
What is later revealed as some days prior to this, the European Sales division of Palisade Defence military arms corporation are on a bus to a team-building weekend at a "luxury lodge" in the Mátra Mountains of Hungary. When a fallen tree blocking the road halts the bus's progress, the driver (Sándor Boros) refuses to take a dirt road through the woods and, after an argument, drives off leaving the group to walk the remaining distance to the lodge.
Eventually the group reaches the lodge, which is old and in serious disrepair, but the manager Richard (Tim McInnerny) convinces the wary but tired group to enter. Inside, Harris (Toby Stephens) discovers a file cabinet full of cryptic Palisade documents, written in Russian. The group discusses the documents, leading Harris to relate a story he'd heard about the lodge: the lodge was previously a mental institution, and in the early 20th century a Palisade-made nerve gas was used to clear it out after the inmates took over. Jill (Claudie Blakley) responds with the story she'd heard: the lodge was a "reeducation center" for Russian war criminals, and after an escape a Palisade-made nerve gas was used to clear escapees out of nearby buildings. Both mention a lone survivor who swore revenge on Palisade. Steve (Danny Dyer) starts to tell his own story about the lodge's past as a clinic staffed by busty nurses when he finds a human tooth in the meat pie the group is eating for dinner. Chastising Gordon (Andy Nyman) for serving a pie he just found in the kitchen, everyone goes to bed.
That night Jill sees someone looking into the lodge from the trees. Though nobody is found outside, everyone but Richard agrees that they should leave the lodge. The next morning Richard grudgingly sends Harris and Jill to the top of the hill to call the bus driver back, on the condition that the rest participate in a team-building game of paintball. Reaching the hill, Harris and Jill find the bus abandoned and the bus driver dead in a nearby creek. Back at the lodge, the game of paintball has just finished when Gordon steps into a bear trap. After several failed attempts by Steve and Billy (Babou Ceesayu) to pry the trap open, Gordon's left leg is cut through completely under the knee. Harris and Jill arrive in the bus, load everyone in and head back for town. On the way, a spike strip is thrown in front of the bus, which causes it to crash. Harris is thrown clear of the bus in the crash, and is decapitated by a masked killer with a machete. Jill is captured and tied to a tree, then gagged, doused with gasoline and burned alive. The rest discover Harris's body, prompting them to head for the lodge to hide for the night.
While Steve and Maggie (Laura Harris) smoke, a masked figure (Levente Törköly) "quietly" grabs Gordon and carries him into the basement. Discovering Gordon's absence and a newly opened door, the four head into the basement which leads to an underground prison. Through one door Billy and Maggie find the now-dead Gordon who has had the Palisade logo carved into his torso and a now-unmasked killer who fires a shotgun at them. The two hide in a nearby cell, where Billy dies from a chest wound. Steve hides on the second floor while Richard escapes out the back into the woods. While the killer searches for Steve, Maggie sneaks up on him with a large knife she took from the prison in the basement, but she falls through the rickety floor. The killer turns round and takes aim at Maggie, but, at the last second, Steve saves her by impaling the killer through the back. The killer falls down and becomes lodged in the main level floor, and Maggie takes his shotgun and shoots the killer in the head.
Maggie and Steve exit the lodge believing they are safe, but discover that a group of several more armed, Russian-speaking killers are awaiting them outside. Maggie shoots one before he can fire on them, and the two run into the woods. They come across Richard, who has stepped on a Palisade-made land mine and cannot move without detonating it. Richard guides Maggie and Steve through the minefield. The killers know that the area is a minefield and do not enter; they use a fallen branch to pass over the minefield close to Richard and torment him with insults and stones as they pass overhead. Accepting his situation Richard does his best to save the others and steps off the mine, blowing up himself along with two of the killers. Steve and Maggie come to another lodge, the real Palisade lodge. Inside they find their boss George, who is partying with two escorts Steve ordered via the Internet earlier. George brings out a prototype missile launcher and fires it at the approaching killers, but the missile locks on to a passing commercial jet instead, destroying it. The five run into the woods, leading to the events shown in the beginning of the film.
Maggie is snared, then about to be molested by a killer, but manages to smash his head with a rock. Steve encounters two attackers and gets beaten and stabbed, but eventually kills them both with a knife and a submachine gun. Maggie is chased by a flamethrower-wielding killer into an abandoned prison camp, filled with crates bearing the Palisade logo. There, Maggie breaks her leg, but is saved when one of the escorts, rescued by Steve, arrives and shoots the man. Steve, Maggie and the escorts make it to a rowboat on the shore of the nearby lake, and as they paddle off to safety Steve jokingly quips, "Foursome?"
|
comedy, dark, cult, horror, humor, entertaining
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Severance is a pitch-black comedy/horror that successfully blends laughs with outrageous scenes of extreme violence to tell the tale of a group of employees for a weapons company who, whilst on a team-building weekend in Eastern Europe, run into trouble when they are attacked by masked assailants.I found the film to be both highly amusing and also rather creepy, although how much you enjoy the film will depend on how warped your sense of humour is.
Director Christopher Smith, who also made the rather humdrum Creep, handles the action well, and the film moves at a brisk pace delivering plenty of chills and thrills along the way.And to cap it all, Smith makes sure that the gore-hounds get their quota of blood 'n' guts, and even finds time to throw in a couple of topless escort girls for good measure.I give Severance a very respectable 7 out of 10..
Poster quotes and lazy comparisons aside, it's nice surprise that for a horror comedy, Severance isn't actually half bad at all.The plot is nice and simple.
Laura Harris completely kicks ass as the heroine.I sorta want to see a sequel but heaven knows where they'd go with it.Overall, I loved the film - it's made by a writer and director who are genuine horror fans and it shows.
The story is gripping and the cast is excellent - some of the finest British actors give star performances - in particular a stellar performance from Danny Dyer.Normally this type of film can be all blood and guts, but Severance manages to combine the horror element (ie enough blood & gore!) with a gripping story line which keeps you on the edge of your seat throughout the film.You will be either clutching the person next to you or howling with laughter as the filmmakers take you on an extreme roller-coaster ride.
Shame that, as this movie is brilliant entertainment.It starts out with pretty funny moments but gets very violent and gory after a while.
that wasn't method acting).As for the direction, it is very commendable, in fact, the director Chris Smith, held a Q+A after the film and he definitely knew what he was talking about, as a big horror fan/geek, that was refreshing to see, particularly since none of his other films have approached this genre with any gusto.
I went into this film expecting a zombie movie for some reason, but actually Severance is more like a British version of Eli Roth's successful 'Hostel', albeit with a bit more humour.
There have been a few good British horror movies over the past few years, including most notably the likes of Dog Soldiers, Shaun of the Dead, Wilderness and The Descent.
I wouldn't say this one really lives up to the best of them; but Severance is good comedic and bloodthirsty fun, and there's certainly enough about it to ensure that the film stands tall as another feather in the cap of modern British horror.
The location is put to good use as our cast of characters finds themselves in the middle of an Eastern European country and director Christopher Smith does an excellent job of ensuring the tone of the film is always hopeless.
The cast isn't anything to write home about, although Danny Dyer, who you might remember from the very decent British gangster flick The Business, does a good job of holding the film together.
and then every now and then we would remember another really good line or funny/scary moment!Superbly acted, directed to perfection.I will be telling everyone I know to go and see this movie and as soon as its out on DVD it will be an instant purchase!
Severance shows us a happy tendency:a European filmmaker who takes the clichés of North American horror films and he gives them an excellent new twist with ingenious moments,intensity and touches of humor.The director who made this great movie is Christopher Smith who started pretty well with the very fun and gory film Creep and,now,gives us Severance,a perfect movie with fun characters,black humor and a social critic.This film can be described as a twist between the TV series The Office(the British version)and The Hills Have Eyes(1977).I know it sounds strange,but the screenplay sails greatly between the horrors of the office work,the black humor and the horror.The movie has a political commentary and it gives the movie a bigger context.Although the basic premise does not sound original,the performances,context and a lot of details give new life to a very used concept(including the great appearance of a bear).I also admire the main characters are not the typical teenagers,but a realistic group of clerks.The reactions the characters have with the horror are credible and fun.Also,the movie brings some intense moments of violence which could really keep me anxious and nervous...and that's something awesome for a horror film.Severance is a brilliant and very fun horror movie with great moments of intensity and black humor.If you are a fan of horror movies,you should not miss this joy which shows the genre on its best condition..
A team-building weekend in the mountains of Eastern Europe goes horribly wrong for the sales division of the multi-national weapons company Palisade Defence when they become the victims of a group of crazed killers who will stop at nothing to see them dead.I recall this film coming out in 2006 and getting a lot of positive buzz from horror fans.
That question has been asked many times, and I think this film definitely makes you wonder.Although many of the references were lost on me, I now know (from looking into the production) that many of the scenes were evoking Kubrick ("2001", "Strangelove" and "Clockwork Orange") and other notable directors.
the "Clockwork" scene was clear to me, but I also am probably most familiar with that Kubrick film (although I have seen them all at least once).I would need to see this again to fully review it, but my initial impression is that it is a great blend of action, humor and horror.
Severance, happily, is as sharp with its humour as one of the knives used in the piece itself, perfectly tuned into the modern world and the bizarreness of it all.What started out as a working script called "P45", where Christopher Smith's film was to be about these "yuppie" types literally team building for a weekend where if they didn't pass the tests they lost their jobs, escalated to a slasher with a wry satirical edge.
I know I'm going to get jumped on for this, but this film was touted as being a "Comedy-Horror" along the lines of "Shaun Of The Dead", but safe to say we didn't laugh once.Horror and gore and pointless storyline, sure.
Boredom however did not figure; at the point where I would ordinarily lose interest in a horror film, Severance re-engages its audience with its hilarity.Don't get me wrong, this film is not void of the gore and violence that horror fans will expect; it provides jumps in all the right places.
Danny Dyer plays a fantastically lovable character and Laura Harris' acing is phenomenal as is th rest of the cast's.All in all, this is the best film I've seen this year.
Mean Machine is the only one and he plays the correct sort of character.................a total Muppett.The films trys to mix comedy and horror but fails all the way, i think they attempted to mix Hostel with Shaun of the dead but it never works.
Not enough gore/suspense for a horror and not nearly enough humour for a comedy.I have stockings that are more robust than the plot which presented several openings for things to get a little more interesting but were clearly not acted upon.
This time, we're seeing 2004's Shaun of the Dead the source for inspiration in Severance, a quite ridiculous and downright annoying little film, from the director of 2004's 'Creep', that is dressed up as something good due to its 'clever' flipping from comedy to horror and its constant Kubrick referencing.
The opening is shameless in its announcing of guilty intentions: big breasted women and gore for anyone willing to enjoy it, too bad any sane adult over the age of 18 is likely to be unimpressed while anyone under the age of 18 shouldn't even be allowed any where near it in the first place; this is despite the '15' certificate slapped on from the BBFC, in what is quite a shameful attempt to branch a British film out to the widest possible audience – too bad they're only contributing to the dumbing down of the youth.The film prides itself on being of the pastiche variety, that is to say a film that is clearly paying homage to its inspirations and horror films and set ups of old.
The place is Hungary, another Eastern European locale getting dumped on in a horror film, and the reason for everyone being there is to bring together a sense of unity within a close-knit bunch of office working people.
Although it seems unfair comparing it to the brilliant Horror/Comedy film, Shaun of the Dead, I can't help but feel this is trying to cash in on this particular trend, so I will compare them anyway.
But as soon as the first person dies the film turns into a boring "we have seen this a hundred times before" horror-movie.
This film wants to be a comedy and a horror movie but it fails with both (the last 30 minutes are hard to watch: They are just so far-fetched and stupid...)You better take a look at Shaun of the death.
being spoiled by good English horrors I apparently believed that this movie is going to be at least interesting and made a mistake watching so long only to see what made this film so high rated.
"Severance" starts with a team building retreat for the newer members of anti-terrorist weapons manufacturer Palisade Defense out in the wooded forests of Eastern Europe.When a fallen tree prevents them from advancing,the employees must hoof it the rest of the way,only to discover the luxury hotel they've all been promised is really a rundown,abandoned building without much food or accommodations.They slowly discover that there is someone out there watching them and that someone is going to start killing them in savage ways one by one.In my honest opinion "Severance" is not as grimly effective as "Creep".The film offers a balance between the humor and horror,but I didn't find it too funny.There is a good deal of gruesome gore including some particularly brutal killings,so I was pleased.Give it a look,if you are a fan of survival horror.7 out of 10..
Smith has gone on to make better films (Triangle, Black Death) but it's in this movie that he really hones the skills learnt whilst making the forgettable 'Creep.' The mood and tone switches up from being funny to dark to jumpy seamlessly and keeps you gripped throughout.
It has almost as long of a setup as 2005's "House of Wax." There are some gory moments, but the violence is more akin to a war movie than a horror, and the killers certainly bring that element with them.I don't know what else to say really, except that it failed at being scary, and it wasn't funny.
It takes a long while to get going, and in fact no one gets killed until about the halfway mark (well, apart from in the pre-credits sequence), but that time is well used, establishing the characters and the setting, and always keeping you entertained, especially courtesy of Toby Stephens' cynical bastard and Danny Dyer's lovable waster, who spends most of the first part of the movie in a magic mushroom assisted frenzy.
I always hate it when movies insist on explaining every last thing, and this one made the right choice in leaving some things open to interpretation.And as in all the best horror films, there's a sly commentary on the real world going on here.
This film is a rare comedy/ horror that works as both and can join Shaun of the Dead, Evil Dead 2 and American Werewolf in London for successfully managing to both scare and be funny.
Sure the premise is a little bit staged, and things are somewhat over the top in terms of what you might realistically expect, but you never feel as though the characters are speaking to the camera as is so often the case in these films, what happens in the film is not so ridiculous as to be unbelieavable, and the action/violence is very well directed.Both the comedy and the horror are extremely clever and co-dependent where one amplifies the other, and a lot of over the top clichés are avoided.
In this case, none of the characters really come across as annoying or unlikeable as is often the case with slasher films, I was rather enjoying the team building atmosphere, and was kind of wanting the film to remain a comedy, but of course midway through, everything begins to go wrong for this group of colleagues.
A horror film that actually makes you empathize with the characters in this way is not one that's going for cheap scares and shocks, but one that actually wants to draw you into the story, which is really the only way to give the viewer that feeling of suspense.Christopher Smith's previous film "Creep" was a huge flop in my opinion, but the sheer cleverness of this one really puts a lasting notch in his belt as a director.
If you like comedy/horror do not see this film, I seen this film with my partner who is not a big fan of anything scary, at no point during this film did he jump, feel scared or even slightly worried that he was going to be scared.
But if you are wanting black comedy a-la Man bites dog or REAL horror as in Night of the living dead this is not the film for you.Please British film reviewers: stop being so nice about British films and tell us what they are ACTUALLY like.Sad waste of Tim McInnerney and Danny Dyer's talents..
Ignore the trailer that implies that Severance is simply a Danny Dyer vehicle and enjoy what is essentially an ensemble piece.All of the main characters are well written and given just enough depth to make you care about what happens to them, which makes the sinister and gory last third of the film all the more enjoyable/unbearable.Whilst Danny Dyer does take up a lot of screen time, he is bang on the money and very, very funny.
Comedy and horror together don't always work but in this case it was a good move, not that there are hilarious scenes, just some subtle humor, but the mix between the two genres was well balanced.
Anyway, Severance is a bit of fun, a bit of horror and suspense all the way through, an entertaining British movie..
There are so many comedy/horror films like this out there, but very few are able to find the right balance of humour, gore and scares.
Again, for a low budget film with no stars (sorry, Danny – no offence, but you're hardly Tom Cruise) the gore is nicely done and pretty sick (special mention to a missing leg scene).And, if nothing else, there is possibly the most amusing use even of a rocket launcher (if not the sickest – technically) that even rivals the RPG fired in Chris Morris' 'Four Lions.' Don't expect a great movie with Oscar-worthy performances, or self-realising character arcs.
Although original in it's own way, you are sometimes left wondering whether to laugh or cry, but this does not affect the overall film, in fact, it probably adds to it.If you are a fan of horror/violence mixed in with some coarse humour (think Shaun of the Dead), then this movie is for you!
Severance surprised me at the Toronto International Film Festival, I had about written off this genre, but Chris Smith has breathed new life into the horror/comedy movies that popcorn and Halloween were invented for.
Is Severance a comedy with horror elements or an horror film with funny bits?
It's nowhere near the extremes of serious horror films like Saw or Hostel.I loved the cast as they were immediately recognizable as certain types of office workers and well played although Danny Dyer (the junkie) could have been easily replaced.
I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie because in a way it looked like a slasher film and in another way it looked like a horror spoof.
It probably isn't fair but the one movie that everybody will compare "Severance" to is "Shaun Of The Dead" for the sole reason that both are horror comedies recently made in the UK.
(And as a side note: how many times can you put Eastern Europe into horror movies as a scary place?)On the plus side, there's a funny little scene involving a rocket launcher and the cast is more than solid, especially Laura Harris who really plays her heart out in the end."Severance" isn't the pinnacle of British horror cinema, but it's a worthy little flick to rent when all the really interesting movies have already been taken..
I would have to say when I saw this movie, I did not know it was supposed to be a horror comedy.
It is a great movie and if you like horror or suspense it will surely keep you entertained.
And like that movie, I can see a lot of people watching "Severance" and afterward saying "the comedy took away from the horror, the characters were dumb, this movie sucks".
Don't be fooled into thinking that because Severance is another British comedy/horror film that you will be watching another 'Shaun Of The Dead.' While S.O.T.D had constant humour mixed with slapstick violence, Severance instead opts for surprisingly explicit gore with occasional dark humour.
|
tt0043137
|
Winchester '73
|
In 1876, Lin McAdam (James Stewart) and friend 'High-Spade' Frankie Wilson (Millard Mitchell) pursue outlaw 'Dutch Henry' Brown (Stephen McNally) into Dodge City, Kansas. They arrive just in time to see a man forcing a saloon-hall girl named Lola (Shelley Winters) onto the stage leaving town. Once the man reveals himself to be Sheriff Wyatt Earp (Will Geer) Lin backs down. Earp informs the two men that firearms are not allowed in town and they must check them in with Earp's brother Virgil. Lin and Dutch Henry see each other in the saloon, but are unable to fight due to the presence of Earp. Lin enters a shooting competition, contending against Dutch Henry among others, that is held on the Fourth of July. They end up the two finalists for a highly coveted "One of One Thousand" Winchester 1873 rifle. Lin wins by betting that he can shoot through a stamp placed over the hole of round piece from an Indian necklace. Dutch Henry claims that he is leaving town, but instead goes to Lin's room at the boarding house and ambushes Lin, stealing the rifle. Dutch and his two cohorts leave town with Lin and High-Spade in hot pursuit.
Dutch Henry and his two men ride to Riker's Bar. Because they left town in a hurry, they left the rest of their guns behind. This puts them in a bad position because of the Indians in the area. Indian trader Joe Lamont (John McIntire) sees the perfect rifle, he raises the price of his guns high enough that Dutch and his men can not afford to buy any. Dutch's only option is to trade the perfect rifle for three hundred dollars in gold and their choice of weapons from the pile that Lamont is going to sell to the Indians. Lamont feigns inexperience at cards and Dutch attempts to win back the perfect rifle. Instead, he ends up losing the three hundred in gold to Lamont. Lamont takes his guns to meet his Indian buyers, but their leader Young Bull (Rock Hudson) doesn't like the old, worn-out merchandise Lamont is offering; he wants the guns that Crazy Horse used at the Battle of the Little Bighorn. Young Bull sees the perfect rifle and wants it. When Lamont refuses to sell, he is robbed and scalped.
Lola Manners (Shelley Winters) and her fiance Steve Miller (Charles Drake) are in a wagon heading to where their new home will be. The left rear wheel of the wagon is squeaking loudly because Steve forgot to grease it back in town. As they are pursued by Indians, the wheel slows the wagon. In a moment of panic, Steve rides away on his horse, but returns when he sees a small encampment of soldiers. They travel with the soldiers to safety with the Army.
That night after being chased by Indians, Lin and High-Spade meet up with those same soldiers who have been pinned down by the Indians. The soldiers are inexperienced and their cantankerous sergeant (Jay C. Flippen) does not know how to fight Indians. Lin gives him tactical advice. They prepare themselves for an early attack the next day. Lin gives Lola his revolver, and implies that she should commit suicide with the final bullet to avoid capture.
After a fierce battle, the Indian leader is killed. Lin and High-Spade search for Dutch Henry and they ride past the perfect rifle. It is found by Doan (Tony Curtis) and the Sergeant who give it to Steve, not wanting an officer to take it away from Doan.
Steve and Lola reach the Jameson house where Lola stays with Mrs. Jameson and her two small children while Steve goes to meet 'Waco' Johnnie Dean, much to the disapproval of Lola. Waco (Dan Duryea) and his men show up at the Jameson house unexpectedly, on the run from a posse. Once Waco sees the perfect rifle, he covets it. He repeatedly insults Steve in an attempt to provoke him into a gunfight. Steve draws on Waco and is killed. Waco and Lola escape the posse and go to Dutch's hideout. Dutch Henry takes back the perfect rifle.
There, Dutch Henry plans an armed robbery in Tascosa, Texas. Waco is stationed in a saloon to provide cover for the gang's escape after the robbery, but is betrayed to Lin by Lola. Lin forces Waco to tell him where Dutch is. When Waco attempts to shoot Lin, Lin kills him. The robbery goes awry and Lin chases Dutch Henry out of town, confronting him on a rocky hill. Lin refers to Dutch by his real name, Matthew. They shoot it out on the hill with rifles before Lin finally shoots him off the hill. High-Spade reveals to Lola that Dutch Henry is Lin's brother. Dutch robbed a bank and ran home to hide out. When their father wouldn't help him Dutch shot him in the back. Lin rides into town with the perfect rifle, and his brother's body laid across Dutch's horse.
|
cult, revenge, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0928026
|
Care Bears Nutcracker Suite
|
At a school called P.S. 5, a teacher named Miss Walker tells some children a version of E. T. A. Hoffmann's The Nutcracker and the Mouse King, involving the Care Bear Family. As the story begins, the Care Bears and their Cousins prepare for Christmas in their home of Care-a-lot; the two youngest bears, Hugs and Tugs, are searching for an ornament. While the others spend time in the Hall of Hearts decorating a tree, another bear called Funshine suddenly alerts them of an unhappy girl named Anna. Enlisting Grumpy Bear to go along, she takes a Cloud Mobile down to Earth.
When the two bears visit Anna, they learn that her past friend Sharon has moved, and her brother Peter is fond of acting as a pirate. As they talk about the virtues of friendship, a burst of light startles them. Eventually, a tall wooden soldier called the Nutcracker emerges from a black portal, along with a band of rats (led by the Rat King) who are after him. When the group hides from their foes, the soldier recollects his memory and explains that he arrived from a place called Toyland; the rodents work for an evil Vizier who is plotting to conquer and destroy that land.
Soon, Funshine and Grumpy send out beams of light from their stomach, sending a "Care Bear Stare" to their assistants in Care-a-lot; Lotsa Heart Elephant, Brave Heart Lion and Tenderheart Bear (along with stowaway Hugs and Tugs) later join them. The baby bears are asked to stay behind with Peter, but those three venture into Toyland nonetheless.
At his castle, the Vizier wants to know the whereabouts of a powerful ring worn by Toyland's former Prince, so that he can control the place. His captive, a small creature called the Sugar Plum Fairy, refuses to tell him; he is more outraged when the Rat King arrives without the Nutcracker. The Vizier soon takes notice when the soldier and his friends enter Toyland, and take a train through its various sights.
When they stop for the night, the friends contend with a group of toy jesters who also want the train, but advise them to leave Toyland. One of them later explains how they tried to save their land, after the Vizier and the rats overthrew its Prince and captured his castle. To make sure the Vizier never got it, the Fairy hid the Prince's ring away from view. The Nutcracker is determined to end the Vizier, despite the rats' barricade.
Upon reaching the castle by raft, the group secretly sneaks inside and frees the Sugar Plum Fairy. With her help, the Bears and Cousins try to get a walnut containing the ring, but the Vizier seizes it and turns them into firewood. This leaves Peter, Hugs and Tugs to fight with the rats for the item. Soon, the Fairy saves it from the Vizier, and when the Nutcracker wears it on his finger, he turns back into the Prince of Toyland. The Bears and Cousins break free from the ruler's spell, and use their Stare on the villains to save the place. Afterward, they and the humans say good-bye to the Prince; as Anna returns, she realises it was a dream and wakes up to meet a new neighbour, Alan Prince, who looks exactly like the Prince in Anna's dream.
When Miss Walker finishes her tale, one of the children wants to ask what happened to Anna. Suddenly a grownup Alan appears at the door. As he and the teacher, now revealed to be Anna, leave the stage together, the other children start rehearsing Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky's ballet. Unknown to all of them, the Care Bear Family has been listening all along.
|
fantasy
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Heartwarming Yuletide fun with the Care Bears. I love animation and Christmas as well as the timeless story and Tchaikovsky's music. I also grew up with The Care Bears, even if I am not a huge fan overall, though I love the show and enjoyed the 1985 movie, A New Generation and Care Bears in Wonderland. Care Bears Nutcracker Suite was one of my first exposures to the story alongside The Nutcracker Suite and the Barbie movie(also love the House of Mouse take), and while it is not one of my favourites of anything to do with Christmas or ever, it is heartwarming fun. The writing does have occasions where it is on the corny and saccharine side, then again that's true of the Care Bears movies in general, and while the take on the story is clever, the essence of the story is there and there are a number of entertaining moments I couldn't help thinking that the storytelling, as heart warming and charming as it is often, was a little overstretched. On the other hand, the animation if not as fluid as the first two movies) is colourful and vibrant and the score is whimsical with the parts of Tchaikovsky's ballet score delightful(though I would have personally loved to heard more of it). The characters are likable enough, the Care Bears, Nutcracker and the two children are sweet, well-meaning characters, the villain rats are very humorous especially the Rat King and the vizier is like the long-lost brother of the Wizard from Care Bears in Wonderland except not as subtly-voiced(still enthusiastic though). All in all, heart-warming, fun, cute and harmless, not mind-blowingly brilliant or life-changing but overall recommended and not to be a subject of scorn. 8/10 Bethany Cox. This might be okay. It's hard to judge this as a movie because it's literally just a bunch of episodes of the show that were compiled into a movie. I'm still going to try to judge it as one. It starts with the Care Bears theme song and ends with the Care Bear credits. I have to admit that growing up, I was never a fan of "Care Bears". I might have seen a tiny bit when I was really little. Well, I've still seen every movie now. This really is no worse or better than any other Care Bears movie. Honestly, I thought there were some good parts. I thought the characters were represented pretty well.I did kind of like Grumpy Bear, even though he quickly lost his grumpiness. What I didn't like was that the animation was just plain clumsy. This is like the fourth movie where they've reused that blonde girl with blue eyes design. I shouldn't think further into that. Even the villain is just cut and paste from the previous movie. Still, the film's entirely harmless. If you have kids who are fans of the Care Bears, then I suggest you watch this with them. If not, it's pretty forgettable. **
|
tt0303151
|
Tom and Jerry: The Magic Ring
|
The story starts out with a haunted, creepy-looking crawlies mansion house, where Tom Cat, as usual, chases Jerry Mouse and breaks everything in the house. Meanwhile, in the basement, a wizard named Chip is making a magical potion. He uses his magic ring to make his potion, until he realizes that it doesn't work. Chip checks the milk carton that he used on the portion, but there is no substitution for the milk of a cow that lives in Calcutta.
Later, Tom ends up being thrown into the basement, and Chip orders him to guard his magic ring while he goes to Calcutta to milk a cow. If Tom does a good job, he'll be rewarded with a big juicy salmon, but if not, ("there will one less kitty to clean up after here") which meant that he shall be kicked out of the house with no return for good. Chip leaves for Calcutta by using his motorcycle, leaving Tom to guard the ring in the basement. Unbeknownst to Tom, an interested Jerry finds the ring, while climbing the table and puts it on his head. Tom spots Jerry, and orders him to give back the ring, but to no avail. Soon, Jerry runs out of the house, and Tom frantically attempts to find and hunt down him.
After losing Tom, Jerry goes through different situations, like trying to pull the ring off his head, but it gets stuck, much to his horror. He attempts to get it removed by going to the jewelry store of a diamond cutter, and meeting a ring loving dog and Droopy in a fortune telling house. However, the store is closed and the owner has left to get some lunch. Tom sneaks into the store and disguises himself as a worker, using his tail for a mustache and attempting to help Jerry get the ring off, but meets with no success. He fails as well and he blows his cover when his mustache--and his tail--fall off, revealing his true identity. Tom chases our mouse throughout the store, and soon, the diamond cutter returns. Tom and Jerry exit the store. Tom destroys the store and ends up getting chased away by the owner.
Jerry runs off into a fortune-teller home, where an Irish dog Butch and Droopy from the Tex Avery cartoons are residing in. After seeing how lovely Jerry's ring looks, and including the fact that Jerry wants it removed, Butch attempts to pull it off, but fails. Tom comes in, and Jerry runs out, with Butch chasing after him as well. Soon, they end up in an alley, where an alley cat (Also known as Butch Cat) happens to be taking a nap. He wakes up and tries to grab Jerry for his dinner. Tom successfully grabs Jerry in time, and by flicking the ring on his head, makes random objects fall on a horrified alley cat. Butch then comes and is able to get the ring off Jerry's head after Jerry bites Tom's hands, which only causes him to be sent flying to the dog. Tom and the alley cat then chase Butch and then wind up spinning and rolled toward Jerry, and unfortunately, the ring gets stuck back on his head. When Tom is running away from Butch and the alley cat, he takes a shortcut to lose sight of them until he accidentally slips on a banana peel, which Jerry's ring then increases the size of; Tom slips on it again and rides on it toward the door of a pet store, leaving Tom unconscious.
A kind old lady comes out and brings the two inside, putting them in two separate cages. However, Tom is paired with Spike and his son Tyke while Jerry is left with two mice named Freddie (better known as Muscles from Jerry's Cousin) and Joey (Muscle dumber partner) who bully a younger mouse, cute and dimwitted ]Nibbles. At first, Jerry proves to be unsuccessful in trying to stop the mouse bullies from hurting Nibbles until he uses the ring to turn them into hunks of cheese. When the cheese mice escape the cage and Nibbles fails to catch up with them since he intends to eat them, Jerry uses the ring to make giant Nibbles grow into a giant mouse capable of breaking free from the cage as he grows and catch up with the cheese mice as they escape the store. An unnamed boy (only known as Junior) comes and buys Jerry as his pet. The boy plays Jerry until the ring produces magic, melting Tom and escaping the cage, he sneaks outside and snatches Jerry from The Boy's hand. The upset boy tells his mother and she tells the police officer, who sends police cars after the cat. Then, the alley cat and Butch, while still looking for Jerry, find Tom and they chase him. Meanwhile, Spike and Tyke get out of the building as well, but right when Tom steps on Tyke. At this point, Spike and Tyke are added in the chase. They run everywhere and Tom and Jerry escape by riding a bus. Suddenly, the bus stops and it reverses, causing Tom and Jerry to panic. The driver is Droopy, and then they are lost until the boy finds Tom and whistles, and the cat and mouse end up cornered in a garbage dump. This leads to about 15 minutes of the movie of a long chase of silliness.
Fortunately, Jerry uses the magic ring to freeze the dogs, alley cat, and police cars. Now that they are saved, Tom and Jerry return home, where Tom once again tries to get the ring off, but every time he fails. Jerry hides in a kitchen cupboard and uses Furniture Ring Remover to get the ring off before throwing the ring in the basement. Tom gets the ring, but panics with fear because he realizes it is stuck firmly on his finger.
Tom hears his master Chip coming and tries to get the ring off, with no prevail. Tom quickly tries to trick Chip into thinking Tom has done a good job protecting his ring, but his plan failed when Chip discovers that his ring is on Tom's finger. Chip, believing that Tom attempted to steal his ring, becomes extremely enraged and angrily kicks him out of the house with his magic fury, where the ring immediately falls off Tom's finger, and as he is pleased to see this, it unfreezes all who chase him to his horror. Nibbles manages to join the chase as he is still chasing the mice who both turned into cheese. Jerry receives the salmon from Chip, which he then turns into a cheese by the ring's power.
|
paranormal, comic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
the right feel but something is lacking.
This is the first T&J cartoon since Hanna Barbera days to recapture at all the look and feel of the Kenneth Muse animated originals.Here are rich backgrounds, visual gags coming one after the other and a decent plot to pull it all together.
Too often, later T&Js are reduced to plot less itchy-and-scratchy violence with the cat always coming off worst.
The Hanna Barbera cartoons were never so predictable.But for all that, something is lacking.
The pace in the action sequences is never as breathtaking.
Perhaps stretching T&J to the longer length simply spreads out too thin the ideas.In the end, while watchable, this is equally missable..
Great movie.
I watch Tom and Jerry a lot, including this movie.
I had no idea I would love this movie so much.
To start off, the animation is clean and smooth, like in an ordinary Tom and Jerry cartoon.
The characters are designed well and the voices are fun to listen to.
I thought that the plot of the movie was funny: Tom has to guard a magical ring and Jerry steals it and it gets stuck on his head.
A lot of you might like the old Tom and Jerry better, but I like the new cartoons and movies of the series, too.
I have watched this movie countless times and it never gets old.
You don't have to like the new Tom and Jerry shows, but at least give them some support..
Best Animation/Action for 2002!.
This is a great movie for anyone, with original gags from Tom And Jerry series, but adding more action sequences and adrenaline rush.I saw this on Cartoon Network when it premiered on Cartoon Theatre and was blown away!
Not many animation movies include so many chases and action scenes, alongside enjoyable comedy with one of the two most famous characters in cartoon history!If your'e in need of a enjoyable action cartoon comedy, this is surely the one!
My childhood.
This movie literary changed my life...
It motivated me to learn English (English is my second language).
I wanted to know what the characters were saying, because it was sounded so interesting to me (hearing a foreign language that i didn't understand ).
so much so that it inspired me.
I don't care how good or bad this movie is, i'd still give it a 10.
Besides the point that it made my childhood awesome..
Easy to like.
Tom and Jerry is one of my all time favourite cartoons, and for a movie, after the disappointing Tom and Jerry: The Movie, this was a pretty decent kids movie.
Yes, it is too short, and the story is predictable, but it is compensated by the colourful animation, likable characters, and a remarkably good voice cast, such as Diagnosis Murder's Charlie Sclatter, and voice veteran Jim Cummings.
And Jerry I've always found really cute.
Also, while adults may find it a bit too predictable and repetitive, and that is a big may, children will love it, and as a 17 year old female, I found it easy to like, and pretty funny.
7/10 Bethany Cox. tom and jerry are funny and great i think.
I have seen this show it was a great movie.
I bet it's for the whole family.
Jim Cummings voice of Butch is between the voice of Tiger and Pete from Mickey Mouse.
It looks like that it was from the old school show in Tom and Jerry series.
but except of it where different voices in the series, the movie, and the magic ring.
My favorite part when Jerry laughs and then tom laughs historical then jerry went away.
Well that show in the series was my favorite show and the other cartoon favorites.
I wonder if there was more episodes if it was a new voice?
I knew a episode of the white mouse that it was going to explode but they think its not going to explode but Tom kick the white mouse then it explode.
If your kids love Tom and Jerry watch it because it's the best..
a good movie.
Tom and jerry the Magic Ring is a great movie to see, Toms owner Chip leaves Tom to guard his magic ring while he milks a cow for his potion.Tom however wasn't expecting Jerry to pop out of the wall and get it stuck to his head.
This movie however ISN'T hilarious its quite funny but NOTHING to the show and I'm a huge fan of Tom and jerry,all the old characters are there like Spike and Tyke, Nibbles(who can talk) and cousin Muscles(Freddie is this).
The voices in this movie really SUCK yes S-U-C-K suck.
Tom sounds stupid and so does Jerry Spike however sounds PERFECT its got a lot of colour in it and a lot of effort i think was put into it.
But sadly compared to the Show this isn't great better luck next time Hanna-Barbera or whoever made it 8/10.
Surprisingly Good Tom and Jerry Movie.
*This review contains some spoilers.* I cringed when I heard that a new Tom & Jerry movie had been made and released to video.
The cat and mouse's track record since William Hanna and Joseph Barbera left MGM hasn't been very hot.
Chuck Jones and his animators were okay, but only made a few stand-out shorts; there were some awful T & J cartoons made in the 1970's; and there was the unpleasant Tom and Jerry Kids.
Oh, and don't forget the disastrous, universally panned `Tom and Jerry: The Movie.' With this uneasy mindset, I sat down to watch `The Magic Ring' with my fangs bared and claws ready to shred.
But to my surprise, `The Magic Ring" was actually good, giving us new things while honoring what fans love about the duo's past.
The plot is so simple it is hard to believe they managed to stretch it to a whopping 62 minutes.
Tom is ordered by his owner, who happens to be a wizard, to guard a ring until he gets back from a trip.
As Tom is standing guard, Jerry gets his hands on the ring and jokingly fits it over his head.
The ring gets stuck and Tom, naturally, chases Jerry to get the ring back.
They wind up taking the chase into the city, where various characters come out of the woodwork and join in, wanting either the ring, Jerry, or Tom. And that is everything.
What's interesting is that, while the gags aren't nearly as good as most of the classic shorts, they aren't at all groan-inducing.
Many are actually quite funny, seeing as how whenever the ring is nudged a magical beam of light will emit and cause a mishap.
Even better is the appearance of a bunch of familiar faces.
Spike & Tyke, Droopy, and Nibbles all show up in the film.
They even threw in a likeness of Jerry's cousin Muscles (here a different character named Freddie).
The best added character is Butch, the Irish-accented dog that vied with Droopy in some great MGM cartoons.
He's voiced by the wonderful Man-of-a-Million-Voices, Jim Cummings, one of the best vocal performers ever.
Just to let you know, `The Magic Ring' isn't all magical.
While its simplicity is majestic, it is also a problem.
Development in the beginning would have been helpful, for instance.
The wizard is interesting.
They deck him in an outfit and give him a voice that are so silly no one would fear him.
It is the perfect touch, except that his face is never visible.
But it never really makes sense why he gave Tom the ring instead of taking it along on his trip.
And I also could have done without seeing a carbon copy of the ending of the1949 Tex Avery classic `Bad Luck Blackie.' But kids won't care about these things and most older people won't mind them much either.
There is one major gripe I have, though.
The makers of `The Magic Ring' were wise to avoid the huge mistake of `Tom and Jerry: The Movie' when it came to letting our silent duo speak.
However, we do get to hear Tom and Jerry make some sounds.
Tom, voiced by Jeff Bennett, was perfect, usually restricted to cries of pain or laughter, reminiscent of the Chuck Jones era.
Jerry, however, makes far too much noise.
Whenever he sees Tom, he lets out an annoying shout.
Frank Welker is another one of the all-time great voice actors, and I love hearing him in cartoons, but his Jerry cries get old very fast.
The worst comes in the film's only terrible scene, where Jerry is sitting on a curb, looking at various stores to generate ideas on how to get the ring off his head.
Not only are the ideas in this thought balloons unfunny, but he ends the thought by saying `No no no no!' in a very annoying manner each time.
Still, I was impressed that someone managed to pull off a good updating of Tom and Jerry, with the past history being studied to see how not to make Tom and Jerry come to life.
I am glad I watched `The Magic Ring,' and I welcome more from this production team.
Just as long as Tom and Jerry don't start talking again.
Score: 8 out of 10.
|
tt0369735
|
Monster-in-Law
|
Charlie Cantilini (Jennifer Lopez) is a temp/dog walker/yoga instructor and aspiring fashion designer from Venice Beach, California, who meets doctor Kevin Fields (Michael Vartan). She thinks he's gay at first, based on a lie Kevin's former girlfriend Fiona (Monet Mazur) told her. But then Kevin asks her out, and Charlie believes that she's finally found the right man.
Things start to go wrong when Kevin introduces Charlie to his mother, Viola Fields (Jane Fonda). Viola is a former newscaster, who has recently been replaced by someone younger, and is in the midst of a meltdown. Loathing Charlie from the outset, Viola becomes even more distraught when Kevin proposes to Charlie. Fearing that she'll lose her son the same way she lost her career, she sets out to ruin Kevin and Charlie's relationship. With Ruby (Wanda Sykes), her assistant, she tries everything possible to drive Charlie away.
Charlie eventually catches on to Viola's plan and fights back. On Charlie's wedding day, Viola turns up wearing a white dress instead of the peach-colored dress specially made for her. This leads to a violent stand-off between the two, leading with Viola refusing to accept Charlie and states she'll never be good enough for Kevin. Suddenly, Viola's own dreadful mother-in-law, Kevin's grandmother, Gertrude Fields (Elaine Stritch), appears and they have an indignant argument, while Gertrude takes a liking to Charlie, saying she is stunning, her grandson is a lucky man, that she is an "exotic Latina", and if only her son, Kevin's father, was as lucky to find a woman like Charlie. Gertrude's resentment of Viola bears a strong resemblance to Viola's feelings of animosity toward Charlie. Gertrude even believes that Kevin's father had died years ago of "terminal disappointment", for which Gerturde holds Viola responsible. Viola counters stating Gertrude "smothered him to death", because she thought nobody was ever good enough for him (basically similar to how Viola is). Gertrude, satisfied she got her last word in, leaves; showing she still favors Charlie. Charlie decides to back–down as she witnesses Gertrude and Viola's relationship. "Nothing's going to change", she laments to Viola after Gertrude leaves the room, "In thirty years that will be us."
Charlie exits to tell Kevin that the wedding is off. But before that can happen, Ruby enters and talks with Viola. Viola is miffed that Charlie compared her to Gertrude, although Ruby points out that Viola is actually far worse than Gertrude, as she doesn't ever recall Gertrude trying to poison Viola once, referring to earlier at the rehearsal dinner when Viola put crushed nuts (to which Charlie is highly allergic) in the meal's gravy. Ruby points out that Viola's efforts against Charlie to make Kevin happy are unwarranted. "Whatever made you think he wasn't?" is her final point. Viola has an epiphany and realizes that she wants Charlie to stay, and they reconcile, ending the feud. Charlie then explains to Viola that she wants her to stay, too, on one condition: if Viola accepts the boundaries Charlie needs, if she is present at any family event, and if she treats her children with love.
Charlie and Kevin then get married and when Charlie throws her wedding bouquet, Viola catches the flowers. As Charlie and Kevin drive away to their honeymoon, the film ends as Viola and Ruby walk out of the celebration.
|
revenge, entertaining, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Everyone I know went to see "Monster In Law" for Jane Fonda and in spite of J Lo. If you go with that spirit, you just may have a reasonable good time.
The stuff that goes on during the film is priceless, countless fights, bickering, trying to one up the other, makes for a wonderful, true to life picture of what its like when you get married and you have to meet the mother in law..
I wish now that I hadn't wasted my time.Granted, Jane Fonda is an asset to "Monster-in-Law." She brims with radiance and plays the Viola role with tremendous flair (although the psychosis of her character sometimes seems forced and exaggerated).
He is like a prop that they casually drag into the movie whenever they need some filler between Charlie/Viola catfights.Wanda Sykes, as Viola's assistant, is fairly comical and works much better with Jane Fonda than J-Lo does.
While I was expecting an overdone, overplayed comedy that tries too hard to be funny and romantic at the same time, I was totally shocked to find a "Meet the Parents" kind of movie.
So I thought to myself, "Jennifer Lopez, Jane Fonda and Wanda Sykes?
Monster in Law is the story of the nicest girl ON THE PLANET (Jennifer Lopez) who meets the perfect man (Michael Vartan).
So obviously Lopez isn't good enough for Vaughn
I mean Vartan.Over the course of the movies 90 minute running time you will be subjected to the following: Conspiracies to derail the wedding.
This movie surprised me, because Jennifer Lopez is known for having a bad track record with the romantic comedies she leads -- even though they do well at the box office, they never have any really good laughs to them.
Ms. Lopez delivers a wonderful performance as Charlie, and Jane Fonda is also excellent in her return to films after a 15-year absence.
Wanda Sykes (who is virtually unknown in the cinema world and is actually a very funny comedienne) rounds out this powerhouse trio of women who entertain us scene after scene with their antics.Just a few weeks ago, I saw Fever Pitch, also a romantic comedy, and even though it was charming and the critics adored it, the audience in the theater I was in only truly belted out laughing once or twice, but for the sneak preview of Monster-in-Law (which was jam-packed when I attended), the theater was in STITCHES from start to finish.There's also a cameo by the amazing Elaine Stritch near the end.Congratulations to Jennifer, she's finally got a romantic comedy under her belt that she can boast about..
How sad it is then to report that her return to the screen after a 15 year hiatus is squandered on a wretchedly written, clumsily directed romantic comedy that is an embarrassment for not only Fonda but a talented supporting cast."Monster-in-Law" represents what seems to be an increasingly generic brand of comedy.
Character motivation and good storytelling have been replaced by gross caricature and "connect-the-dots", formulaic writing that is as predictable as it is depressing."Monster-in-Law" takes many of its cues from an earlier Fonda comedy, the lamentable 1981 burlesque, "9 to 5".
Unfortunately movie audiences seem easily pleased by this new comedy hybrid.In "Monster-in-Law" Jane Fonda plays veteran television interviewer Viola Fields, a Diva from Hell who is determined to break up the impending marriage of her handsome, vacuous son (an L.A. surgeon) to Charlotte "Charlie" Cantilini (Jennifer Lopez), an office temp, part time caterer and dog walker.
Otherwise "Monster-in-Law" is a mess and possibly the worst movie of Jane Fonda's career..
Thing are going well until she meets his overbearing mother (Jane Fonda), a recently fired news anchorwoman who takes her aggression out on her son's new girlfriend with help from her assistant Ruby (Wanda Sykes).
Her scenes with Jane Fonda are the best things about the movie though she gets a little annoying.
No chemistry between Lopez and Vartan makes the whole production fail early and by that time Fonda's over-the-top role (still not quite sure why Fonda agreed to be in this movie) is not enough to sustain the audience's interest.
Plus, Jane Fonda came out of retirement to make "Monster-In-Law", her first movie in 15 years.
In the perfect world, if Woody Allen had written the script and made the movie with three of them, Fonda, Lopes, and Sykes - we could've had if not a masterpiece but a wonderful and funny comedy.
However, I have always found Wanda Sykes very funny, and Jane Fonda is usually worth a look.Within 10 minutes, I was wishing I'd gone to see Crash instead.
Unfortunately, his mother (Jane Fonda) is a perfect harridan fresh off the back of a nervous breakdown or so we are asked to believe.This is where the "fun" should start, with the general idea, I guess, being to make an "all-chick" version of "Meet the Parents".
Doris Roberts on EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND accomplishes more with a couple throw away lines than all the script does for Jane Fonda's character.I could go on and on about what's bad about this huge waste of celluloid AND talent, but take the $22 you woulda spent on this for you and your date, go to the video store and rent Seinfeld, ELR, Fawlty Towers, and buy cheap candy instead of paying the inflated larcenous prices they charge in the theatre.
We do have Jane Fonda back on screen, but sincerely, I would expect her to do something else after 15 years of creativity break, and not this routine feel good comedy.I am afraid that this film - after making its in-flight entertainment career - will rest soon on the shelves of the studios full of not-so-funny comedies, and a well deserved amount of dust will cover it.
Jane Fonda is back after 15 years of not making any movies and she gives a very good performance as the titular character in Mother-in-Law. A romantic comedy directed by Robert Luketic (Legally Blonde and Win a Date with Tad Hamilton) and written by first timer Anya Kochoff, the movie gets very good to OK performances by the actors, and there are some funny parts, but overall it fails and is only being talked about because Miss Barbarella is back on the big screen.
Jennifer Lopez plays Charlie, a dog-walker (among several other jobs) and super nice girl who falls for Michael Vartan's Kevin Fields, a super nice guy who happens to be a very rich surgeon.
Jane Fonda plays Viola Fields perfectly, getting all crazy for nothing or sometimes justified like when Kevin proposes to Charlie in front of her on their first meeting.
Also supporting and kind of funny were Adam Scott and Annie Parisse as Charlie's gay friend Remi and best girlfriend Morgan, respectively, and totally wasted and with only 2 or 3 lines was Will Arnet as Kevin's best friend Kit. Jane Fonda is back and I couldn't care less, specially if she's going to keep doing movies like this that are funny because of its supporting players, but that overall have nothing memorable about them and are impossible to recommend.
Jane Fonda, who plays Viola Fields (the Monster) gives such a natural performance and not being a general fan of Jennifer Lopez who plays Charlie, did excellent but the person to watch out for in the movie is scene stealer, Wanda Sykes who plays Ruby.
JLo is after all a good actress, even though her real personality is far removed from the 'nice' roles she plays (and so they often don't ring true).Of course some in the audience lampoon anything Jane Fonda is in because they will never forgive her for opposing the Vietnam War ..
time to move on?Overall I went into the theater expecting mildly funny, but found myself in the middle of a laugh out loud classic comedy and as you can probably tell, most impressed by Jane Fonda's performance :).
Also good is Wanda Sykes as her sidekick, whereas a great cameo by Elaine Stritch is also as entertaining, the modern, conformist cast such as Lopez, Varitan, and their friends in the cast are so out of place alongside Fonda, and Stritch.
Jane Fonda touch some many over the year with films such as coming home and the china syndrome (one of my favorite movies of all time) After 15 years she's made a comeback, but sadly she has made a disappointing comeback to this dreadful comedy, about a monster mother who disapproves his fiancé's marriage, the laughs are completely non-existent, the acting is really bad, the script is lousy This is more like an badly overplayed sitcom than a movie Avoid this while you can.Jane Fonda waiting over a decade to do movies, just to be in this garbageMercy..
In her return to the cinema industry, Jane Fonda "steals" the movie and has an excellent performance in the role of a possessive mother that does her best trying to avoid the marriage of her beloved son scaring her daughter-in-law.
Wanda Sykes, Michael Vartan, Adam Scott, Annie Parisse and Monet Mazur complete the good cast of this funny movie.
Jennifer Lopez adds sparkle while Jane Fonda is good as Viola.
It's not the best I've ever seen but I definitely think Jennifer Lopez and Jane Fonda do their part in making it a movie worth seeing in the theater and owning at home.
If life were that easy, a lot more people today would be getting along with their "in laws." Other than these two concerns I've addressed, I enjoyed the relationship between Jennifer and Jane throughout the movie, the acting was great and I laughed a lot.
I went to see Monster In Law mostly because I was curious how Jane Fonda would come across in her first movie in years.
Now, in conclusion, I highly recommend this good romantic comedy that will make you laugh and feel good to any Jennifer Lopez, Jane Fonda, or Michael Vartan fan who hasn't seen it.
Jane Fonda returns to the screen playing an eccentric, Barbara Walters-type TV personality who has just lost her job to a younger woman and served a stint in a clinic after attacking a guest on her show...the last thing she needs is to have her "brilliant surgeon" son bring his new girlfriend to tea and propose marriage on bended knee right in front of mama.
If you're looking for a feel good comedy or if you're a Jane Fonda fan, this movie will not disappoint you!.
If you like original, simple but extreme comedy, then this is the film for you.Jennifer Lopez and Jane Fonda make a great pair, working off each other so well.
Bringing Jane Fonda out of retirement is not enough of a twist.The film opens with the love-at-first-sight relationship of Charlie (Jennifer Lopez) and Kevin (Michael Vartan).
Back in Rich Town, U.S.A. Michael's mother Viola (Jane Fonda) has just returned from the Looney Bin where she was submitted over an anxiety attack resulting in the injury of a 16 year old pop star on her day time talk show.
To be honest, she's really one of the better aspects of Monster in Law. The same goes for Jane Fonda's lead role as the evil Viola.
"Monster-in-Law" may just be one of the worst studio romantic comedies to be released in recent memory, a movie so bland, brain dead and unengaging that it almost defies explanation.Fonda stars as the female equivalent to Robert DeNiro's character from "Meet the Parents," a fallen television journalist who plots to derail her unwitting son's (Michael Vartan) impending nuptials to a free spirit dog-walker/temp/aspiring designer (Lopez).These characters are more outlines than fully realized roles.
"Monster-in-law" would be cheese even if it had been developed as a single episode of sitcom, and drawn out to a feature length movie, it's unbearable...crude, cruel, dumb, and of course worst of all -- unfunny.The minimal thrust of the plot is to create a diva cat-fight between 70-ish Jane Fonda (still beautiful, but subjected here to many very unkind closeups) and 35-ish Jennifer Lopez....the pleasure intended to be seeing them slap each other, poison each other with drugs and otherwise create mayhem.
How can rich powerful stars like Jane Fonda and Jennifer Lopez agree to perform in such drivel?
This film is saved by Jane Fonda, who does a great job at trying to sabotage her son Kevin's (Michael Vartan) relationship with Charlie (Jennifer Lopez).
After a fifteen-year retirement, Jane Fonda came back to Hollywood and starred in Monster-in-Law, a comedy about an overbearing mother who tries to interfere with her son's impending marriage because she feels his fiancé isn't good enough for him.
Or, if you look at it another way, a loving mother feels her handsome doctor son could do better than a flaky, part-time dog walker, and she tries to help him come to his senses before they're married.Michael Vartan plays Jane's son, and Jennifer Lopez is the impending daughter-in-law.
While it might be a bit of a shock for audiences who last saw Jane as a romantic lead in Stanley & Iris in 1990, she doesn't take the role as the mother-in-law to say, "I'm an old lady now." She's beautiful, vibrant, and able to compete toe-to-toe with the icon JLo. Jane even films a scene in her negligee; it's clear to her audience that she's nowhere near old age.As to the movie itself, it's very entertaining and funny.
This 2005 rom com starring Jennifer Lopez, Jane Fonda, and Wanda Sykes is pretty entertaining and very funny at certain moments.
Jennifer Lopez was like she usually is, not meaning that in a bad way though, she was still entertaining, even if Jane Fonda over shadowed her a bit.
We can relate to the movie in some ways except the movie exaggerates a lot of what makes our lives funny.I find Jennifer Lopez's and Jane Fonda's performance to be hilarious.
Well I must say it was a boring Sunday and this was the most "decent" movie on HBO.So well, I must say that "Monster In Law" delivers expectations for those who want to see a light romantic comedy with the occasional American humor and creative funny situations.
Alas, Ms. Fonda would have done much better by refusing whatever was offered to her and stayed in one of her mansions raising money for her causes instead of being reduced to being a caricature.The best, and only, reason for even wanting to take a look at this movie is the presence of Wanda Sykes, who steals the picture from all the stars to make it her own.
As the no-nonsense assistant, Ms. Sykes is a delight to watch and the only one showing some wit in the movie.While the film is by no means horrible, one can think of other ways to be entertained..
But if you're simply looking for a funny movie, I recommend it completely.As others have already said, a lot of credit goes to Wanda Sykes for her delicious supporting role.
Jane Fonda is not ordinarily my favorite actress, and Jennifer Lopez is not even on my radar, but I enjoyed both of their performances a lot as well.
A well-worn movie premise gets a fresh coat of paint in MONSTER-IN-LAW, a laugh-packed comedy confection that made history as it marked the return to the big screen of two-time Oscar winner Jane Fonda, in her first film in 16 years.
The only actors who don't get blown off the screen by Fonda are Wanda Sykes, who has some of the funniest lines in the movie as Viola's assistant Ruby and Broadway legend Elaine Stritch, who shines in a brief cameo as one of Viola's former mother-in-laws, but this is Fonda's show all the way, and if this film shows anything, it's that Fonda has not lost any of her ability to command the screen during her 16-year absence and I hope more roles are coming her way.
entertaining chick flick predictable sometimes funny maybe 1 good laugh but you see the gags coming how can anyone believe the mother in law would see the light at the end is beyond me it does not happen in real life...and the tag along black p.a. is so formulaic be original lets have a comedy in which the guydoes not get the girl letshave a flick thats not a morality talelets have the hero marry into money...
But as most of the married men out there already know sometimes (always) we have to watch what appears to be a "chick flick" The chemistry between Jane Fonda and Jennifer Lopez was excellent.
Like Jennifer Lopez, Jane Fonda, Wanda Sykes, all played off each other so well.
So, I went to see this film purely because I have a soft spot for Michael Vartan - I know little to nothing about Jane Fonda, and generally hate Jennifer Lopez.
The only thing good about this movie is Jane Fonda -- and anything other than J Lo. I must say, however, that J Lo is quite the actress, if only because in real life she is so awful.
The one actor who can hold her own and does the most to prevent the film from becoming "The Jane Fonda Show" is Elaine Stritch as Kevin's grandmother, Viola's own and equally monstrous mother-in-law Gertrude, but hers is only a cameo role.
I liked the scenes where JLo and Fonda were beating the crap out of each other, and it turned out that they were only dreaming it.I think too, if it weren't for Wanda Sykes, the movie would really have bombed!
Mother and daughter-in-law to be become friends in the end and the guests throw rice.Notable characters who make the movie worth seeing: Ruby - Wanda Sykes (This woman was hilarious, credit to the writers of her lines of course...
Watching her in this movie was just painful.Jane Fonda...why did you come out of retirement!?
|
tt0034261
|
Take My Life
|
Nicholas "Nicky" Talbot attends the London debut of his wife, opera singer Philippa Shelley, at Covent Garden. After her successful performance, Nicky runs into former girlfriend Elizabeth Rusman backstage, a musician in the orchestra, who asks for his help. She gives him her address before Philippa appears (and keeps his personalised pencil). At home, Nicky and a jealous Philippa quarrel over Elizabeth. When Philippa throws an object that strikes her husband in the forehead, he leaves in a huff.
The scene then shifts to a courtroom, where the prosecuting counsel reveals that Nicky is on trial for the strangulation of Elizabeth that night. A flashback shows the murderer setting fire to the body. When the killer leaves the flat, he conceals his face from a man using a handkerchief pressed to his forehead, leading the police to assume he has been injured there. Also, the pencil is found at the scene of the crime. The police take Nicky into custody.
Philippa goes to see Elizabeth's mother in Holland, then to an employment agency and Elizabeth's acquaintances, without any progress. Inspector Archer does, however, let her examine the dead woman's possessions and copy a bit of music. When Philippa plays it at home, she discovers that her nephew is already familiar with it.
She sets out for a school in Scotland, having ascertained that one of the masters may be the composer. Mr. Flemming, the headmaster, is disturbed to recognise her from her photograph in the newspaper. He takes her on a tour of the school. She notices that the school group photograph for the previous year is missing. When she plays the tune on the chapel organ, she sees in a mirror that he is perturbed. Philippa obtains a copy of the photograph the next morning and sees Elizabeth in it. Flemming becomes aware of this and follows her aboard the train. He confronts her in her compartment. They are interrupted when a man enters, but when the newcomer reveals that he is deaf, Flemming confesses to the crime, though it was unpremeditated. Elizabeth had threatened to divorce him for cruelty, which would have ruined him. After the deaf man leaves, Flemming destroys the incriminating photograph and tries to throw Philippa from the train. Fortunately, the deaf man returns just in time. Flemming then jumps to his death.
When Philippa goes to see Inspector Archer (still without proof), he introduces her to Detective Sergeant Hawkins, the "deaf" man who is not deaf at all and therefore heard Flemming's confession.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0085547
|
The First Turn-On!!
|
On the last day of summer at Camp Big-Tee-Pee, all the teenage campers are crazy with hormones and eager to go home. While on a nature walk with ditzy hippie camp counselor Michelle Farmer, four students, self-proclaimed stud Mitch, his girlfriend Annie, overweight Henry, and nerd Danny break off from the rest of the group to indulge in some cannabis. They take refuge in a nearby cave, only to be caught in the act by Michelle some time later. While being shooed out, Henry's flatulence causes a landslide, trapping the five of them inside. To pass the time until their eventual rescue, the group shares stories of how each lost their virginity.
In Mitch's story, Lucy, an elegant prostitute, picks up Mitch while he is hitchhiking and invites him to visit her fancy hotel room. Feeling nervous and inexperienced, he asks his ultra-cool, yet dim-witted friend Jeff to give him pointers (which include "when in doubt, whip it out"). However, upon meeting Lucy, Jeff unsuccessfully attempts to seduce Lucy, almost injuring her. When Mitch saves her and kicks Jeff out, Lucy repays him with mind-blowing sex.
Henry is forced to tell his story next. In preparation for a big Halloween party, he dresses as a ghost. Unfortunately, in addition to not being able to see out of the eye-holes, the costume looks identical to a Klan robe. Blinded, he accidentally stumbles upon a group of (flamboyantly gay) African-American thugs about to kill a young white woman. The thugs turn their attention to Henry, beat him senseless, and then skip off, singing and holding hands. The girl, convinced Henry has just saved her life, instantly falls for him and the two make passionate love later that night next to a giant pile of donuts.
Meanwhile, the camp's staff, in fear of a potentially expensive lawsuit, desperately search for the missing campers.
In Annie's story, she discusses her first time, back when she was working on her family's farm. One night, she discovers an attractive drifter who had broken into her house in search of food. Overwhelmed by her hormones, she gives him a lot more than cookies in the back of the barn, much to the dismay of the sheep.
Danny goes next: His flashback reveals that he was a pornography-addicted loser. While visiting the beach one day, he thinks he sees Penthouse Pet Sheila Kennedy smiling and winking at him, but quickly dismisses it as a mirage. Later that night, after being rejected from a double date with his brother, Danny returns to his room to find Kennedy waiting for him. While the two engage in lengthy foreplay, they are later joined by his brother's girlfriend, and they all participate in an orgy, which Danny mispronounces.
Finally, Miss Farmer tells her story: Back in high school she was deeply in love with her psychotic, nerd boyfriend Dwayne. However, when Dwayne dumps her for another girl at the junior prom, she sucks up her pride and picks up two new boyfriends. The three of them proceed to have sex on a bowling alley lane.
As more time passes and oxygen diminishes in the cave, the gang becomes convinced that they will all asphyxiate. In a moment of truth, everyone admits that their stories were false. They're all still virgins. Determined not to die as such, they all participate in an orgy. The symphony of thrusts and moans causes another landslide, thus opening the entrance of the cave and freeing everyone.
As the group returns to camp, a narrator reveals the character's futures: Danny became a pornographic actor under the name "Dicky Long". Mitch became a priest and a staunch advocate of gay rights. Henry now works for the National Cheese Commissioners Board. After eight marriages, Annie had a nervous breakdown and became a vegetable. Miss Farmer runs the government's program for Wildlife Preservation. The film's final shot shows her trying to make a large trout "fly away" by tossing it into the air.
|
adult comedy
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
pales in comparison to American Pie??!!!.
J. Canker Huxley doesn't know what he's talking about.
American Pie is garbage.
It isn't funny.
The First Turn-On is a classic from the days when there were such things as "teenage sex romps." It has no aspirations other than to amuse and to exploit.
Movies like Road Trip and American Pie want to have their cake and eat it too---they try to be lewd and crude, yet still contain a "message" or be moral.
The First Turn-On has no morals and therefore succeeds in being entertaining..
Vincents First Turn On!.
My interest in this film was purely as a fan of Vincent D'Onofrio..and this is his first ever movie made at the tender age of twenty four.
His role is small however, but his character is actually quite funny.
He plays a psychotic,brainless teenager called Lobotomy..and oh, how his acting improved over the years!
The film itself is a carry on movie meets Airplane!
lots of silly humour and innuendo.
It's set at a kids summer camp with dubious members of staff and centres around four teens and a dizzy blonde staff members stories of their first seductions..it is funny in parts but also very silly.
It's not a bad film, just a piece of inane fluff..
A Troma teen sex comedy.
One of Troma's first entries in the teen sex comedy genre, it is average at best.
"The First Turn On!!" is about a bunch of idiot teen campers and a female counselor get stuck in a cave and "describe" their first sexual encounters.This is a pretty subaverage fare for even Troma films.
In the world of teenage sex romps it pales in comparison to recent films such as "American Pie" and "Road Trip."There are some highlights in this film.
This was a first film for Vincent D'Onofrio (Full Metal Jacket, Feeling Minnesota, Men in Black, Steal this Movie!) as a fat loser and a funny cameo by comedian and all-around nice guy Rondell Sheridan as a gang member.The real gem of this movie is the sound track from the seminal new wave band "Shrapnel" featuring some of their best (and unreleased) stuff.
Hearing the song "Sleep Over" and the goofy performances by Sheridan and D'Onofrio are worth giving this film a watch on cable or a $1.00 rental (but not much else)..
Sex, lies, and Penthouse Pets (and Vincent D'nofrio).
I used to hate 80's teen movies (it was bad enough actually BEING a teenager in the 80's without having to watch a bunch of crappy movies about it).
But now a warm glow of nostalgia (or incipient senility) has set in and I kind of like some of them.
I still don't care for some of the more famous ones ("The Breakfast Club", "Dirty Dancing", etc.), but I like some of the ones that are kind of realistic (if somewhat depressing) like "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" and "The Last American Virgin", or, on the other hand, films like this one that are so ridiculous you can't take them seriously at all.
Since this film was made by Lloyd Kaufman and Michael Herz of Troma, it is of course very self-consciously campy (if not quite as much as their more famous "Toxic Avenger" series).
It takes place at a strange camp where the "campers" all seem to be in their early twenties.
A counselor and four "campers" get trapped in a cave and decide to pass the time by telling each other stories of their "first time".The stories are all REALLY dumb, but this movie uses an interesting device where the flashbacks on screen often contradict the story the character is telling.
I remember a few years later a mainstream critic practically wetting himself when overrated film genius Steven Sodeberg did this in "sex, lies and videotape".
Of course, this device is much more incompetently rendered here and a plot twist near the end really makes hash of it (but then again "sex, lies, and videotape" doesn't end in a big orgy like this one does).But I'm sure nobody but me cares about any of this so let's get to the two most important things--the "T", and of course, the "A".
There's plenty of it here naturally as in any Troma movie.
Most of the girls, however, aren't stunningly attractive except for Sheila Kennedy, who was a former Penthouse Pet and years later appeared in the TV "reality dreck "Big Brother" (and I don't which of these is the skeleton in her closet).
This movie is definitely a skeleton in the closet of Emmy and Academy Award-nominated actor Vincent D'nofrio.
I certainly don't agree with Lloyd Kaufman's introductory comment that Sheila Kennedy is better in this than D'nofrio was in "Full Metal Jacket", but she's better than he is in this movie (of course, she doesn't have to stretch herself too much since she's actually playing a Penthouse Pet here).
Anyway, those that enjoy this kind of celebrity early-career embarrassment will certainly enjoy Vince here..
Super unfunny yet still charming.
This is the last straight comedy produced by Troma before they found their niche in action/horror spoofs and the only film directed mostly by Michael Herz.
Its a very sophomoric and amateur take off on Porky's and Meatballs 2 designed to be zany and irreverent.
Troma's early comedies all suffer from sleaze, grime and laziness, but they usually have a redeeming sly sense of satire and a fun cartoon logic thanks to Lloyd Kaufman.
"Turn On" then is very interesting Troma fans as they can see just what Herz' contributions were before he stopped teaming with Kaufman.
Herz directs "Turn On" with a humanist energy.
His actors are happy and free and he pays no attention to blocking or coverage.
He's all about performances.
The later Troma films are missing this naturalistic acting style and the sensuality Herz seems obsessed with.
Kaufman is definitely a better director of action and comedy but maybe Troma would've grown stronger with Herz's style still complimenting Lloyd's..
Cheapo tit flick.
A completely pointless excuse to put some of the ugliest women in the history of 'cinema' on screen without their tops on.
I don't know where the comedy bit came into this film, as the funniest bit of it was watching the woman cop a double decker on the bowling alley.GOD AWFUL.
before Toxie, there was sex comedy...
and it wasn't very good, as one might guess.
The First Turn-On!!
(must have the two exclamation points there because, hey, more stuff on the poster!!) is a sex-romp where we get to see the inside scoops on what the "first time" was like for a few ass-wipes and two stuck up chicks (to speak in Beavis & Butt-head tongue), and they all beef up their stories that they tell in the cave after an avalanche makes the cave impenetrable...
he-he, impenetrable, is that a funny?
Well, no, on to the movie itself, one of the early collaborations between Troma founder/bad-taste pioneers Michael Herz and Lloyd Kaufman, who share producer/director credits here.
Their game, if one can't tell from their other movies, is intentionally hitting the lowest common denominator.
They do have a tongue-in-cheek through most of it- that is when the misogyny doesn't scream out like a young lady's first or almost orgasm- and at least they're not trying to be offensive...
actually, no, that's a lie.
If you got offended by this, they won half the battle (and if you paid for the whole DVD- as opposed to, with some wit, getting it off of Netflix instant-view, they won the other half).I would like to try to look deeper into some of the psychological ramifications of what the campers and camp-leader with the frizzy 80's hair and wide blue eyes go into, but does it matter?
Whenever Kaufman and Herz try to get on with a story it makes so many detours it threatens to jump off a cliff with two boobs in your face.
This said, throughout the raucous and stupid and juvenile and just flat-out gross and 11-year old humor wedged into a very-R-rated sex comedy, I actually did laugh at a few lines like "This would be easier than (bleeping) a tomato", and there were a few sight gags that did make me chuckle loudly.
I could probably count those times on one hand.
And I guess there are some nice bosoms, to note once again.
The rest of it is obnoxious crap-comedy, the kind where you roll your eyes or just sit in momentary stunned silence and go "really, you had to go there?
It's a Porky's knock-off at camp that unfortunately doesn't go far enough to anticipate 127 Hours.
Now if they had to cut off some genitals to stay alive (mostly testicles) it might be a better night out..
A Big Turn-Off. Oh, poor Vincent D'Onofrio!
The only people who should pay any money to see this movie are collectors who buy the DVD because they want to get everything Vincent D'Onofrio has ever done.
And, for the record, he has no part in what makes this movie awful.
That honor goes to the actors who had the main parts, and to the writers, and to the directors, and to the producers....You know, the collectors should pay for it, maybe, but I don't think that even they should see it.
Keep it sealed and be afraid, be very afraid.
Oh, O.K., true fans of Vincent D'Onofrio can watch what is, according to IMDb, his first film performance, if they have strong enough stomachs to deal with the rest of this garbage.
This "teenage sex comedy" wasn't funny, wasn't sexy, and I don't think the performers looked particularly teen-aged!.
A choice chunk of vintage 80's Troma comedy trash.
Four teenagers and a summercamp counselor find themselves trapped in a cave after an avalanche.
The quintet decide to make the time pass by faster by swapping (wildly embellished) stories about their first sexual experiences.
Directors Lloyd Kaufman and Michael Herz, working from a blithely lowbrow script, gleefully wallow in a cheerfully crude and stupid sense of anything-goes dippy toilet bowl humor with a steady succession of always sophomoric and often sidesplitting no-brainer jokes about such things as pot smoking, hillbillies, urination, masturbation, herpes, and a hysterical group orgy scene that's truly something to behold.
Naturally, we also get a tasty truckload of yummy female nudity and lots of leering soft-core sex.
The cast broadly overact their colorful roles with deliciously enthusiastic go-for-it relish, with especially amusing contributions by Georgia Harrell as annoyingly chipper nature freak Michelle, Michael Sanville as macho lout Mitch, Googy Gress as tubby slob Henry, Heidi Miller as luscious tart Annie Goldberg, John Flood as the cocky Danny Anderson, Betty Pia as Danny's shrewish mom Ms. Anderson, and Mark Torgl (Melvin the mop boy in "The Toxic Avenger") as supremely disgusting geek Dwayne.
Insanely foxy "Penthouse" Pet Sheila Kennedy burns up the screen as basically herself while Vincent D'Onofrio in his ignominious cinematic debut goes totally over the top as incredibly obnoxious psycho Lobotomy.
The bouncy soundtrack and cornball stock film library score further enhance this picture's considerable inane charm.
This is the type of flat-out idiotic junk that's frequently very funny because of its gloriously blatant and unapologetic dumbness.
A complete raunchy'n'wacky riot.
|
tt0027805
|
Isle of Fury
|
The film begins by displaying a map of the Pacific Ocean and the adage: "There still remain far from the lanes of travel, myriads of unmarked islands, the refuge of lost men."
On the island of Tankana in the South Pacific, a marriage is taking place between Val Stevens (Humphrey Bogart) and Lucille Gordon (Margaret Lindsay). The ceremony is interrupted by word that a ship is sinking on an offshore reef during a storm. Val hurries through the exchange of vows, and then rushes out to rescue Captain Deever (Paul Graetz) and his passenger, Eric Blake (Donald Woods).
Val, who is in charge of a pearl business, hears that the natives who dive for him refuse to enter the ocean, as two of their men never surfaced. Eric joins Val and Lucille on a pearl-fishing expedition in which Val suits up in a diving outfit in order to show the natives that there is nothing to fear about. After being submerged at the spot where the natives disappeared, he gets attacked by a giant octopus, with his line loosening from the boat. Eric jumps in the water with a knife and kills the octopus, freeing Val from its tentacles. After this, a friendship grows stronger between the men.
Since first meeting Lucille after being rescued, Eric has been smitten by her beauty. Feelings of love begin to appear among them. In his speeches, Dr. Hardy (E. E. Clive) slyly seems to prod Eric to follow his feelings towards Lucille. The Doctor instructs the Captain to spy on the incipient romance. Eric rescues Val a second time when two natives attempt to steal the pearls during a hold-up in his office. Val then urges Eric to stay on the island and become his partner, but Eric, who has asked Lucille to accompany him, refuses, telling Val that he must sail on to his destination. During one of their talks while drinking highballs, the Doctor tells Eric that he knows that he is a detective who was sent to the island to capture Val who is wanted in the United States for a murder. But, Eric says that he has changed his mind, as he now feels that Val is innocent. The Captain, though, believes that Eric is the wanted fugitive and tells Val that he is going to turn him in for the reward. Val angrily dismisses the accusation, but the Captain tells Val that his wife and Eric are currently making love. Val rushes home, while the Captain steals his gun.
Val abruptly confronts the two who are talking, but the Doctor enters and soothes Val's anger, and Eric confesses that he came to the island to capture Val. The Captain, while spying on the group from an open window and realizing that he has been hunting the wrong man, bursts into the room and holds Val by gunpoint. Lucille's grandfather emerges from a room and shoots the Captain dead. Lucille expresses her interest in staying with Val, and Eric leaves the island to report that the wanted fugitive is dead.
|
melodrama
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0096251
|
Tetsuo
|
The film opens with a man (called only "the man" (Yatsu) in the credits, or the "Metal Fetishist" in English-language film criticism), cutting open a massive gash in his leg and then shoving a large threaded steel rod into the wound. Later, upon seeing maggots festering in the wound, he screams, runs out into the street, and is hit by a car. The driver of the car, a Japanese salaryman (Tomorowo Taguchi), and his girlfriend (Kei Fujiwara) try to cover up the mess by dumping the body into a ravine, but the dumped man gets revenge by forcing the salaryman's body to gradually metamorphose into a walking pile of scrap metal. This process starts when the salaryman finds a piece of metal stuck in his cheek while shaving. He tries to remove it, but realizes it is growing from the inside.
The scene cuts to the salaryman at his home having breakfast, with a bandage over his cheek. He receives a phone call, consisting of nothing but him and the other speaker (possibly his girlfriend) continuously saying "Hello?" to each other and flashing back to having sex after dumping the Metal Fetishist.
The first of several highly stylized chase scenes starts with the salaryman pursued through an underground train station by a woman whose body has been taken over by the Metal Fetishist as he is on his way to work. The salaryman seems to win this encounter by breaking the back of the radically transformed woman (she begins the sequence as a demure office worker and ends it as a wild metal-infected woman) after even more metal has erupted on his ankles and arm.
The next segment is a terrifying dream sequence where the salaryman's girlfriend, transformed into an exotic dancer with a snake-like metal probe, terrorizes and rapes the salaryman. After waking from this dream, the salaryman and his girlfriend have sex at his apartment and eat erotically. As she eats each bite given to her, he hears the sounds of metal scraping. The salaryman suddenly discovers his penis has mutated into a gargantuan power drill. A fight ensues where the salaryman terrorizes his girlfriend, and acquires more and more metal on his body. She fights back and in the end impales herself on his drill and dies.
Helpless to do anything, the salaryman, now the Iron Man, is visited by the Metal Fetishist, who emerges from the dead girlfriend's corpse to show him a vision of a "New World" of nothing but metal and turns his cats into grotesque metal creatures. This is where the film suggests a post-apocalyptic future. The Iron Man flees and is followed by the Metal Fetishist into an abandoned building. After the Metal Fetishist explains to the Iron Man how both of them became what they are, a final battle ensues. The Iron Man ends by attempting to rust/combine himself with the Fetishist and this merges both of them (in a hallucinatory rebirth sequence where the two are connected by a metal umbilical cord) into a two-headed metal monster. The two agree to turn the whole world into metal and rust it, scattering it into the dust of the universe by claiming "Our love can put an end to this fucking world. Let's Go!" The duo charges through the streets of Japan in a horrific fusion of the two men and the accumulated metal, in a largely phallic form. The film ends with the words "GAME OVER" as opposed to "The End" after the closing credits.
|
realism, paranormal, cult, violence, atmospheric, psychedelic, sci-fi
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Now I viewed it again last night, and I am totally shocked and speechless, when it comes to this masterpiece of Shinya Tsukamoto, the genius multi talent behind films like Tokyo Fist (just don't try to watch if you think Raging Bull is too much), Gemini and Bullet Ballet.
The soundtrack is made with different sounds of metal hitting together, scratching against something and most notable, there is also synthesizer use to create very ominous and threatening atmosphere that never stops, and the music is again one of the most important elements of this film.The effects are totally outstanding as the director made them by himself.
Tsukamoto also wrote, directed, photographed, art directed and edited this film among special effects, and the most help he got came probably from Kei Fujiwara, who plays the girl friend in the movie, and she also directed her own similar film, Organ, in the middle of the 90's.
The feeling in Tetsuo is exactly similar, even though the things themselves are not scary or threatening, because they should be only dead pieces of metal and plastic, products in other words.Shinya Tsukamoto made also sequel to Tetsuo, but it is in color and never as stunning as this brilliant original, but still worth checking out for lovers of this kind of cinema.
Shinya Tsukamoto is among Takeshi Kitano, Takashi Ishii and Takashi Miike the most interesting, personal, creatively lunatic and overall stunning artists to come from Japan today, and by watching their films, all the nonsense entertainment coming too often from Hollywood nowadays is easy to forget and just concentrate on these miracles in the field of cinema.
Cinema is magic and Tetsuo is one example to show that for the lovers of independent films, since this is not going to reveal to mainstream audience due to its difficult imagery, violent scenes of nightmarish terror and overall personality that demands a lot from the viewer.
This is far too difficult and intelligent cinema for mainstream audience, and thus would never come out from some big studio that wants only money and commercially potential films.Tetsuo is a 10/10 masterpiece and one of my personal favourites.
I've tried to describe this film as clearly as possible, and without using too many praising adjectives, and since this movie's power is somewhat hard to describe with words, I recommend that all the lovers of Japanese cinema and the ones who think they're interested in Tetsuo check this out and see and experience the magic for themselves..
While hilarious, there is a scene involving the man and his "woman" (as credited) that, while serving a purpose, became more of a sick joke than a part of the film.As the movie continues on you get more and more lost as to what is going on when cuts become more frequent and the film becomes extremely frantic and fast paced.
But here are a few that apply: Japanese, hyperactive, perverse, industrial, surreal, Faustian bargain, contrasty, black-and-white, Kafkaesque, scifi, stop-motion, manga-influenced, revenge, technology, alienation, supervillains.Shinya Tsukamoto is an actor (he's the antagonistic "Metals Fetishist" here as well as Jijii in Ichi the Killer) as well as a ground-breaking writer/director/cinematographer.
Tetsuo's influence can be seen clearly in directors as diverse as Darren Aronofsky, Takashi Miike, and even David Cronenberg.There is definitely a plot, but due to the non-linear editing and sparsity of dialogue you'll need to pay close attention on a first viewing or else you'll be overwhelmed by the engrossing visual style (which might be a good thing).
The real meat was Tetsuo.The "plot" of this film revolves around a businessman (who apparently like to have sex with his girlfriend in public places and film it) who is involved in a hit and run auto accident with a metal fetishist.
If this isn't bad enough he soon finds out the man he hit (played by the director of the film) is in fact alive and rather peeved.Absolutely insane violence permeates the film which retains its punch through the black and white film.The review I read about this film compared it to Eraserhead (A film I still have not seen) which I believe says a lot about Eraserhead.
To compare it to a film I've seen I'd say it reminds me of "Un Chien Andalou" with about three more lines of dialog and a lot more gore and violence.I also recommend the sequel Tetsuo II: Body Hammer.
He comes back to haunt tetsuo as tetsuo turns into a human scrapyard and then attacks him physically in a very strange dual of metalic body morphing near the end of the film.A lot of the movie is stop motion animation mixed with live action actors.
The industrial music is perfect for this film because the film is based on dirty grimy and rusty industrial metal garbage and even the environments are all streamlined industrial parks and monotonous suburbs.The thing i like about this movie is although it is "artsy" it's the kind of art that's fun to look at.
In fact it fails to explain anything so you will sit on the sofa in a state of confusion that will not lessen on repeated viewings until you come to realise as I have that there is no reasoning behind this film.Take "Akira" without any character development whatsoever, minus the amazing action action sequences, minus Otomo's skill at directing and scriptwriting, lose the detailed world in which it takes place, replace the Japanese drums and naked voice soundtrack with good old fashioned industrial and of course replace the Cristal clear animation with grainy black and white that looks like it was shot with a nineteen thirty's handicam and you have "Tetsuo, Iron Man!"Basically the plot is the same, Tetsuo has a traffic accident with someone who has unusual powers, develops those powers, kill his girlfriend in a grotesque manner then an orgy of violence and manga style metamorphosis ensues.
I believe it omitted anything else as there were no other characters or events.If this wasn't enough the editor was clearly unsure about the order in which the scenes were intended to go (if indeed they were intended to go in any particular order) so they were simply spliced into one second shots and shuffled like a deck of cards so that each shot barely corresponds to the once which precedes it.Try as I might I cannot understand why this film has had such a positive reception from the various websites I have encountered, so I assume that there must be an audience for films where loosely related scenes are jumbled together like a Spanish paella (and I mean no offence to those of you to do like to watch films without narrative) But I can't help thinking that Tsukamoto's "masterpiece" Tetsuo takes all the worst elements from Manga like the flashing lights and unexplained morphing and put them in a live action film that doesn't include any of the good elements that make manga great or for that matter any good elements in the slightest..
I feel that most viewers are not mature enough/experienced with extreme cinema to look beneath the superficial "story," of which there is very little, to appreciate the wealth of subtext lurking beneath the most mind-blowing and exhilarating hour and seven minutes ever committed to film.At once, it is an allegory of technology in the modern age (and the dehumanizing effect it has on its unwitting victims), a commentary on the psycho-sexual fetishization of industrialization, a critique of vengeance and violence, a celebration of nihilism and the potential beauty of destruction, a deranged superhero fantasy, a metaphor for failed dreams, an indictment of sexual repression (including homosexuality) and, at its core, a modern day ghost story, in which a hit and run driver (of sorts; he does carelessly dump the metal fetishist's body in the woods) is haunted by his metal-obsessed, ambiguously homosexual, marathon runner victim, a crazed nihilist who has acquired the ability to manipulate metal with his mind after a piece of steel (from the car) became lodged in his brain during the accident.
The events of the film, when taken to be no more than the actual images depicted, are too disturbing, complex and, ultimately, too alien, for the average, unthinking audience member to make heads or tails of, and thus are insulted as pointless, "offensive" and "weird," as if these highly subjective concepts denote something inherent in the movie.
"Tetsuo The Iron Man" is the brainchild of Japanese film director Shinya Tsukamoto and it is a brilliant piece of industrial cinema.
60 or so minutes of mind blowing, psychedelic images, moving at 200 miles an hour, it is violent and it is disturbing and it is like nothing you've ever seen before.There is a man obsessed with metal to the point that he insert various metallic parts on his body.
Utter bonkers, making no sense whatsoever (well, a kind of flimsy one), the movie is an almost silent film with amazing imagery but close to zero story.It all starts with a guy running around after sticking a metal rod on his leg.
However, I also can't see myself recommending it to my friends anytime soon or re-watching it again.After a businessman hits someone who recently inserted a rusty, metal rod into their leg, metal slowly starts to pop up on his body as he begins to mutate into a massive chunk of metal.When the film first opens up, you get a couple minutes of quiet and calm pacing showing someone walking down an alleyway.
At several points it is nigh on impossible to distinguish where the shrapnel-like eruptions of skin end and the twisted metal fixings begin.I recommend you watch this film loud, on a big screen and slightly under the influence.
The sexuality is shown as a pure act of aggression (somwhat typical for Japanese movies as well) to spread the cold metal and let it run free.The most disturbing thing is the gory violence, which is explicit, but artful, cause it is so well filmed (in black-and-white) and edited with incredible speed and skill.Last but not least this sure is an extraordinary work of metal sculpturing!So my vote is: 7 (if you like to see a Cronenbergesk movie-trip without a "story")..
Let me say that Tetsuo is not for all tastes, not even for those of you who liked the aforementioned Akira (actually, the movie's name is based on one of the protagonists from the film) and Blade Runner.
there's been lots of arguing about whether Tetsuo is a masterpiece or a steaming heap of artsy junk, but one thing is for certain: it's one of the strangest movies ever made.The story begins as the character usually referred to as 'the metal fetishist' (since the characters really don't have names) cuts open his leg and sticks a metal pipe inside.
If the director, Shinya Tsukamoto had gone for a more conventional story-telling method, Tetsuo could be shrugged off as just another movie barely worth watching only for it's visual ideas.
Piling some really quite disturbing imagery into a melange of stop-motion animation, sped-up and slowed-down film and lots and lots of fast-cut montages, this gradually builds into an at least slightly coherent plot involving a man slowly turning into a giant metal monster, then fighting some kind of rust-man-woman-thing on jet-powered skates.
All the elements such as the jaw-dropping stop motion effect, the incredible metallic soundtrack, the smart sound mixing, the extreme film editing, the black and white cinematography and an highly innovative story come together beautifully and prove that cinema, indeed, is limitless and low budget can never suppress a man's vision.
And the strange electronic music by 'Chu Ishikawa' brings to life the metallic, teeth gnawing, body-horror, that is frequently compared to David Lynch and Cronenberg.It's hard to describe the story in Tetsuo, it's a true surrealist nightmare!
A man known only as the "metal fetishist" (played by the films director Shinya Tsukamoto), whose insane 'fetish' is to insert pieces of scrap metal into his own body, is hit by a car.
After that, strange things start happening to poor Tetsuo as metal pieces appear on some parts of his body and becomes almost like a semi-cyborg as the person who originally started the whole accident begins to taunt him through his horrifying transformation to the path of destruction.Weird and mind bending Japanese Sci-fi horror shock-feast with surreal and disturbing imagery blended with bizarre special effects and stop motion animation with it as well, the movie is a hyperactive and gory little movie with a complicated plot but some nice gore and violence along with it.
The movie is like a dark nightmare come true in the tradition of David Lynch and David Croneberg, this film is not for every taste but worth a view if your into Japanese flicks, Sci-fi with horror and gore flicks.Also recommended: "Videodrome", " Scanners", " Akira", " Re-Animator", "Dead Alive", " Street Trash", " The Fly ( 1986)", " The Toxic Avenger", " Doom", " Day of the Dead", " Ichi The Killer", "Riki-Oh: The Story of Ricky", "Battle Royale", "Versus", " Perfect Blue", " Eraserhead", " High Tension", "Caligula", "Hostel", " Bad Taste", "C.H.U.D.", "Evil Dead 1 & 2", " The Thing ( 1982)", " Shivers", "Rabid", "The Brood", " Terror Firmer", " 3 Extremes", " Fist of the North Star ( 1986 anime version)", " Ghost in The Shell 1 & 2", " Driller Killer", " Troma's War", " Predator", " Cannibal Holocaust", " Cannibal Ferox", " Cannibal Apocalypse", " Basket Case", " Sin City", " From Dusk Till Dawn", " Vampire Hunter D (1985)", "Urotsukidoji: Legend of the Overfiend", " Demons", "Suspiria", " Inferno", "Phenomena", "Terminator 1 & 2", "City of the Living Dead ( a.k.a. Gates of Hell)", "Bio-Zombie", " House By The Cemetery", "Hellraiser 1 & 2", " Evil Ed", " Nightmare on Elm Street Series", "Freddy Vs. Jason", "Tokyo Fist", "Oldboy", " Shogun Assassin", " Jason X", "House of Wax (2005)", "Blood Diner", " Jason Goes To Hell: The Final Friday", " Bride of Re-Animator", "Beyond Re-Animator", " Metropolis ( 1927 and 2001 versions)", " Natural Born Killers", "Maniac ( 1980)", "Last House on The Left", " Se7en", " Jin-Roh", " Saw 1 & 2", " The Elephant Man", "The Devil's Rejects", "Men Behind The Sun", "Citizen Toxie: The Toxic Avenger part 4", "Robot Carnival", " "Troma's War", "Combat Shock" and "Blood Feast"..
Unlike most movies known for their extremely divisive weirdness, "Tetsuo" is a film that definitely has a clear plot, as well as reoccurring main characters.
If a movie in which a man tries to stick his power tool penis in a screaming victim in one of its more toned down scenes sounds good to you, you will adore this perverted work of genius!Personally, I love weird movies; after all, my favorite film of all time is "Eraserhead", which obviously inspired "Tetsuo" heavily.
Just think of it as a long nightmare that you can't escape.The scenes where the man slowly mutates into living metal is as horrible as it is satifying, and the labido thats turns into a drill.....enough said.This film rates as the ultimate head f**k, it only goes on for about an hour but you can't really go on watching it for much longer after that as it really messes you around.
This is a masterpiece of Japanese underground-cyberpunk-sci-fi.The whole 65 minutes of this movie are crammed and intense.Sure it is uncomfortable,sure its sick but hell,its compelling.Watching the metamorphasis of the main characters and using unique cinematography, gives this film the edge over a lot of its "underground" alternatives.Using stunning (though confusing) cut scenes and having an astonishing sondtrack ,makes Tetsuo an extremely difficult,but enjoyable viewing experience..
Things in this movie could and should had been wrapped up sooner and perhaps would had been a better watch if it was going somewhere different with its story toward the end.But for most part "Tetsuo" is simply being a visual experience.
Although the Salaryman and his girlfriend try to get on with their lives after the accident, things begin to go astray when the Salaryman notices a metal prong protruding from his cheek.Shot completely in black and white, the first fifteen minutes or so of the movie is quite stimulating because of its fast-paced action sequences, strangeness, and pulsating background music of Ishikawa Chu. However, for me anyway, the film grows a bit dull after thirty minutes because while visually stimulating, I would of liked the film to have more of a story..
The movie is entirely shot in black and white and it has an important use of the stop-motion technique, also used so many times by Tsukamoto in other films.
Tetsuo: The Iron Man is, definitely an amazing movie that tells a story in a weird cause-effect logic but that still understandable for the audience who males this travel throughout the mechanic and dirty world that the creator presents.
this is the second movie i've seen by Tsukamoto (the first being A Snake of June) although i've been wanting to see this and many other films by the director for a long long time.Tetsuo confused me a lot, i wasn't always 1005 sure of what was going on and the distorted camera angels and crazy re-arrangement of the plot made this even more difficult but i did enjoy this film very much and can see where it's influences were from and how it has since influenced (the ending of this film being very similar to that of D.O.A: Final by Miike Takashi for instance.I will definitely watch this movie again, i've come away from it remembering the atmosphere much more than the story and i feel this is a primal aspect of this film, it's very much a mood piece that engulfs everything.So what's the atmosphere like?
Yes, both Tetsuo and Eraserhead are weird films shot in black-and-white.
|
tt0122323
|
Young Hercules
|
The show features the efforts of Ares, the god of war, played by Kevin Tod Smith, who attempts often to destroy his younger half-brother to win over Zeus' good graces. Among his group is his nephew Strife (Joel Tobeck), who is the rather weaker member of the team. Strife's mother is Discord, goddess of retribution (Meighan Desmond), who acts more level-headed and power hungry than her counterpart on more than one occasion. The series has two other villains: Hera, queen of the gods and Hercules's stepmother; and Apollo, god of the sun and Hercules's half-brother.
The storyline follows Hercules (Ryan Gosling) as he attends Cheiron's Academy to train in the arts of the warrior under the wise headmaster Cheiron the Centaur (Nathaniel Lees). He makes friends with the future king of Corinth Prince Jason (Chris Conrad) and a thieving former member of a bandit group named Iolaus (Dean O'Gorman), who was sentenced to train at the academy as an alternative to prison for his crimes. Hercules also meets the academy's first female cadet, Lilith (Jodie Rimmer). Other characters of interest include Kora, the inn keeper who unknown to Hercules and his friends is a devotee of Artemis: Goddess of the Hunt. As the series develops, Kora is revealed to have special powers which allow her to do Artemis' bidding. There are hints of romance between Hercules and Kora, although their friendship keeps it all innocent.
|
good versus evil
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Great Movie.
Ian Bohen is so much better than that annoying blond kid who played Young Herc on the tv show.
I would have hated the movie if blondie was in it.
The story was pretty good too.
The thing I liked the most was that Ares wasn't a wimpy, irritating characther like he is on Hercules and Xena: he's more evil and that's the way I like him.
There's also a great fight scene at the end..
use of succes.
The strange aspect is to not can criticize it.
it is a MTV film, with a precise target, without high ambitions and proposing a more than easy story.
the only virtue is Ian Bohen, as a good looking Hercules but far to be credible for the viewer who knows some Greek mythology.
the film is almost an improvisation.
or a mixture of characters, adventures, good intentions and fight scenes.
nothing coherent, nothing credible.
but right choice for a generation who, after 20 years, is , at first sigh, more preocupated by technology and video games, for who the easy stories - this more than the series - are good entertainment.
after Xen and Hercules series, this film is not surprising or error.
it represents only the use of succes in most simple way.
nothing wrong.
if you loos for real easy films..
Nice try but it falls short..
The director has created a clan of caricatures who only fleetingly rise to the level of characters.
The visual effects are primarily swirling montages and the music track overpowers many scenes.
Inclusion of some episodes from the mythological story of Jason and the Golden Fleece leaves this plot merely episodic and confused.
It's barely a nice try..
Mythology meets MTV.
I made the error of buying the DVD of this, so I thought I would write a warning to others to beware.
I found modest acting, dialog written in teenage mall slang, lots of tilting and panning camera moves meant to enhance the illusion of excitement, and painfully fractured Greek mythology (since when was the Greek god of war meant to be a scheming villain?).
My roommate, his girlfriend and I watched it in a sort of amazed stupor.
Ian Bohen is cute, that's about all I can say in its favor..
A great movie, much better than the title that spawned it.
I thought this was a very well-done film.
Between the acting, the good dialogue, decent special effects and good fight scenes, there's nothing about this film that I didn't love.
All the actors did a good job of playing very well-written characters.
The fact that this movie was such high quality isn't a surprise considering that it was a trailblazer to the few (unfortunately) flashback episodes of the regular Hercules show which (in my opinion anyway) were MUCH better than the regular show that had the regular, older cast.
The `young' episodes showed Herc learning about the world, and said a few things about the pressures he met in life, ****MINOR SPOILERS**** just some of them of him being made fun of because he was looking for true love instead of empty sex, and especially the wartime episode where his platoon was surprised to think that the enemy thought of itself as the 'good guys', just like they did.
It was a classic scene of meeting the enemy and having it be a reflection of one's self.
Followed that up by a scared expression on young Jason's face when he came across real combat and body parts started flying in every direction, and nightmares that the characters experienced in those precious few episodes, along with a charming friendship between Herc, Iolaus and Jason (all three played much better by the younger actors as opposed to those older, uglier ones) made this story great to watch.
From this movie, the scene that stole the already awesome film was when ************SPOILERS*********** Jason's father had been healed by the Golden Fleece, and Aries listens to Jason exclaim how `it's a gift from the gods', and Aries' response is that `gods give, and gods take', before he snaps Jason's father's neck, killing him instantly and then stabbing Jason with a knife in revenge to the trio's adventures that killed his giant creature.
Following that scene we have young Herc ordering (or more like screaming at) someone to get the Golden Fleece in an effort to save Jason's life.
That one acting scene by Ian Bohen had more intensity in it than most other so-called 'dramatic' scenes that other shows or movies try to achieve and, most of the time, fail to do so.
Just don't get me started on how this incredible movie which created several incredible flashback episodes of Hercules : The Legendary Journeys, thus being a spin-off that was way better than the show it was created from, then ended up being a lousy half-hour long Power Rangers clone on Saturday morning, which also brought us some blonde pipsqueak playing the part of young Herc instead of Ian Bohen.
I had heard that was the case because Bohen had refused to permanently move to New Zealand to film there.
Maybe, or maybe not.
But that doesn't explain why the writing went from being better than Hercules and Xena to being worse than them!
Either way, that awful show died after one season anyway, which wasn't surprising at all considering it sucked.
So all in all, definitely see this movie, and if you're able to find Hercules : The Legendary Journeys as reruns on your TV, also definitely look out for the handful of episodes that this cast was given charge of as the trio are like a classy version of the three musketeers.
Just too bad that winning combination was axed soon afterwards.
Just another example of Hollywood being an overblown machine that has too much money and not nearly enough creativity within it.
|
tt0120812
|
Rush Hour
|
On the last day of British rule in Hong Kong late 1997, Detective Inspector Lee of the Hong Kong Police Force leads a raid at a shipping bar wharf, hoping to arrest the mysterious crime lord Juntao. He finds only Sang, Juntao's right-hand man, who manages to escape. However, Lee successfully recovers numerous Chinese cultural treasures stolen by Juntao, which he presents as a farewell victory to his departing superiors: Chinese Consul Solon Han and British Commander Thomas Griffin.
Shortly after Han arrives in the United States to take up his new diplomatic post in Los Angeles, his daughter, Soo Yung, is kidnapped by Sang while on her way to her first day of school. The FBI informs Consul Han about the incident. Han calls in Lee to assist in the case. The FBI is afraid that the injury or death of Lee would result in negative attention internationally, decide to pawn him off on the LAPD just to keep him out of their way. The arrogant, reckless and loudmouthed detective, James Carter is tricked into doing this but Carter makes a plan to solve the case himself when he finds out that he has been given a mundane task as punishment for botching a sting operation.
Carter meets Lee at Los Angeles International Airport and proceeds to take him on a sightseeing tour of LA, simultaneously keeping Lee away from the embassy and contacting several of his underworld informants about the kidnapping. Lee finally escapes and makes his way to the Chinese Consulate, where an anxious Han and a group of FBI agents are awaiting news about his daughter. While being reprimanded by Agent-in-charge Warren Russ, Carter accidentally involves himself in a phone conversation with Sang, where he arranges a ransom drop of $50 million in a couple of hours.
The FBI traces the call to a warehouse and sends in a team of agents only to have them killed by a bomb. Spotting Sang nearby, Lee and Carter give chase, but Sang escapes, dropping the detonator in the process. Carter's colleague, LAPD bomb expert Tania Johnson, helps them trace the detonator to Clive, a man previously arrested by Carter. Clive is guilt-tripped by Lee into revealing his business relationship with Juntao whom he met a restaurant in Chinatown and this earns Carter's trust in Lee. Carter goes to the restaurant alone where he sees a surveillance video of Juntao carrying Soo-Yung into a van. Lee arrives and rescues Carter, but the two are taken off the case after the FBI blames them for ruining the ransom drop with Lee being sent back to Hong Kong. Despite this setback, Carter appeals to Johnson for assistance and sneaks onboard Lee's plane, persuading Lee to help finish the case and stop Juntao. Griffin later involves himself in the case, revealing more about the HKPF's past with Juntao's syndicate.
At the opening of a Chinese art exhibition at the Los Angeles Convention Center, which Han and Griffin are overseeing, the now $70 million ransom is being delivered. Carter, Lee and Johnson enter disguised as guests, where Carter distracts the guests into leaving for safety. This angers the FBI, but also blows Griffin's cover, as Lee catches him walking over to a bar and accepting a remote for the detonator from Sang. He and Johnson both conclude that Griffin is Juntao because Carter recognizes him from a surveillance tape in Chinatown. Griffin threatens to detonate a bomb vest attached to Soo Yung and demands the money be paid in full in compensation to the loss of the priceless Chinese artifacts he worked so hard to preserve. However, Carter manages to sneak out, locate her in the van, drives it into the building and brings her within range of Griffin, knowing that setting it off would kill him as well.
Johnson manages to get the vest off Soo Yung while Griffin heads toward the roof with the bag of money. Lee takes the vest and pursues Griffin while Carter shoots Sang dead in a gunfight. Lee eventually catches up to Griffin, resulting in a brief battle that culminates in the two dangling from the rafters under the roof. Griffin, holding onto the vest, falls to his death when the vest breaks, but before Lee falls, Carter is able to place a large flag underneath and catch him safely.
Han and Soo Yung are reunited, and Han sends Carter and Lee on vacation together to Hong Kong as a reward for their actions. Before Carter leaves, Agents Russ and Whitney offer him a position in the FBI, which he rudely refuses. Carter gets on the airplane with Lee, who starts singing Edwin Starr's "War", annoying Carter.
|
comedy, murder, bleak, violence, humor, action, revenge, entertaining
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
I think Americans love Jackie Chan because he's so nice and great person.The main reason why I like this movie is the wonderful duo they play, constantly arguing, while walking around exciting California, USA, about everything, but in the meantime they are loyal partners.
Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan, the best comedic duo since Lethal Weapon bring us Rush Hour.
Rush Hour is one of those very fun action/comedy movies that I'm sure you'll enjoy if you love movies like Lethal Weapon or 48 Hours.
Obviously, "Rush Hour" is mostly just another buddy comedy, but there's so much hilarious dialogue between Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker, that it's all worthwhile.
Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker are a definite revelation!The cast in RUSH HOUR prove themselves worthy of their roles.
Newcomer Julie Hsu is also fabulous as a hostage who proves to be more difficult for the bad guys than they can handle...RUSH HOUR has top notch stunts mixed with one-of-a-kind comical moments which help make this film an enlightening combination of action and comedy, with a dash of Chan's fantastic skill work.The Chan-Tucker collaboration is the best on-screen duo since Abbott & Costello!
Again, the action in RUSH HOUR is no short of exhilarating with outrageous sequences such as Chan trying to protect a valuable vase from the wrath of the bad guys.Great dance moves by Tucker, but nobody impresses the audience like Jackie Chan leaping from place to place, mowing down the bad guys!
This film is Jackie Chan's and Chris Tucker's finest hour.
Which it does - there's not as much action for Jackie Chan as I would have liked and his fight scenes feel toned down in favour of Tucker's manic comedy (this was partially reversed in RH2).
The bad guys are quite characterless but it doesn't really matter as the lead duo manage to carry the film.Overall a good buddy cop movie that is a good vehicle for both Chan and Tucker and plays on both their strengths to good effect.
Even though this movie might be a bit conventional, it's thoroughly entertaining, with nice action scenes, cool martial arts fighting & a good sense of humor.
It's a good concept, to combine the humor of Chris Tucker with the martial arts of Jackie Chan.
A funny cop buddy film, with a good chemistry between Chan and Tucker.
Some of the martial arts/karate that Chan does in the film is impressive, just like in all his films, and Tucker does a good job playing the loud mouth(even if he did get out of hand sometimes).
After being disappointed (originally) with Chris Tucker in The Fifth Element, as I was with that entire movie, I didn't want to see Rush Hour thinking it would be mainly a Chris Tucker vehicle, even though I was/am a huge Jackie Chan fan.Well, I rewatched The Fifth Element and actually liked it a whole lot more and was willing to give the 1998 opposite buddy cop movie a shot.
Rush Hour is a 1998 American buddy cop action comedy film starring Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker as two cops that have nothing in common working together to rescue the daughter of a Chinese diplomat who has been captured while also arresting a crime lord.
I was suspicious of Tucker, but as long as it was the new Chan movie it ought to be okay.Right ?Wrong !I found myself forced into one of the most annoying fake interracial buddy-buddy action/comedy blockbusters I have ever had the displeasure to had to sit through.Rush Hour is nothing more than a Chris Tucker Star Vehicle with Jackie reduced to a "Chinaman" sidekick.
That's all good and fine if you're under such heavy medication that you think Tucker is actually funny but after two minutes of him doing his little Eddie Murphy rip off routine I was ready to climb on a rooftop with an AK-47 and let justice rain from the sky.Throw in a mentally challenged plot, bad acting, the old "where did all the money from the big budget go ?" complaint and a director who couldn't direct an action scene to save his life and you got this feature length misery.If you're ready to see a real Jackie Chan movie, go to your local video-shop and rent Operation Condor.
The movie is very awesome comedy.The direction by bredd ratner is good.The screenplay is good.The editing was OK.The acting was awesome from Jackie Chan and cris Tucker.The story is good.The story is about a honest hong kong police inspector teams up with a reckless and loudmouthed LAPD dectective to rescue The Chinese counsels kidnapped daughter wioe trying to arrest the dangerous crime lord along the way.The comedy was awesome.Both the 3 parts were good.Overall a must watch comedy movie and a must watch for Jackie chan fans.Now I am finally waiting for rush hour 4 which is announced and going to be released..
'Rush Hour' is an average, generic action/comedy movie that is saved by the duo of Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan, who are frankly the only thing about this film that makes it somewhat interesting.
Although Jackie Chan is amazing, Chris Tucker is the real star, a real 'brother' with heaps of attitude and some of the funniest lines in film history.
Rush Hour is a great movie with a well written storyline and a very talented comedic cast.The movie is filled with a ton of hilarious scenes from start to finish,most of that coming from Chris Tucker,who apparently improves most of his lines,which is so impressive because there hilarious most of the time.Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan make a great team,Tucker is the comedic person and Chan is the action star,it's a great combination and it also helped that the two seemed to really enjoy making this movie together.Rush Hour is a hilarious movie that I would recommend to anyone looking for a good comedy or action.A marital arts expert cop and hapless LAPD detective must retrieve the kidnapped daughter of a diplomat.Best Performance: Chris Tucker.
Huh rush hour is very boring all it is are two cops go after a crime syndicate.the film is tripe and has lame humor which is all i saw Chris tucker was awful and not even funny.
15 years ago, director Brett Ratner and stars Jackie Chan & Chris Tucker unleashed the first film in the "Rush Hour" series unto the masses.
The film has an oddly timeless feeling, adding much to its appeal and charm as one of the better "Buddy Cop" films to emerge in the past 20 years.Chan stars as Detective Inspector Lee, a Hong Kong Police Officer who is brought to the US to help his friend, a Chinese Consul whose daughter has been kidnapped.
However, Lee's steadfast dedication to his duty soon brings the two mis-matched officers back into the case, and they realize they may be the only one's capable of saving the kidnapped child.Chan and Tucker's performances and chemistry are the beating heart of the film, and are what makes it function and come off so well.
But even that cannot diminish the fun performances and good filmmaking behind this movie."Rush Hour" may not be the best film ever made, but it's a blast to watch, and has excellent entertainment value.
Although a simple plot the pace of the movie, dialogue, situations and above all the chemistry between Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker is fantastic.
Bruce Willis is a pretty bad actor but die hard doesn't have a 6.8/10 This is probably one of the funniest movies i've ever seen and Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan are a great match.
Rush Hour is a fine film from the 90s that even after you watch now, you will still be laughing hard, the movie came out same year that Lethal Weapon 4 was released, which also starred a martial art actor Jet Li. So for me as Lethal Weapon stopped, this two picked up from where it stopped and are keeping the buddy cop flame burning.www.lagsreviews.com.
This is a far better movie then a lot of his other Hollywood flicks like The Tuxedo, The Medallion and The Forbidden Kingdom.I'm not normally a Chris Tucker fan since I usually find him to be really annoying but it works well here in this movie, Chris and Jackie have great chemistry together.
This film is one awesome venture with the presence of both Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker helping to create a winner for the action genre.
This film is one awesome venture with the presence of both Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker helping to create a winner for the action genre.
Newcomer Julie Hsu is also fabulous as a hostage who proves to be more difficult for the bad guys than they can handle...RUSH HOUR has top notch stunts mixed with one-of-a-kind comical moments which help make this film an enlightening combination of action and comedy, with a dash of Chan's fantastic skill work..
this is a pretty good movie.it's an action adventure comedy.there is a lot of action and the movie is fast paced.there isn't a lot of comedy,but comedy bits there are,are pretty funny.Jackie Chan's acrobatic,over the top cartoonish martial arts moves are funny.Chris Tucker's motor mouth character is pretty funny at times.also the teaming of Chan and Tucker is a great idea.they work well off each other.one could not be more opposite from the other.i liked their back and forth banter.the other thing i like about this movie is that even though there is some violence,it's not excessive,and there is a bit of coarse language,but not very much.for me,Rush Hour is a 7/10.
The two stars of the film, martial arts master Jackie Chan and comedian Chris Tucker make a great team for the big screen.
Tucker's high-pitched voice, facial expressions, and well-written lines in the screenplay bring about several laughs which keep us entertained whenever there's not a karate fight going on before us.Bottom line, "Rush Hour" is a very effective comedy-action film that stands high above others that were made before it and still to this day try to imitate its effective style.
The main point is that Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker make a great team for entertaining an audience.
although neither one of them will ever be as great as Eddy Murphy.In "Rush hour", Chris Tucker plays the total opposite of Jackie Chan which means: all talk but hardly any walk!
He is most famous for his role in "X-Men: The last stand" where he played a mutant who was able to sprout spikes from his body (which obviously makes it very hard for anyone to give him a hug without getting hurt.)In short: A simple yet intelligent comedy which is slightly different yet becomes a very original buddy cop movie due to the martial arts by Jackie Chan.
Rated PG-13 for sequences of action/violence and shootings, and for language.Rush Hour is a cop/buddy film in the vein of 48hrs starring Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker.Two very funny actors in one very funny movie.Rush Hour is an entertaining film with some fun action scenes.The sequel Rush Hour 2 is also great but not as good as the first.I have not seen the third film yet.Rush Hour is about a cop from china who goes to America to help in the investigation of a man's daughter getting kidnapped.He is teamed up with a loud-mouth cop named Carter.At first they dislike each other but as they investigate further they start liking each other.Rush Hour is a hilarious cop film!.
Rush Hour is a good Action/Comedy that deserves the high rating it has on IMDb as Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker make an awesome team.
Chris Tucker and Jackie Chans performance is incredibly good and deserves 10 percent of my rating.
The interaction of Lee and Carter, makes this movie a really fun one, entertaining, and with great action scenes with of course, a lot of martial arts with Jackie Chan's style (a particular typo of humor).
Really good action in two continents and good one and a half hour entertainment!ABOUT THE MOVIE: This movie is about two of the most rude police agents in the world; one from China (Chief Inspector Lee, represented by Jackie Chan), and the other from America (Detective James Carter, represented by Chris Tucker); in this funny movie they have to find and capture the terrorists behind the kidnapping of Soo Young (Julia Hsu), a little girl, daughter of the Chinese Consul in America (Consul Han, Tzi Ma); this girl was kidnapped by one of the Chinese mafias that looked for revenge against the consul, after he spoiled some drug operations that they where doing back in China; this mafia was leaded by Sang (Ken Leung) an evil and martial arts expert; the confidence that the consul has on Chief Inspector Lee, creates a quest of two continents in the search of the little girl, and where they start to find obscure relations between the Chinese and some people in high positions on some official departments of USA..
In this movie, Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker's combination was really fun.
Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker gave a great performance playing against each other and then deciding to join forces together and fight the real bad dudes in Los Angeles.
Jackie Chan, (Chief Inspector Lee),"San Wa",'05, visits the LAPD and is assigned a so called FBI pal, Chris Tucker,(Detective James Carter),"Jackie Brown",'97, who finds out the job he is assigned to is like a Babysitter for Inspector Lee. There is plenty of action and car chases as Lee is trying to locate a missing little gal who gets into the hands of some very bad dudes and there is plenty of people being killed through out the entire picture.
To me, Carter (Chris Tucker) and Lee (Jackie Chan) were very tough and funny guys.
Now, in conclusion, if you like Chris Tucker or Jackie Chan films, I highly recommend this movie.
Overall if your into a good buddy cop movie with Chan doing some nice stunts as always then you'll like this.
The dynamic duo started of with Rush Hour which, since I like action-comedy movies, is one of my favorites.
Starring: Jackie Chan, Chris Tucker I remember when this movie first came out.
Jackie Chan brings us his trademark martial arts skills as detective inspector Li, and Chris Tucker also give us his trademark skills playing James Carter as the world's most obnoxious and loud-mouthed schmuck.So here's the deal.
Jackie Chan's martial arts skills are as good as ever, and Chris Tucker is
well, annoying.
The film's fun comes from the acting and leading charm of Chan and Tucker, who both make the movie all that more enjoyable and funny.
What you get with this kind of movies is a lot of action, some special moves and nice fighting scenes, but it doesn't take itself too serious.Even though I'm not the biggest fan of martial arts films, I have to admit that I had a good time watching this one.
Tucker is very good as the loud mouth screw up who doesn't like to work with a partner and Jackie Chan is very impressive with all his moves.
This movie can be described in 4 words: Hilarious Entertaining Good PlotJakie Chan and Chris Tucker prove to be the best Action Comedy team in this movie.
Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan actually make a pretty good team and help reclaim a kidnapped daughter, spiting the annoying, know-it-all FBI agents..
Jackie Chan plays a Chinese detective who is sent to California to solve a kidnapping, but the FBI wants none of his help so they hire Chris Tucker to babysit him.
Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker make a great team and they will make you laugh in every scene they are in together.
Chris Tucker as Det. Carter with a big mouth and Jackie Chan as Det. Lee make Lethal Weapon 4 look like a girl scout cookie.
What was different from this film and Rush Hour 2 was the actually plot that made it interesting to watch, not to mention Jackie Chan kicking ass as he and detective carter try to get bad guys.3 stars.
Naturally, they're going to resolve their differences and kill all the bad guys.I watch Jackie Chan movies for jaw-dropping martial arts action and amazing stunts.
But aside from those two scenes, there's not a lot of great action, and that's partially where the film disappoints.Without the heaps of adrenaline-pumping fights, we have Chris Tucker as the comic "relief." Is he funny?
Thrills laughs and action collide as funny guy Chris Tucker and action man Jackie Chan star in Rush Hour.
Chan is good (like most of the times in his movies) with his ocasional laughs and fast action moves.
If only Tucker acted out his character in the sequel like he did in this film, then this and Rush Hour 2 would be a pair of good movies.
Great action scenes that amaze,even though you are supposed to be laughing at Tucker,and Chan.
I also liked the part when Jackie Chan, use his kartie stunts, he sure does a great job on that and it was excellent and yes Chris Tuckers, was funny and I love it and I think they should be partners forever.
After watching this movie I am sure Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan really make a great duet.
Personally, I liked the movie and thought that it was really funny, one of my favorite scenes is when Tucker and Chan sing the song, "War, what is it good for?
Jackie Chan has made movies in America before and this one probably comes closest to his Hong Kong films in the action sequences.
Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan worked good together on this movie.
This movie is very funny, and of course with Jackie Chan in, it is full of action.
Both Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan were great.
Both Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan were great.
I have never seen Chris Tucker in a movie before, but he did a very good job in "Rush Hour".
|
tt0043435
|
Cry Danger
|
Rocky Mulloy was sentenced to life in prison for a robbery and murder that he didn't commit. He's released five years later when a witness named Delong appears and provides an alibi. Rocky then sets out to find who framed him, hoping that by uncovering the actual criminals, he'll be able to free his friend Danny Morgan, also accused of the same crime.
Delong is lying about the alibi. What he really wants is a share of the missing robbery loot. Rocky insists he wasn't involved. They go see Morgan's wife, Nancy, a former love of Rocky's, who now lives in a trailer park.
Police Lt. Gus Cobb keeps an eye on Rocky because he's still convinced of his guilt. Rocky believes that bookie Louis Castro is the mastermind. He demands $50,000 at gunpoint. Castro won't agree to that, but gives him $500 to bet on a fixed horse race.
Shots are fired at Delong and girlfriend Darlene near the trailer and she is killed. Nancy believes the intended victims were Rocky and herself. Rocky goes back to Castro and plays Russian roulette until Castro reveals where the robbery money can be found. It turns out Morgan was indeed involved and that Nancy now has his share.
Lt. Cobb gradually comes to believe Rocky's innocence. Nancy says she loves him and invites him to run off together with the loot, but Rocky leaves her for the law.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Dick Powell gets off a train at the Union Station after spending 5 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit.
Powell intends to prove not only his innocence, but that of his buddy.Add to the mix William Conrad as a bad guy with his own agenda and you have a better than average noir.
I'm fairly new to film noir (started getting into the style in my mid to late teens, and now at twenty, I'm a fanatic) and while I've seen almost all of the massive hits, the films that define the genre to the critics and the movie-loving public, I've found that my personal favorites are films like these, the ones that are so obscure you just might stumble upon them on accident and find that you've unearthed a treasure trove!
From there, we're introduced to a set of characters so shady and so thoroughly corrupted by circumstances beyond their control that the story itself must logically take place in one of the seediest, most dilapedated settings to have ever been featured as a primary backdrop in a film noir...a worn-down trailer park!
The cramped trailer that Dick Powell and Richard Erdman share looks like it could have easily been ground zero for a moderately large hurricane, but as this is a west-coast noir, the above theory can be easily disputed.
His prickly temper informs Robert Parrish's Cry Danger, the last true noir he would appear in before affecting a pipe and cardigans in The Bad and the Beautiful.Carrying a grip with the weight of the world in it, Powell steps off a train in Los Angeles; he's just spent five years in prison for a robbery and murder for which he took the rap.
But Powell has never met this old buddy before.Nonetheless, they throw their lot together and rent an armadillo-like trailer in a run-down park, where the wife of his old partner (Rhonda Fleming) lives, too.
Powell has scores to settle, beginning with big-time bookie William Conrad who, he reckons, owes him $50-grand.
He starts stalking Conrad for revenge, even though he's dodging pot-shots in the trailer park, while the duplicity that ensnared him lies much closer to home....Cry Danger has a number of points in its favor, chief among them the pitiless photography of Joseph Biroc (it's decidedly the low-rent side of the City of Angels).
Powell moves into a seamy trailer park on a hill overlooking the downtown (there is a great film shot of this) and teams with a disabled ex-marine.
Castro is definitely bad news for everyone around him.The plot is not exceptional and certainly does not transcend B-movie standards, but the film is visually good and somehow the characters and the setting create a milieu which draws in the viewer.
Dick Powell, Rhonda Fleming, Regis Toomey, Richard Erdman, and Jean Porter star in "Cry Danger," a 1951 film directed by Robert Parrish.
Powell plays Rocky Mulloy, an ex-con, recently released from prison after an alibi appears that clears him of a robbery/murder.
The Marine wants money from the robbery.The two rent a trailer in a trailer park, where the wife (Rhonda Fleming) of his ex-partner, who is still in prison, lives.
Rocky goes after a bookie (William Conrad) who cheated him and unknowingly bets on a fixed race, is paid in the robbery money, which sends the police after him.It's good to read the comments for this film and realize that many people appreciate the versatility and talent of Dick Powell.
Not all of his later films were "A" productions, but he was always excellent.The performances by Erdman and Conrad are very good.
Rhonda Fleming is her usual beautiful self, and Jean Porter plays a lively party girl.This is a good noir that captures the atmosphere of post-war LA, the down and out side of it.
Somehow, I missed this little gem over the years.Excellent location filming, combined with a compelling script and great acting - a definite must-see for "film noir" fans.
Richard Erdman and Jean Porter are excellent in their supporting roles.It was rare in 1951, to see so many actual locations in a film, but this is obviously a low-budget enterprise.
"Cry Danger" was shot at two locations on Bunker Hill, one at the corner of Third and Olive (the Amigos Club, where William Conrad had an upstairs office) and the other at the New Grand Hotel complex on the northwest corner of Third and Grand (where Conrad tricked Dick Powell into winning a bet with hot money from the robbery that had sent him to prison).
(To see film stills matched with 2010 photos, check out www.electricearl.com/bh.) I recently (April 2010) saw the restored film version of "Cry Danger" at the Egyptian Theater in Hollywood (where, incidentally, Rhonda Fleming and Richard Erdman were on hand to talk about the movie), and I can attest that the location scenes drew audible breaths and exclamations from the audience.
When his career floundered he changed genres and became one of the movies' best tough guys, in many ways better in the role than Humphrey Bogart, although Powell never became the cult hero Bogart became.
William Conrad's Castro is an excellent foil for Powell's character, Rocky Mulloy.
Rocky (Dick Powell) and Delong(Erdman)have trouble with their women in "Cry Danger." Both Rhonda Fleming and Jean Porter turn in creditable performances and add to the overall effectiveness of the film.
Good dialog and a fast-moving story make this one of the better somewhat-unknown film noirs of its day.Dick Powell and Jay Adler wisecrack their way through this film with some humorous sarcasm.
His dialog with the tough cop, played by Regis Toomey, also is excellent stuff.Jean Porter provides added humor with her supporting role as the bimbo-thief date for Adler and Rhonda Fleming adds beauty.
A younger William Conrad - with a dark head of hair and a mustache - also has a key role in here.Even though it is classified as film noir, I'm not sure it belongs in that category because it doesn't feature the brooding, dark type of characters and atmosphere one usually sees in that genre.
With Cry Danger, Dick Powell said good bye to the noir genre that had served him well since his electrifying Philip Marlowe in Murder My Sweet.
He's out now due to an alibi provided by Richard Erdman who says Powell had been drinking with him the night the robbery had taken place.With five years of his life taken from him, Powell's out to find who framed him and he hunts with only the determination Dick Powell can muster.
Good photography of the seamy side of Los Angeles, especially the trailer park where Powell is residing with Erdman, Rhonda Fleming who's the wife of his partner who's still in prison and Erdman's gal Jean Porter.
After five years in prison wrongly accused of robbery of US$ 100,000.00 and murder, Rocky Mulloy (Dick Powell) is released when the ex-marine Delong (Richard Erdman) gives the necessary alibi to him.
They go to visit Nancy (Rhonda Fleming), who was Rocky´s former girlfriend that married his best friend Danny Morgan that is in prison for the same robbery, and she welcomes Rocky.
He ached to do something more and around the end of WWII he got it--a great string of tough film noir movies.
Forever grim and determined, he is a the archetype of an unhappy man, and usually, as in "Cry Danger," he's out to fix some problem.This is a Dick Powell movie all the way, and a really good one.
There are some great secondary characters, especially the mob leader William Conrad and a suspicious and wise-cracking Marine sidekick played by Richard Erdman.
William Conrad, who is thirty at the time of filming here, went on to be television's "Cannon" and "Jake and the Fat Man," but he appeared in a bunch of these B-list noirs and is good every time.
Set in run-down bars and trailer parks of downtown Los Angeles, it has a patina of grime to counterbalance its sense of humor and to satisfy those who like their noirs seedy.Grade: A.
So when Rocky Mulloy (Dick Powell) is freed from a life sentence after five years - for a crime he didn't commit - he's eager to hunt down those who framed him; and also, to do what he can to clear his buddy, Danny Morgan, still in stir.
No sooner after detraining at Union Station, Rocky's buttonholed by police Detective Cobb (Regis Toomey) who's accompanied by an ex- marine, Delong (Richard Erdman), both wanting to know: So, Rocky ...
Cobb wants to recover the money for his investigation; Delong wants his just reward for providing Rocky with the alibi that freed him from jail.Cobb lets Rocky walk away with Delong, but puts a 24/7 tail on them as they make their way downtown to catch up with Danny's wife, Nancy (Rhonda Fleming), at a low rent, seedy caravan park.
From there, while leaving Delong hitting on ravishing blonde Darlene (Jean Porter), Rocky sets his sights - and his Colt .45 pistol - on Castro (a very young William Conrad), the bookie who must know - right?
And don't miss Rocky's final confrontation with Castro: a tour de force of terrifying torture rarely seen in movies of this era.All the while, Dick Powell delivers great one-liners like no other actor; and with a cool, savoir-faire not again seen, in my opinion, until Mr Cool - Steve McQueen - arrived on the scene in the early sixties.
Jean Porter, who appears in this film as Darlene, claimed in an interview in later life that this film was really directed by Dick Powell himself, but that he allowed Robert Parrish to take the credit.
Prolific Director of Photography: Josef Biroc (It's a Wonderful Life '46, The Detective '69) captures the seedy sets designed by Hungarian Joseph Kish, to the point where you can almost smell the mold and dust on the walls.Paul Dunlap (Walk Like a Dragon '60, and several Samuel Fuller efforts) along with Emil Newman, are credited with the Music Score, but others were also involved, so it comes across as pretty much like a stock Library effort.Not first class Noir, but should please lovers of 50's mystery double features and, any work by Powell is worth watching..
It stars Dick Powell, Rhonda Fleming, Richard Erdman, Regis Toomey and William Conrad.
Engaging, compact crime meller has Dick Powell in excellent form as Rocky Mulloy, framed for a robbery and out of jail on parole after serving five years; he's being tailed by a Los Angeles police lieutenant, who thinks Rocky knows the whereabouts of the loot never retrieved from the heist.
Second-rate noir, made curiously memorable by atmospheric LA locations, a sardonic Richard Erdman, and a good look at history's ugliest car--the 1950 Nash 4-door sedan, an inverted bathtub cleverly disguised as a passenger vehicle.At the top of the list are the principal players, led by a usually capable Dick Powell who's supposed to be a hardened ex-con, but whose clean-cut looks and Brooks Brothers suit instead suggest nothing more menacing than an insurance company executive.
There's also Hy Averback's energized bookie, Joan Banks' mature vamping, Jay Adler's bad ukele playing, and that quietly inspired moment when alcoholic Erdman casts aside nourishing food and milk for yet one more drink and the dipso ward.Nonetheless, the loosening of classic noir standards is evidenced here by an absence of conflict between light and shadow and by a moral universe beginning to harden and stabilize, especially around Powell's unconflicted personality.
A Class Act. Cry Danger – 1951Dick Powell shines in this mid cycle film noir.
He says he was framed and wants to get even.This film noir is a true gem with some of the best use of location shooting in the genre.
Add all this to a screenplay from noir veteran, William Bowers, and we have a genuine classic.The cast includes, Dick Powell, Rhonda Fleming, Richard Erdman, Regis Toomey, Jean Porter, William Conrad, Jay Adler and Gloria Saunders.Dick Powell – He is very good as the less than pleased man just out of prison, who is trying to clear his name.
This is, in my humble opinion, his best noir role.Richard Erdman – Erdman also hands in an excellent performance as the alibi who arranged for Powell to be sprung from prison.
His voice can be heard on many Quinn-Martin productions.Rhonda Fleming - WHEN STRANGERS MARRY, SPELLBOUND, THE SPIRAL STAIRCASE, OUT OF THE PAST, INFERNO, THE KILLER IS LOOSE, WHILE THE CITY SLEEPS, SLIGHTLY SCARLET, Regis Toomey – PHANTOM LADY, SPELLBOUND, STRANGE ILLUSION, THE BIG SLEEP, THE GUILTY, THE BIG FIX, HIGH TIDE, I WOULDN'T BE IN YOUR SHOES, UNDERCOVER GIRL, THE HUMAN JUNGLE.Jay Adler – THE UNDERWORLD STORY, THE MOB, SCANDAL SHEET, THE TURNING POINT, VICE SQUAD, THE LONG WAIT, 99 RIVER STREET, DOWN THREE DARK STREET, MURDER IS MY BEAT, THE BIG COMBO, ILLEGAL, SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS, CRIME OF PASSION, THE KILLING Robert Parrish –Twice Oscar nominated and one time winner, Parrish, was involved with, SHOOT FIRST and THE MOB as a director.
Jean Porter has a couple of good moments as the party girl living in the trailer park."Cry Danger" while not a fine example of the crime film, gives us a look at how Los Angeles looked like thanks to the good black and white photography by Joseph Biroc.
With plenty of action, humour and violence, it's gripping right from the start and its relentless pace ensures that audience interest stays at a high level throughout.After serving five years in prison for crimes he didn't commit (robbery and murder), Rocky Mulloy (Dick Powell) is released early from his life sentence when a disabled ex-marine called Delong (Richard Erdman) steps forward with a strong alibi.
Mulloy is out for revenge on whoever framed him and wants to hunt down the real criminals in order to clear his name and also that of his best friend Danny Morgan who's still in prison.Danny's wife (Rhonda Fleming) who was also one of Mulloy's ex-girlfriends, is one of his neighbours at the trailer park and seems interested in reviving their relationship.
The determined Mulloy is more focused on other priorities, however, and so goes to visit local crime boss Louie Castro (William Conrad) who he knows was involved in setting up the robbery and demands a payment of $50,000 as compensation for the years he spent in prison.
Dick Powell is convincingly tough, cynical and witty in a performance that makes his shady character very likable and Richard Erdman stands out among the supporting cast who are all extremely good..
Rocky Malloy(Dick Powell)is released from prison and immediately begins looking for who framed him for a robbery he did not commit.
**Spoilers** Railroaded into prison for life in a payroll robbery that resulted in the shooting death of a security guard US Marine combat veteran Rocky Mulloy, Dick Powell, is given a break after serving five years of a life sentence.
Taking out Danny's wife Nancy, Ronda Fleming, together with Delong and his kleptomaniac girlfriend Darlene LaVonne, Jean Porter, to celebrate Rocky is shocked to find out from Det. Gus Cobb, Regis Toomey, that Castro and his bookie Hy paid him off in hot money!
In fact the very money that was taken in the payroll heist/murder that he was sent to the state pen for!Better then your average film-noir crime drama with not as much darkness like in William Powell's earlier film-noir flicks.
No sooner has Rocky (Dick Powell of "Murder, My Sweet") gotten out of stir courtesy of a lame Marine, Delong (Richard Erdman of "Objective: Burma"), who has provided an alibi about clearing Rocky of a crime that our hero didn't commit.
The cops show up just as Castro's gunsels are coming to his rescue."Cry Danger" isn't the best movie that Powell ever made, but this atmospheric RKO release holds its own until the final revelations.
mixing alcohol with his snarky comments, he notes "The way I drink, you have to start early."The gorgeous Rhonda Fleming has the leading female role of the girlfriend of someone still in prison for being involved in the heist, making a play for Powell even though she is supposedly still in love with this man.
Conrad, later a hero as a character actor on prime-time TV, would be alternately cast in film noir if Raymond Burr was not available.he makes it wonderful smarmy villain, and it is fun to watch Powell play cat and mouse with him, making his potential take-down all the more delightful..
As for Flemming, she is excellent as the dame who loves Rocky (Powell).William Conrad is the heavy as he sets up Rocky with a fixed horse racing bet to give Rocky stolen money that the cops are looking for, There's more to it, but that is the base line I will go with rather than spoil the ending here.Filmed in California in glorious Black and white, the film is a "b" RKO feature that is just over an hour in length.
Like most noirs it packs a lot into an hour including Powell beating up Conrad..
This film is usually credited to director Robert Parrish alone, but in point of fact it was Dick Powell who directed and rehearsed the players, whilst Parrish and Joe Biroc concentrated on the camera set-ups.
This makes Cry Danger Powell's first film as a director – and a really notable achievement it is!
However, it is actually Richard Erdman, who plays Powell's bogus buddy, who delivers the film's standout performance.
Your average run of the mill film-noir with Dick Powell starring as a recently released prisoner, who comes home to try to prove that he was not involved in a robbery that killed someone and sent him up the river.Rhonda Fleming plays the almost-innocent wife of the guy who went to prison along with the Powell character.
The dialogue was actually not bad.Neither is he young nor good looking--mostly just boring reminds one of an insurance agent.The trailer park was fun to watch...1950 seediness.The 2 tonne Nash was fun too (how do the front wheels turn?)--part of the time machine effect.Film noir?
|
tt0085127
|
'A' gai wak
|
Sergeant Dragon Ma (Jackie Chan) is part of the Hong Kong Marine Police's effort to suppress the pirates, who have been raiding ships for months. Members of the Hong Kong Police Force and the MP, who have a strong interservice rivalries, get into a fight in a bar. Shortly after this, Captain Chi (Kwan Hoi-san) releases all of the sailors to their commanding officer, and two of the MP's ships get blown up.
Gangsters Chiang and Mr. Chou meet at a VIP Club, and discuss fleeing to Vietnam. As soon as Chiang leaves, he meets one of the pirates and they laugh about sabotaging the Marine Police ships. In the course of the conversation, the pirate tells him that his boss, San-po (Dick Wei), wants 100 police rifles.
As they do not have enough ships, Dragon Ma and his squad are forced to become regular police officers. They have to undergo "hard training" with the police, under Captain Chi's nephew, Hong Tin-tsu (Yuen Biao). After the police learn that Chiang is at the VIP Club, and that the guests there are not to be disturbed, Dragon and Tin-tsu go to arrest Chiang, but a big fight breaks out. After tiring of the blatant corruption in the police force, Dragon drags Chiang out and tells Tin-tsu to take the credit. That is his last official act as an officer with the Hong Kong police.
Fei (Sammo Hung) finds Dragon in the street. They have a conversation, in which Fei reveals that someone from within the police force is selling rifles. Fei tells Dragon that all he wants are the guns, and Dragon can catch the traitor. At night, Dragon and Fei interrupt a gun deal between the Army and the police Captain. After pushing everyone into the water and making off with the guns, Fei hides the rifles inside a log and marks it with a red flag. He later tries to sell the guns to the gangsters and pirates, but Dragon has intervened by removing the red flag and putting flags on other logs.
After thwarting Fei's plan to sell the rifles to the pirates, Dragon has a conversation with the Admiral's daughter, Winnie. He learns that the Captain wasn't smuggling rifles for San-po, he was buying the riffles from the army to arm his men. On overhearing this, Fei gets into an argument with Dragon. The gangsters come after Fei, so he tells them that Dragon is to blame for the missing rifles. Dragon is forced to flee with Winnie. After teaming up with Fei, being tortured for information about the rifles, and falling from the face of a clock tower, the police track Dragon down for a third time, and help him get away as they arrest the gangsters.
As the pirates have lost the rifles they held everyone on board a ship hostage, including a Rear Admiral. The Colonel has a conversation with Mr. Chou, which Dragon overhears. Mr. Chou proposes an arms-for-hostages deal. He tells the Colonel that this will "greatly expedite matters," and the Colonel consents. After Mr. Chou leaves, Dragon confronts the Colonel and convinces him that the gangsters and the pirates will never fear the law if the police force are corrupt. After it is agreed that Dragon will assume all responsibility for the mission to save the hostages, the Colonel allows the Marine Police to be brought back into full force.
Mr. Chou is brought in by the police and beaten until he tells Dragon and Tin-tsu how to get to San-po. Dragon, posing as Mr. Chou, gets on board a ship that takes him to San-po's hideout, and they are followed by the rest of the squad. Fei sneaks aboard and poses as a pirate. After a lot of tricky undercover work, the cavalry arrives, and there is a final confrontation in the middle of the pirate's lair. Dragon, Tin-tsu, and Fei engage in a hand-to-hand battle with San-po, eventually killing him with a hand grenade when he's rolled into the carpet.
|
cult, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Project A(1983) is my favorite film of the Jackie Chan/Sammo Hung/Yuen Biao collaborations.
When it comes to stunt work, Jackie Chan is the best at taking chances in giving action scenes an ounce of authenticity.
One of the top films directed by Jackie Chan besides Police Story(1985), Armour of God 2(1991), and Project A part 2(1987).
The fighting scenes are top-notch, maybe not quite as good as the ones in Drunken Master II, which still remains my favorite Jackie Chan movie even though this one gets really close.
My personal favorite is the battle on the bicycles in the narrow back alleys.The one thing that has made Mr. Chan my favorite martial arts actor is the way his movies infuse humor and slapstick into serious fight scenes, and Project A, in my opinion, does that better than any of his other films.Highly recommended..
The humour translates well and three sequences stand out as some of the best action scenes ever put to film the three being Jackie's homage to 'Safety Last' by falling from the clock tower, the bonkers bike chase through increasingly narrow city streets, and the final showdown defeat of San Pao by Jackie, Yuen Biao and Samo (with a little help from Mars and some wayward grenades).
Chan and his co-stars, Samo Hung and Yuen Biao are really fun to watch, and the stunts are excellent (the bicycle chase scene, the scene in the clock tower,...).
Project A combines a complex, twisting plot, a nice historical period setting, typical Chan humour, and of course, many breathtaking fight and stunt sequences.
The stunts are incredible and the fight scenes are breath-taking!Anyone who loves films for sets & scenery will have a field day here!Just one thing....Get the Hong Kong Legends UK 2 DVD pack with AAALLLLLLL those gorgeous extras, interviews, documentaries and everything else!
It's all done pretty well, with the obvious quirks that make Hong Kong movie acting what it is: strained facial expressions, a lot of pointing, and a lot of laughing that is laughable itself.Sound - not very good, but when you consider that all the sound had to be re-dubbed, it makes sense, and allow for more leniency.The plot is not wafer-thin, as has happened in earlier Chan movies, but this isn't Pi. To be honest, it's about as complicated as a Jackie Chan movie is ever going to get, and if the only reason for watching a kung-fu movie is plot, you're an idiot, anyway.Right, then - action - and boy oh boy, this film is full of incredible action.
You get to see Jackie, Sammo Hung and Yuen Biu fighting each other, and the bad guys in such a fast, furious, and creative way that this is an action movie you'll never forget.
Dick Wei is muscular and mean as the head of the pirates, and is a formidable foe, who forces the three brothers to come together to dispose of him.As usual, the stunts would not have been allowed in Britain or America, but hey, this is Kong Kong, so let's blow these guys up, and watch them flip and fly across the set for our own satisfaction.Overall, this is a top notch film, with wonderfully edited fights, excellent creativity, and superb Chanesque humour along the way.
The story continues as Jackie hunts down pirates with his friends Sammo Hung and Yuen Biao, and anytime you get the three of these action stars together, you can be sure you are going to get plenty of action, humor and fun.
Unlike the insurance-run Hollywood, the Jackie Chan Stunt Team wasn't afraid of taking risks or getting hurt at the sake of entertainment, and this beat-em-up' underrated classic overpowers any modern-day action film that Hollywood could muster.
Project A is silly but viciously raw; and thanks to clever direction and choreography, its one of the better martial arts movies out there.Project A is about (Yes guys, there is a plot) a group of sailors, Navy-like men trying to stop Chinese pirates from wreaking havoc in the coastline.
Project A is easily one of the best choreographed films of all-time in terms of the action; some of the fights are just flat-out unbelievable.
Plus, just like Chan's best comedic work, there has to be at least one humorous fight thrown in, and Project A delivers in this category as well.Chan's direction does two things: allows for the action to remain intense, and showcases just how elaborate everyone's movements are.
Sammo Hung gives the best performance of the film as the thief that thwarts Chan's quest for justice and at the same time helps him.Bottom Line: While perfection or masterpiece isn't achieved here, Project A delivers everything you could possibly want in a martial arts film: amazing stunts, great fights, decent story, good acting, worthy adversary, explosive finale, and a tang of humor.
Well-directed and written by the master himself, Project A remains one of Jackie Chan's best work and another example of how his foreign films are far superior to that of his work in America.
Project A: Jackie Chan fighting pirates; it's too good to be true.
This is when Jacky is at his peak, so you can expect to see death-defying stunts, great fight scenes, and hilarious comedy.In Project A, Jacky plays Sergeant Ma Yu-Long, a Hong Kong coast guard officer during the colonial times.
Thumbs up on: 1) the fight scene in the bar between the police and the coast guards 2) the fight scene in the gentlemen club 3) the escape and ensuing bicycle case/fight on the narrow alleys which ended with Jacky's death defying fall from the clock tower 4) the covert operation on Pirate Lo's islandI strongly recommend Project A to anyone who is interested in Jacky's 80s movies (please note you will enjoy it even more if you understand Cantonese).
From cycling through the cramped streets of Hong Kong to grenade training in the police academy, you bound to sometimes be in a state of awe - or at least chuckle a few times.It's amazing some of the stunts Jackie pulled off, including falling from a very high clocktower.
Project A is Jackie Chan's tribute to the silent film stars like Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd.
The presence of his opera brothers, Sammo Hung and Yuen Biao, made this much better than the sequel although some people prefer the action of Project A II.If you must, avoid the US release of the movie.
There Dragon Ma , a honest coast guard officer ,Jackie Chan , fighting against pirates in "old Hong Kong".
Jackie Chan is top notch as one army man fighting a group of heinous pirates and as always he makes his own stunts like is well showed .
Spotlights movie include a spectacular brawl at a bar , Jackie jumping down a building , impressive and interminable fights with Chan dangling and downing , a breathtaking final struggle and other extraordinary action sequences in overwhelming style .
Of course , his biggest hits were ¨The Police story¨ series that won the Golden Horse Award, a Chinese version of the Oscar , the first was titled ¨Police story(1985)¨ directed by the same Chan , it was a perfect action film for enthusiastic of the genre ; the following was ¨Police story 2(1988)¨also pretty violent and with abundant humor touches.
There was very witty dialog, a great story-line (who can't excited when pirates are involved!), and unparalleled action sequences with not only the movie in general, but add to that the scene with Martial Law's Mr. Hung and the bicycle chase scene about half way through the most just adds even more to the fact why I think this movie is definitely up there in the top 5 Jackie movies of all times.Overall rating 6 out of 5, you won't be disappointed with Jackie Starring and Directing in this one, as he most often does, and does well!.
He directed, starred, co-written and even hired two "brothers" in Sammo Hung and Yuen Biao (they had grown up together in the same opera troupe and performed as the Seven Little Fortunes amongst others; Sammo was already an established success at this time and certainly is a prodigious presence in this movie) in the first film where they all had decent acting time -- kudos to those who can name the first film they acted in together.Dragon Ma (Jackie Chan) is a sergeant in the Hong Kong Water Police where pirates are problematic on the coastline (they would remain an issue even past WWII), his department is poorly financed, there are interdepartmental squabbles with the landlubber police and their haughty commander Captain Chi (Kwan Hoi-San) and his nephew Inspector Hong Tin Chi (Yuen Biao: Knockabout) and they just had their remaining ships blown up real good (nice model sets in that scene).
But you look at how high he is from the concrete floor below and realize that if he messes this stunt it could be much worse than the fall through the awnings.The comedic fighting in this film is also quite adroit and amazing in its action direction led by Jackie and Sammo.
Add in several other fight scenes and a fantastic finale with the three brothers and the antagonist and you have quite a satisfying film.Project A was a hit in Hong Kong (19M HK dollars box office) and found critical support there as well.
It helped push action movies into modern day locales and away from the Qing era and before dominated themes (though this film is considered a period film since it takes place in early 20th century).While the film may not know what to do with female characters like Wong Man-Ying and the plot is not the most sublimely cohesive -- there is a grenade scene early in the film which seemed a bit excessive, not that funny and did not seem to fit -- this film is consistently fun and beautifully directed (cinematographer Cheung Yiu-Jo does not get enough credit for the work he has done with Jackie Chan).
I was very young then about 8 or 9 and to this day I even track the film down and brought it from the Hong Kong Legends label that includes special features.One of my favourites with Sammo Hung and Yuen Biao showcasing their incredible and some funny action choreography.All three should make films again as their on screen work together combined show they are talanted geniuses at martial arts, stunts and action films.I recommend this to all Jackie Chan fans who haven't seen it, including action fans too.
I love Jackie Chan films and this one has to be my favorite because of the superb stuntwork, the bike chase scene and the the first super-stunt in a chinese film, the clock tower fall stand up to the modern day wire stunts and end up looking just as impressive usually stunts in a film this old look dated but they are as amazing nowadays as they were when this film was made, this is easily some of chan's best work.
Jackie Chan's best martial arts movie.
Jackie Chan's Project A is one of the best martial arts movie ever made.
Entertaining, Stylish, and Fun. It seems that for the most part, Jackie Chan movies are the most entertaining with a historical setting and especially when Sammo Hung and Yuen Biao along.
This film, following a man named Dragon's exploits as he tracks down and defeats a group of pirates who have been screwing with the Hong Kong Coast Guard and are smuggling weapons, is one of the best offerings of Chan's early career.Much like the majority of his films, this one is full of good comedy and slapstick.
The other fight scenes are exceptionally choreographed and some of the stunts are death defying.As a Jackie Chan film, this is a good offering.
Project A is in my opinion the three brothers best work(Jackie Chan, Sammo Hung, Yuen Biao).
Whenever I think of Chan; "Police Story" and "Project A" always shoot to mind as these benchmark films truly captured the talent of their star by effortlessly blending the goofy psychical humour and martial arts with amazing fight (watch the many uses of a bicycle) and stunt sequences (like 'Clock-tower fall').
The stunts are of course very dangerous and no Hollywood actor would do them, Jackie, Sammo and Yuen makes the stunts look like elegant ballet dances and I almost always get tears in my eyes while watching the movie of sheer joy!The humor is just so good and I always get a smile on my face when I remember one of them.
Long before Rush Hour Jackie was making classics like this , great fights , amazing sets , Hong Kong Classic .
Before there was the first Police Story, there was Project A and in it Jackie manages to pull off his trademark fast-paced signature choreograph action scenes that would define 80s Hong Kong action films.
Directed by and starring Jackie Chan, Project A is a martial arts classic, a lavish late-19th century adventure featuring some of the most incredible fight action and death defying stunts imaginable.
Chan plays Navy recruit Dragon Ma Yue Lung, who teams up with police captain Tzu (Yuen Baio) and lovable thief Fei (Sammo Hung) to try and bring to justice the pirates (led by Lor Sam Pau, played by Dick Wei) who have been marauding the Hong Kong seas.Even though the film's plot is slight and contains plenty of the broad slapstick comedy that I often struggle with, the quantity and quality of the action still qualifies the film as unmissable, its three stars, Chan, Baio and Hung, at the top of their game (causing plenty of pain for the poor stuntmen extras).
Chan and his crew are old hong Kong coast guards mixed in a dull formula of military style training and arguing with loudmouth police who is lead by then Biro who is Chan's opponent yet become pirate fighters , Samoa hung is funny in this as a caring thief who adds to the films dullness the 3 do some martial arts and with objects which is inventive yet that the story loses its fights and fun and goes into a police , crime story with the same things seen in films such as police story.
Project A is a 1983 Hong Kong Action Film directed by "Sammo" Hung Kam-Bo. The film stars Jackie Chan (Dragons Forever), Sammo Hung (Winners and Sinners), Yuen Baio (The Iceman Cometh) and Lora Forner (Wheels on Meals).This film may have awful acting and horrible dubbing (even in it's original language) but the film is soon rescued when Jackie Chan deserts his role as a policeman to fight with a gang of pirates.
Dated it may be, it still is a fun movie to watch, especially if you're a fan of Jackie Chan.
Anyway, I've never really been a big fan of Jackie Chans comedic movies but his fighting styles have always amazed me.
Anyway, it's not the best Jackie Chan movie that I have seen but it's definitely one worth having if your a Kung Fu fan.I recommend this movie to people who are into their martial arts/action/comedy movies about a coast guard/policeman who is fighting against Pirates and corruption in the police force.
Another completely over the top Jackie Chan adventure but fairly enjoyable if you are into this sort of thing.Jackie and his brothers fight pirates (!) off the coast of Hong Kong.
I had heard that this was the best movie with the "Three Brothers" (Jackie Chan, Yuen Biao, and Sammo Hung), so I was looking forward to seeing it.
Many people will disagree with me, but this isn't one of Jackie Chan's best films.
im not going to talk about the story, this is a jackie chan film remember, but as for the action, it still remains some of chan's best, the fight scenes are his best yet, and the stunts remain a joy to watch, the two highlights bieng his bicycle chase, and clock tower fall.
Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung Kam-Bo have awesome chemistry together, and the film has plenty of funny moments, plus the stunt where Jackie falls off the clock tower was absolutely incredible!.
This is an excellent Jackie Chan film, with awesome character, incredible stunts and magnificent fight scenes and i say it's a must see for everyone!.
This is an excellent Jackie Chan film, with awesome character, incredible stunts and magnificent fight scenes and i say it's a must see for everyone!.
This is an excellent Jackie Chan film, with awesome character, incredible stunts and magnificent fight scenes and i say it's a must see for everyone!.
Project A is regarded by many film buffs as the most important movie of Jackie Chan's career.
Well there isn't much to describe in the way of plots and themes in a Jackie Chan movie but that is not why you watch them.
When most people come to Jackie Chan they think of comedy, fighting, and cool stunts.
There are other great action scenes; most notably a brilliant bicycle chase through narrow alleyways and one where Jackie Chan, as Dragon, falls about sixty feet from a clock tower slowed only by a couple of fairly flimsy looking awnings.
Jackie Chan is on great form as Dragon, making this film a must see for his fans.
Also starring Biao Yuen as Captain Hung Tin Tzu. Chan is fantastically skilled in the action sequences, filled with great Kung Fu moves and surprising stunts, all real and the most memorable being the fall from the clock tower which you see his face after doing, I may not have understood the story, but for the fights and comedy, this was a fun martial arts adventure.
|
tt0038928
|
Shadowed
|
Salesman Fred J. Johnson manages to hit a hole-in-one as he plays golf one day, and he writes his initials and the date on the lucky ball. He swings at the same ball once more, but sends it into a ditch instead of towards the hole. When he goes to the ditch to get the ball, he finds a dead body instead, and next to the body lies a small package, which contains plates for forging dollar bills.
Fred keeps the package and realizes it belongs to another member in the same golf club, Tony Montague, when he happens to overhear the man talking to his wife, Edna. Tony finds Fred's marked golf ball and suspects that a man with the initials F.J. Has taken the package. Before leaving, Tony raises his voice on the golf course, warning "F.J." to go to the police with the package, threatening to kill him and his whole family if he did.
Fred goes back to his family, and opens the package, finding the address to a print shop with the plates. He doesn't call the police, remembering Tony's threat. When Tony and Edna get back to their boss, Lefty, they are chastized for losing the package and sent to recover it.
The murder is all over the news the next day, and Fred discovers that his lucky charm is missing from the wrist band of his watch. His daughter Carol goes out on a date with a banker named Mark Bellaman, and his other daughter Ginny goes to the golf course with her beau Lester Binkey. Examining the location where the body was found, she finds her father's lucky charm.
Tony goes back to the golf course to get a list of everyone who was there the day before, and pretends to be a detective investigating the murder. He sees Ginny and asks her name, then realizing she is Fred's daughter. He offers to drive her home to her father, saying he is an old friend of his.
When Fred goes to send the plates to the police anonymously by mail, he is followed by Lefty, who threatens to kill Ginny if Fred involves the police.
Ginny talks to police Lt. Braden about the murder and shows him her father's lucky charm she found at the crime scene. This leads Braden to question Fred, and he seems suspicious enough for Braden to order one of his men, Sellers, to tail Fred afterwards.
Layer that night Ginny is kidnapped by Lefty and his gang. They tell Fred that she will be killed if he doesn't give them the plates. They agree on an exchange, but Fred won't give the plates away even after ginny is returned safely. Tony pulls a gun on him, but his wife Edna panics and rushes to the window to scream for help. Tony shoots Edna in her back and Fred manages to knock down Tony with a gardening tool. Lefty tries to escape but is caught outside by the police.
In the papers the next day, Fred is mentioned as a hero who caught the murderer.
|
violence, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0073812
|
Tommy
|
Satyam Master (Rajendra Prasad) is a very famous professor in Bheemavaram. One fine day, he comes across a dog in the railway station and decides to adopt it. Initially, his wife (Seeta) does not approve of it but later agrees to her husband’s wish. The couple names the dog Tommy and very soon, the pet becomes a key member of the family. Satyam Master starts taking Tommy daily to the station and Tommy on his own goes to station to receive him in the evening. Their bond of love becomes stronger every day. The twist in the tale arises when an untoward incident changes the entire family’s life upside down. Suddenly one day, Tommy does not want Satyam Master to go to his duty and tries to stop him home and at the station too. What problems does it cause to the family ? and what happens to the dog finally ?
|
cult, humor, psychedelic, murder, boring
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
When you listen to the original Who album a lot is left open to the imagination as regards plot, and I think its important to realise that Ken Russell's film version is merely one interpretation of the story told by the music.
However, what I will say is that the imagery he uses in the film really does spark a lot of interest, for example the hypocrisy of organised religion and icon worship (particularly when Tommy causes Marlyin Monroe to crash to the floor after the rest of the church have been "brainwashed" by the priests).A lot of people criticise the film for its cast, particularly Oliver Reed and Jack Nicholsons' debatable singing abilities.
Elton John as the pinball wizard, (who does so well in this that I think he decided afterwards to retire from making movies while he was still ahead) while Ann Margret chews up the scenery much better than I had certainly expected, and Tina Turner as the Acid Queen gives a performance in a cameo that you have to see to believe.
However my Uncle has great taste in music and has introduced me to many great bands and albums over the years, especially 60's rock music.I think my initial reaction to the film was it had some great scenes, mixing fantastic music with iconic imagery, some very interesting cast members, and a very strange dark humour throughout most of it.The scenes which I were first really drawn to were 1951/what about the boy?
(whether Oliver Reed can sing or not without severe editing, he fits his part perfectly and both he and Ann-Margaret shine during this scene), Acid Queen (an amazing performance by Tina Turner) and Amazing Journey.Due to enjoying these songs/scenes so much I revisited the film a few times and then really found the true depth of the movie.
Every scene is almost mesmerising in it's own way (apart from Eyesight to the blind, although I love Eric Clapton, I just do not enjoy this part at all).I had been looking for this on DVD for sometime, and in the meantime had purchased the original CD (interesting how some songs are better on the CD whilst others translate better in the movie) as a substitute.
I was of course extremely pleased at the recent 2 Disc Collectors Edition release and did not hesitate to make my purchase.OK, the story is not your run of the mill, easy to understand type and I think it is open to all kinds of interpretations, the main thing is the movie is a visual and musical feast almost like an extended ultra good pop video..
The movie has an all-star cast of eccentric and top stars (Oliver Reed, Ann-Margaret, Jack Nicholson) and pop stars (Tina Turner, Roger Daltry, Keith Moon, Eric Clapton, Elton John and The Who themselves, as a group on stage).The music was changed and performed for the movie.
Although the medium of the album and the film is rock music, Tommy strings together many of the most powerful elements of classical opera.
Most of the time, this works - Ann Margaret, Roger Daltrey, and cameos by Jack Nicholson, Elton John, Tina Turner and Keith Moon are all outstanding.
But the problems with the sound track are at least partly made-up for by fabulously campy musical cameos by Tina Turner and Elton John, and - FINALLY - by Daltrey's excellent performance once Tommy himself gains a voice.
It is never funny in a comedy sense but it is fun in the same way as going to a big show like Rock Horror can be, it's hard not to get caught up in the music, performances and sights of the film as everyone is really overdoing it and it's fun!
The real gold in the film though is a collection of cameos that may not all work but all add to the film: Tina Turner IS The Acid Queen, Elton John gets the best song of the film, Clapton doesn't make as much of an impression as I would have liked and the presence of Jack Nicholson is as good as it is surprising!Overall this is a silly, shambolic film that makes very little sense and is not clever enough to make the points about religion that it tries to.
It also does something else: creates actual characters from the music, a plus due in part to the fine acting of Ann-Margret as Tommy's glamorous mother, Roger Daltrey as Tommy, Oliver Reed as Tommy's stepfather (Reed is hammy but quite game, while the role is designed as both a villain and a hero), and Tina Turner, an extremely scary presence as the Acid Queen.
Up until then I mainly watched it for the music, but after that it became a whole different ballgame, and I watched it to extract more of what Ken Russell was really trying to get at.Anyone younger than about 30 probably will not understand this film at all, but if you are of the right generation, see it a couple of times because you may not get the meaning the first viewing.Several memorable performances - Elton John as the Pinball Wizard, Keith Moon as Uncle Ernie, Ann Margaret as Tommy's mother and - of course - Ollie Reed who has never done a bad film..
Watching it, you try to figure out how to digest all that you're seeing and make sense of it (although I would reject calling it sensory overload).The plot of course has deaf, dumb, blind Tommy Walker (Roger Daltrey) becoming a pinball champion and developing a cult following.
Probably the most surprising cast member is Jack Nicholson as The Specialist; I mean, who would have ever imagined Jack Nicholson of all people in a musical?* Peter Townshend, John Entwistle and Keith Moon also appear.All in all, director Ken Russell instills this movie with the same sensibility that we find in the rest of his movies.
I knew the movie was a musical but was under the impression it`d be something like Jeff Wayne`s WAR OF THE WORLD album where there`s a clear narrative with dialogue along with musical tracks , I mean Robert Powell , Oliver Reed and Jack Nicolson aren`t singers right ?
That actually sums up the strengths and weaknesses of TOMMY , the imagery is strange , sometimes utterly compelling and breath taking like the sequence in Amazing Journey where a pin ball randomly smacks bombers turning them into crosses of rememberance but more often than not the film makes just as much sense as it did when I listened to it on the radio more than 20 years before .
There`s a vague point that musical heroes are somewhat Hitlerite in our modern pop culture but the very similar THE WALL by Pink Floyd makes this point far clearer and if truth be told THE WALL is by far a better movie and album Anyone else feel uneasy that much of TOMMY revolves around a young child from source material by Pete Townshend ?.
Then, explain to me the artistic value of Ann-Margret bathing in baked beans as they shoot out of her TV set at her, the Eric Clapton tribute to Marilyn Monroe (which probably resulted in her haunting him ever since) and Roger Daltry's ridiculous performance (as he manages to OVERPLAY the role of Tommy, a deaf and blind man).
The scenes with Keith Moon as Uncle Ernie are no less than inspired and absolutely hilarious; the Acid Queen segment with Tina Turner as the title character is one of the best segments ever filmed for a rock movie and Elton John as the Pinball Wizard is simply put, absolute balls of fun with a live performance by the Who themselves.
A grand example of the best and worst (mostly the worst) of 1970's cliché' music fantasy and overindulged ridiculousness, "Tommy" is a film that should be filed right alongside other rock and roll horrors like" Sgt. Pepper's" and "Xanadu" along with a note stating "Watch at Your Own Risk"!.
Then he realizes about the really important thing.The stars of this rock opera are sensational(well, Ann-Margret, Oliver Reed, Tina Turner, Elton John, Jack Nicholson and The Who).If you want to live a psychedelic experience, please try to find the DVD with the original sound of the 1975...and get ready, because the tag line of the movie tell us all the true.*Sorry me if i wrote something bad.
I didn't enjoy the songs or the music, I felt them, heard them, experience them, the movie took me to a world I shall not find again
a world I wasn't even born in, but that made me nostalgic of an era I didn't live in
Tommy, a tragic view
for a hard review
It's hard to review such a film without falling in the trap of the enthusiastic discoverer but this is the most sincere feeling I can describe after finishing "Tommy", the opera rock.
there's no way not to enjoy this film
the only mystery is how it's not even more praised and appreciated today
I don't know
I don't care
If there ever was a sect of fans of the film, I'm among them
I won't go emotional, or cerebral, the greatness is here, the gallery of characters that enrich this masterpiece so unforgettable, from the Acid Queen to Cousin Kevin, from Uncle Ernie to the doctor, from Elton, to Tina, from Clapton to Nicholson
it's a psychedelic experience that just makes me feel like:I feel like the ball in the pinball machine, trying to stay in the game as long as possible hitting every segment, going back and forth, every repetitive viewing, I don't want the journey to stop, but ultimately, there are no free games, and all I can do is to share the experience with the others and convince them to watch this film
So let me speak on the name of "Tommy" : hear me, see me, touch me ...
I still think the bonus brought by Ronnie Wood (The Rolling Stones) for "Acid Queen", Elton John for "Pinball Wizard" and of course the genius work of Pete Townshend have made a real opera from what I call a "good rough".
A boy is deaf, dumb and blind, but despite his multi-handicaps has magical gifts including being a champion pinball player.Where do you start with this giant piece of self-indulgence that would be so easy to ignore if were not created by a popular rock-and-roll band (The Who) and actually includes some above average tunes; and even some above average talents "singing" them.(Anne Margaret - as Tommy's mother - not being one of them.
Not only have her hips expended - since those days - her breasts seem to have as well!) The last time I saw Tommy director Ken Russell he was in his own back garden filming a straight-to-video vampire movie on his camcorder.
I'd even suggest that you could snip all the scenes and reassemble in them in a totally random order and you wouldn't do much damage either!Despite not being very good, don't be put off seeing Tommy, it is no more a waste of time than two hours of MTV, but works best at illustrating how ramshackled and nonsensical the mind of Pete "my whole life is pop art" Townsend really is.People in the pop music world give kudos to this movie, but then again they give kudos to any artist who simply gets out of bed before midday, no matter gets an expensive home movie made..
'Tommy' is a musical with no dialogue, unlike 'Oliver' in which Reed was excellent.This sort of sets the tone for a pretty bad film.Buy the original album by The Who instead.
OK, not really but this movie was very psychedelic, the colors are awesome, the singing is awesome (especially from Jack Nicholson, but if it's a voice over
) I loved the direction, The acid queen bit was awesome.This film is only a 8/10 because, the plot was hard to follow sometimes, and the side story with Sally Simpson, I thought was totally unnecessary, and didn't like it..
This is probably not the best movie to start watching after a busy day at 10:30 P.M. Even though I had already heard the Who's original album, I was still completely unprepared for the sensory assault mounted by the film's director, Ken Russell.
This is probably not the best movie to start watching after a busy day at 10:30 P.M. Even though I had already heard the Who's original album, I was still completely unprepared for the sensory assault mounted by the film's director, Ken Russell.
Every scene is a kaleidoscopic frenzy of garish and bizarre images, most filled with hilariously obvious symbolism (which the college kids watching the film with me seemed to enjoy pointing out), and reinforced by the Who's music, which runs throughout the movie at top volume and with barely any interruption.
Every scene is a kaleidoscopic frenzy of garish and bizarre images, most filled with hilariously obvious symbolism (which the college kids watching the film with me seemed to enjoy pointing out), and reinforced by the Who's music, which runs throughout the movie at top volume and with barely any interruption.
I suppose it means that those who truly love Tommy are destined to be scared or something like that.I also liked the following symbolic tidbits:At the "communion" in Clapton's temple of Marilyn worshipers they hand out pills and bourbon instead of bread and wine.Sally Simpson marries a Rock Star from California who is a Cowboy Frankenstein which neatly ties in with the huge scar on her face.On VJ day they decorate the tombstones of fallen soldiers with red flowers with black centers which are used in several scenes.Townsend, Entwhistle, and Moon are all wearing suits with a design for the Bank of England Notes on them in the Pinball wizard.In short, the movie is rife with these little cinematic treats.
The combination of The Who's concept rock/opera album Tommy and director Ken Russell in his pomp led to this visual, surreal, hallucinogenic and flawed musical film.
It also has an underlying sexual and child abuse elements as well.The bold film is a British classic of 1970s experimental cinema thanks largely to Ken Russell at times unrestrained direction but he is in his element in marrying the music, songs and visuals.Ann Margaret probably did not realise what she was letting herself into when she agreed to this film.
Ear Piercing Audio, without Dialog, and Visually Overwhelming, this Overblown Rock-Opera Written by Pete Townshend (Oscar nominated), and Directed by Ken Russell, Stars Ann Margret (Oscar nominated), Roger Daltrey (Golden Globe nominated), with a Gaggle of Cameos.The Elton John (Pinball Wizard), Tina Turner (Acid Queen), and Eric Clapton (Preacher) Segments are Highlights but the Movie is on a High of its Own. There was Absolutely Nothing Subtle about The Who, Ken Russell, or the 1970's.
Even John Entwistle said, "I didn't understand what it was about until I saw Ken Russell's version, and he was wrong." Wrong as it was, Tommy the movie was still very good.
Russell planned ``Tommy'' as a full-fledged assault on the eyes and ears (the tagline on the movie was ``Your senses will never be the same''), and that's exactly what it is, tossing out one bizarre visual after another while guest artists such as Eric Clapton, Tina Turner and Elton John help out stars Roger Daltrey, Ann-Margret and Oliver Reed.
Likewise the story of the film and the musical is just absurd and knows it, seeing as Tommy is a satirical rock-opera that didn't mar things.
It's just as bizarre as Tina Turner's 'Acid Queen' without the freaky horror aspect and Tina's over the top performance.Anyway, Ken Russell stays very close to the Tommy story, which is good in theory, but as a film plot it's very difficult to pull off.
Director Ken Russell who also created other classic flicks, The Devils 1971 and Altered States 1980 has created another gem in Tommy.Starring Roger Daltry from the great band The Who.Also starring Oliver Reed who was also in Ken Russell's The Devils and other classic flicks, Gladiator 2000, Lion of the Desert 1981, Z.P.G 1972 and The Hunting Party 1971.Also starring is Ann-Margret.Also starring are musicians Tina Turner, Elton John, Eric Clapton and also from The Who, Keith Moon, Pete Townshend and John Entwistle.Also starring is Jack Nicholson who was also in the classic flicks, Easy Rider 1969 and Psych-Out 1968.I loved the music and the trippy scenes.If you enjoyed this as much as I did then check out other classic musical flicks, Cry Baby 1990, The Doors 1991, Fears of a Black Hat 1993, Jesus Christ Superstar 1973, Pink Floyd the Wall 1982, Bohemian Rhapsody 2018, Great Balls of Fire!
Imagine what Ken Russell could do if he re-did the film nowadays.Sure, I am a rock music fan, and seeing The Who or The Tina Turner of these days was a treat for me.
The cast in this film where huge names at the time of it's release, Robert Palmer, Roger Daltrey, Elton John, Jack Nicholson, Tina Turner, and the great Oliver Reed.
The film "Tommy" is a chance to SEE what you loved to hear in the Who's classic rock album, and I am grateful for the opportunity a fan like myself has been provided..
In fact, it's worth watching just to hear Jack Nicholson singing!Ann Margaret deserved her Golden Globe for her excellent performance and, all of the other cast members are very good in their roles.There's lots of Ken Russell symbolism, such as the use of colour and the recurring plane / cross / silverball motifs.The music is very good and there are some humorous as well as bleak moments in this film..
|
tt2332623
|
Fateful Findings
|
The film opens with author and vigilante-hacker Dylan (Neil Breen) reminiscing about his childhood friend Leah (Jennifer Autry), who he has been in love with since he was eight. While walking in the woods Dylan and Leah had found a secret stash which hid a magical black stone. In the present day, its mystical powers are revealed to Dylan after he is hit by a car and survives the accident through a mysterious and miraculous speedy recovery. Dylan reveals to his wife, Emily (Klara Landrat), that he has not been writing a new novel but instead has been using his hacking skills to expose "the most secret government and corporate secrets". His commitment to this mission is tested by his wife's downward spiral into alcohol and drugs ending in an overdose, the murder of his best friend framed as a suicide, and continual sexual seduction by his best friend's underage step-daughter.
Plagued by haunting dreams of a mystical book of secrets, Dylan begins seeing an additional psychotherapist and is encouraged by the discovery of his lost childhood girlfriend (Brianna Borden) (revealed to be his nurse during his recovery from the accident). Despite his efforts, he is continually harassed by unseen spirits. His life as an author slowly deteriorates and he confides in his new lover, Leah, that his work may be discovered. This culminates when Leah is kidnapped by an unknown assailant. Dylan manages to track the attacker and uses teleportation powers to rescue Leah from her kidnapper. Before releasing his findings to the world Dylan chooses to see his psychotherapist one last time only to find that she has been a ghost the entire time and he must now question the council of spirits that guard the mysterious book. In the end, he releases "the most secret government and corporate secrets" to the world. During the speech an assassin attempts to thwart Dylan but is killed by Dylan's powers. Exposed, government officials and executives throughout the world take their own lives, in public exhibitions to applauding crowds. Dylan lets the world know that they have the power to fight the tyranny of corruption and work outside of government and corporate systems just as he has done.
Although not in the final cut of the film, its teaser implies that the government, men in black, or aliens may have been monitoring Dylan throughout his entire life, and possibly may have been the original source that granted him his powers.
|
paranormal, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Fateful Findings is a new film directed by the up-and-coming and relatively unknown Neil Breen.
It is a political thriller of sorts with paranormal and cosmic undertones including, but not limited to mushrooms that turn into magical crystals, spiritual beings and a car accident that turns someone who already had special abilities into some sort of super genius who now has incredible hacking abilities, is a scientist and well-regarded novelist.This movie is being touted as a new The Room, a movie so bad that its badness transcends everything that we know about bad movies and becomes sort of brilliant.
Take, for instance, a series of scenes in which the main character, also played by Neil Breen, appears to transport himself into a magical crystal, and the set inside of the crystal is clearly just a basement lined with trash bags to give the illusion of a shiny, black stone.
A certain amount of schadenfreude is involved when you get so much pleasure out of these movies, because you're always aware that the director and his cast and crew set out to make something legitimately great and entertaining, but failed miserably along the way.
We laugh at the movie screen not because of some wonderfully witty banter, but because each reaction shot seems to be filmed on a different day with a different lighting set-up and no consideration for the audio matching the rest of the scene.If you, too, are a lover of bad movies and cinematic failures, Fateful Findings will be perfect for you.
The opening shot of the movie is pretty damn masterful and builds tension and you're thinking that you might be watching a movie from a skilled craftsman, but immediately after that, the movie looks like an after school special from the 1980's, and then the cinematography only gets worse from there.
It's like the quality declines and then does a reverse plateau somewhere near the bottom and flatlines from there until the movie is over.Fateful Findings is good, very good, but not great.
And no one pisses on hospitality."No more books!" is going to be the oft-quoted line from this movie, when our main character chucks a book he wrote at one of his five laptops that he utilizes for hacking "the most secret government and corporate secrets" despite never being on.
He mostly just sits at a black screen and clacks away and nods, letting us know his efforts are successful.Through a series of events including a pretty realistic looking car accident, our main character meets up with his childhood love, now working in the hospital he visits during his recovery.
It could be argued that Neil Breen is employing some Lynchian, dreamlike logic to his movies and has created a low-budget surrealist masterpiece— the black gem of this movie is like the blue box from Mulholland Drive.
If that's the way you want to read into it, awesome.If you have an interest in cult movies, watch Fateful Findings as soon as you can at your local grindhouse or when it inevitably becomes available on home video..
If you review this as a film- it's acting, it's dialogue, it's plot and it's cinematography- Neil Breen's movies resemble Wiseau's 'The Room'.
Neil is also the main character of his films, in this case, Fateful Findings, further supporting the argument that he's just gone a little bit crazy because of his midlife crisis .If you expect a comprehensible movie, you're looking in the wrong place.
If, however, you're looking for something to laugh at with a few friends, this is a great movie to watch.
So many things happen at the same time- Neil's character Dylan is hacking the government, then a friend of his is murdered.
I can't remember the last time I laughed this hard at a movie that's suppose to be taken seriously or I think it was.
I know I pull out references from this movie with the friend who have seen it.If you like Trash Films, this is for you.
The Best Neil Breen Movie of 2013.
Like a child playing in a bubble bath, a dandelion swaying in the wind, or a dog licking its own balls, this movie reveals to the world just how corrupted the movie business has become with its exaggerated love for "talent" and "skill" and "acting."A love letter to the lovesick, an orgasm without erection, there is something magical about Neil Breen's touch.
Although regarded as a "so bad it's good" flick, I do not feel that way as this film is so frustrating to sit through.I don't even know how to describe the storyline as the movie jumps around from one plot point to the next, and not even in a coherent way.
The movie doesn't even really develop many plot points; the drug addiction plot point is barely looked upon, a teenage girl having a crush on Dylan is never bought up, and when Dylan's friend Amy shoots her husband Jim, we never see them ever again.
However, the worst performance comes from the movie's creator Neil Breen, who plays Dylan himself, and does it so poorly that it's depressing to watch.
All in all, this glorious piece of work obviously took some effort: creator Neil Breen puts his all into this film as well as his others, each passion project being exactly that.
If you're not into not taking movies seriously or enjoying things with a certain humor, this film is not for you: it's powers are too great.
Watch this with whomever you can find, but most of all, watch this with your friends for the ultimate bonding experience.When I first watched the film, I couldn't remember ever having so much fun watching a movie, SERIOUSLY.
"Fateful Findings"- Right up there with the likes of "Birdemic" and "The Room" as one of the greatest "so-bad-it's-good" camp classics ever crafted!.
Well, frankly I think there's no other way to vote for writer/director/editor/star Neil Breen's camp-classic "Fateful Findings" than to score it based on it's impeccable and constant high levels of entertainment.
this is pure "Breen-ius" from start-to-finish and is right up there with the likes of "Birdemic" and "The Room" as one of the finest unintentionally-comedic camp classics ever made.For the uninitiated, Neil Breen is an independent actor and filmmaker who for the past ten-or-so years has built a career out of self-producing and self-distributing a string of low-budget indie thrillers starring himself as the various leads.
While some of his other films like "Double Down" or "Pass Thru" have had a greater leaning towards misguided action and intrigue, "Findings" is a straight-up Sci-Fi/Fantasy drama that is predicated more heavily on character and story...
There's a lot of genuinely uncomfortable filler inserted constantly, such as an uproariously funny moment where we see Dylan awkwardly eating a salad while another character watches him and smiles like it's the greatest thing they've seen.
Neil Breen's "Fateful Findings" is just brilliant in its insanity and constantly entertaining in its poor quality.
And his movies are definitely going down in cinematic history.For the constant (and I do mean "constant") laughs, "Fateful Findings" easily earns a perfect 10..
It's Neil Breen, who is also the star of the film.
It seems like he has never seen a movie before.It is so completely ridiculous with the bad acting and terrible dialogue that it is actually pretty funny.
Their facial hair and body types and just all around bad acting makes me think that they are adult film stars most of the time.He can't figure out when to pick up his cup or get anything right.
I think that somewhere along the line Neil Breen just kinda gave up on coming up with new things and just started rehashing old things he's already done.In "Double Down" he plays a bio-weapon / super hacker / techno Jesus that is able to hack any system and cure brain cancer.
You'd think that after three attempts at making movies Neil Breen and his friends would have managed to learn to act.
Mysticism , corrupt politics , lost romance , kicks butt and all combine for a very entertaining viewing and audience participation experience .Neil Breen , as writer , director ,continues to combine magical imaginative and metaphorical moments with social responsibility .
And then there are people like Tommy Wiseau or the man who made this movie, Neil Breen.
As bad as this is, it is worth it.Crediting himself to almost every single film crew position available, Neil Breen has taken on more roles than other thespian in existence.
Neil Breen plays Dylan, a man who once found the love of his life before he hit his teens.
But if you're interested in seeing how unbelievable a guy like Neil Breen can be, now's the time.
This is, along with Wiseau's "The Room," one of the more entertaining movies of all time, but Wiseau hasn't produced anything substantial since his magnum opus, while Breen is the gift that keeps on giving.
Now," it's a pleasant surprise that Breen doesn't appear to have gone the way of James Nguyen, purposely making bad movies in order to cash in on his previous, well-deserved success.
Breen is still apparently unaware, and that is a great thing.In the tradition of bad movies, it fails on every possible level, but in the tradition of good-bad movies, it fails on every possible level in the best way it possibly could have.The plot is nonsensical and impossible to understand.
Character motivations make no sense at all, and the movie is full of random metaphors that may or may not mean anything.Breen's age relative to a particular actress makes even the casting more than questionable in the context of the film.I can't imagine how the acting could have been made worse.
Neil Breen has praised into same level as cult heroes like Tommy Wiseau and Ed Wood.
Some scenes are tying to create lynchian atmosphere, and after that film I got the joke I once heard - David Lynch is basically poor man's Neil Breen.Amateurish and silly, 'Fateful Findings' is easily one of my all time favorites in the category of 'so bad it's good' mainly because no matter how bad you can still feel the passion of filmmakers behind this gem, and passion is important.
It pains me to see Neil Breen's work be brushed off as some midnight movie.
I had to pause the movie 5 times because I was laughing so hard I couldn't breathe.I was so sure I had hallucinated the whole film that I watched it again the next night sober and thought it was just as funny.
Stay tuned for Neil Breen's next film "Twisted Pair".
I've also seen Neil Breen's earlier movie, "Double Down" and "Fateful Findings" is by far the better one..
If you think it's going to be a quality film with good acting, editing, or plot, you're going to be sorely disappointed.
It's a movie that should be watched knowing it will make no sense most of the time.
For years, movies like The Room and Rocky Horror Picture Show have been loved by thousands around the world, not for their merits as works of art but for something different from and far better than what could have been intended by their creators.
New cult hits come about once or twice a decade, and while it is still relatively new, Fateful Findings has quickly proved itself among the greats.The movie follows Dylan (Neil Breen), a man gifted with magical powers by a magical rock he found as a child.
As he dives further into his work and his life becomes stranger and more dangerous, he must find the strength to finish his work.I love this movie so much.Like many other cult hits, Fateful Findings is a film that is uniquely its own.
Breen himself works at a desk with no fewer than three powered-off laptops that he abuses regularly by throwing books at them or swiping them onto the floor.This film is all over the place in terms of its plot, characters, and themes.
Neil Breen works professionally as an architect but makes movies in his spare time and does so simply because he wants to.
"So bad it's good" is a profitable section of the industry, and any schmuck can spend a few thousand dollars and very little effort on a film that ends up potentially making them millions.With Fateful Findings, we instead have a man with a vision.
Neil Breen hates corrupt governments and corporations, and by gum he's gonna make movies about them.
It's time for the new god of film to rise to the rank of best filmmaker ever.All of the actors, while talented in their own right, owe a great deal to Breen as he has saved them from the casting couch to give them work here.
Full disclosure time: I watched Fateful Findings not necessarily with the intention of expecting a legitimately good movie.
This said, after witnessing the s***-spectacle known as Double Down, my intrigue for a Neil Breen film shot in HD and this time with more actors than just himself on a rocky ledge with a bunch of laptops and tuna fish cans and maybe one or two others shot up.
It's hard to be more terrible than that poor excuse for a snot rag, but this time Breen outdoes himself from Double Down in some ways; here he gives himself a "character" (must use quotes) who as a child with another girl found some magic rock by a tree or something, I don't f***in' know, and years later is a famous novelist working on his latest book...
Not one moment in this movie, from the performances to the would-be story, is convincing, but Breen thinks he's like the Edward Snowden of filmmakers (maybe with a touch of, uh, Billy Jack Goes to Washington), letting us all know that EVERYTHING IS CORRUPT and must be unearthed so that (spoilers, who cares) the politicians and lawyers and Wall Street crooks can admit to their crimes and proceed to (I'm not making this up) shoot themselves and kill themselves because...
From various clips and reviews, one can easily see that he has no idea how to make a movie yet he treats his films as painfully serious masterpieces, making for loads of unintentional comedy and putting him in the esteemed company of clueless auteurs such as Tommy Wiseau and Sam Mraovich.Actually, scratch that.
Breen can't even do that.By far the most memorable aspect of "Fateful Findings" is that its plot has many things happening, but yet nothing happens.
The main character played by Breen finds a magic rock as a child then watches his childhood sweetheart move away.
There are characters who wander around then vanish, a gigantic tome whose contents aren't revealed and appears at random, and scenes of a naked Neil Breen(ick) sitting in a room lined in trash bags that I think is supposed to represent him being inside the magic rock.
He seems to think that exposing high-level corruption will compel government and business officials to confess and commit public suicide to a cheering crowd in a delightfully inane ending that is one of the most unintentionally funny scenes ever captured on film.Breen's directing is as clueless as his writing.
One scene even manages to combine a fade WITH a ten-second therapy session.The cringeworthy acting is no different from the average Neil Breen film.
The wife sounds half asleep when delivering her lines, the best friend has apparently never been drunk as he has no idea how to act it, his wife hams it up worse than a high school play, and the daughter is the absolute worst as she emotes even less than Breen.
Now was pretty good, but this takes it to a whole new level.The amount of depth and emotion that Neil was able to put in this film - like in the Oscar-worthy suicide sequence - is just astounding.
I sure as hell hope this man has some beautiful films coming into the future.Breen's four main films (Fateful Findings, Double Down, Pass Thru, I Am Here...Now) are the best things I have ever laid eyes on.
When Breen finds out that his friend is dead, he believes that it was an act of suicide, but really his wife had killed him.
Someone's gotta tell King and Stielberg that they really need to step up their game.This whole movie is pretty much shot inside of ALL of what I believe to do be Neil Breen's house.
The acting in this film is awful with the main actor, Neil Breen (who is also the writer AND director) being particularly bad as well as this guy who's supposed to be an alcoholic but never acts drunk.
No, it isn't one of those 'so bad it's good' movies....
Sometimes a bad film is all you need for a good laugh, The Room is the obvious first choice for this category...
This is one of the most hilarious so bad its good movies.
I recommend you watch this movie and all of Neil Breen's other movies.
(There all on the same level of bad) Thats all I have to say about this movie please watch it you will never laugh so hard in your life..
1. Neil Breen's character getting hit by a car (it may not be the best to you guys but...it took me by surprise
"No!" (Neil Breen looks toward the camera, he knows there is)
Ok, this is the best Breeny film I've seen so far, still waiting on Twisted Pair which is most likely better.
Neil Breen has five movies now but sadly I've only seen four.
All the acting in these films is very poor quality and most of the shots are filmed in Neil Breens house or on a green screen.
I respect Neil Breen as a filmmaker and I do genuinely enjoy his movies, and it's a shame that the process of getting them is so complicated.
|
tt0059555
|
Othello
|
=== Act I ===
Roderigo, a poor and dissolute gentleman, complains to his friend Iago, an ensign, that Iago has not told him about the secret marriage between Desdemona, the daughter of a Senator named Brabantio, and Othello, a Moorish general in the Venetian army. Roderigo is upset because he loves Desdemona and had asked her father for her hand in marriage.
Iago hates Othello for promoting a younger man named Cassio above him, whom Iago considers less capable a soldier than himself, and tells Roderigo that he plans to use Othello for his own advantage. Iago convinces Roderigo to wake Brabantio and tell him about his daughter's elopement. Meanwhile, Iago sneaks away to find Othello and warns him that Brabantio is coming for him.
Brabantio, provoked by Roderigo, is enraged and will not rest until he has beheaded Othello, but he finds Othello's residence full of the Duke of Venice's guards, who prevent violence. News has arrived in Venice that the Turks are going to attack Cyprus; therefore Othello is summoned to advise the senators. Brabantio has no option but to accompany Othello to the Duke's residence, where he accuses Othello of seducing Desdemona by witchcraft.
Othello defends himself before the Duke of Venice, Brabantio's kinsmen Lodovico and Gratiano, and various senators. Othello explains that Desdemona became enamoured of him for the sad and compelling stories he told of his life before Venice, not because of any witchcraft. The senate is satisfied, once Desdemona confirms that she loves Othello, but Brabantio leaves saying that Desdemona will betray Othello: "Look to her, Moor, if thou hast eyes to see:/She has deceived her father, and may thee." Iago, still in the room, takes note of Brabantio's remark. By order of the Duke, Othello leaves Venice to command the Venetian armies against invading Turks on the island of Cyprus, accompanied by his new wife, his new lieutenant Cassio, his ensign Iago, and Iago's wife, Emilia, as Desdemona's attendant.
=== Act II ===
The party arrives in Cyprus to find that a storm has destroyed the Turkish fleet. Othello orders a general celebration and leaves to consummate his marriage with Desdemona. In his absence, Iago gets Cassio drunk, and then persuades Roderigo to draw Cassio into a fight. Montano tries to calm an angry and drunk Cassio down, but end up fighting one another. Montano is injured in the fight. Othello reenters and questions the men as to what happened. Othello blames Cassio for the disturbance and strips him of his rank. Cassio is distraught. Iago persuades Cassio to importune Desdemona to convince her husband to reinstate Cassio.
=== Act III ===
Iago now persuades Othello to be suspicious of Cassio and Desdemona. When Desdemona drops a handkerchief (the first gift given to her by Othello), Emilia finds it, and gives it to her husband Iago, at his request, unaware of what he plans to do with it. Othello reenters and vows with Iago for the death of Desdemona and Cassio, after which he makes Iago his lieutenant. Act III, scene iii, is considered to be the turning point of the play as it is the scene in which Iago successfully sows the seeds of doubt in Othello's mind, inevitably sealing Othello's fate.
=== Act IV ===
Iago plants the handkerchief in Cassio's lodgings, then tells Othello to watch Cassio's reactions while Iago questions him. Iago goads Cassio on to talk about his affair with Bianca, a local courtesan, but whispers her name so quietly that Othello believes the two men are talking about Desdemona. Later, Bianca accuses Cassio of giving her a second-hand gift which he had received from another lover. Othello sees this, and Iago convinces him that Cassio received the handkerchief from Desdemona.
Enraged and hurt, Othello resolves to kill his wife and asks Iago to kill Cassio. Othello proceeds to make Desdemona's life miserable, hitting her in front of visiting Venetian nobles. Meanwhile, Roderigo complains that he has received no results from Iago in return for his money and efforts to win Desdemona, but Iago convinces him to kill Cassio.
=== Act V ===
Roderigo attacks Cassio in the street after Cassio leaves Bianca's lodgings. Cassio wounds Roderigo. During the scuffle, Iago comes from behind Cassio and badly cuts his leg. In the darkness, Iago manages to hide his identity, and when Lodovico and Gratiano hear Cassio's cries for help, Iago joins them. When Cassio identifies Roderigo as one of his attackers, Iago secretly stabs Roderigo to stop him revealing the plot. Iago then accuses Bianca of the failed conspiracy to kill Cassio.
Othello confronts Desdemona, and then strangles her to death in their bed. When Emilia arrives, Othello accuses Desdemona of adultery. Emilia calls for help. The former governor Montano arrives, with Gratiano and Iago. When Othello mentions the handkerchief as proof, Emilia realizes what her husband Iago has done, and she exposes him, whereupon he kills her. Othello, belatedly realising Desdemona's innocence, stabs Iago but not fatally, saying that he would rather have Iago live the rest of his life in pain.
Iago refuses to explain his motives, vowing to remain silent from that moment on. Lodovico apprehends both Iago and Othello for the murders of Roderigo and Emilia, but Othello commits suicide. Lodovico appoints Gratiano Othello's successor and exhorts Cassio to punish Iago justly.
|
tragedy, revenge, murder, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
This is the best film of a Shakespeare play that I have ever seen.
(Throne of Blood is a great movie, but it's an adaptation, not really Shakespeare's Macbeth.) What makes the difference for me are the outstanding performances by the entire cast, not just Olivier.
I haven't seen any other roles played by either Frank Finlay or Joyce Redman, but in any case, they're excellent here.
I much prefer Olivier's Othello to his film role as Hamlet.
More text gives more characterization to Othello, and gives Olivier the chance to really fill the role, which he does beautifully.
The National Theatre production of 'Othello' was legendary - one of Laurence Olivier's iconic roles from the era when white actors still blacked up to play the lead part.But is it really any good on the screen?
It is essentially filmed theatre with an overpowering performance from Olivier, which is perhaps too large for viewing away from the stage - but it does benefit from three key parts of excellence in support (Frank Finlay as Iago, in Shakespeare's longest role as far as numbers of lines is concerned; Maggie Smith as a delicate Desdemona; and a very young Derek Jacobi as Cassio, resplendent in fine clothes and groomed hair).Trimmed slightly from the full play, it nevertheless keeps the main characters and the sense of the story, and plays at nearly two and a half hours.
Tight direction, good diction, and - as far as filmed theatre can be - adequate sets give this Othello an edge which means it is still relevant today..
Still the best OTHELLO on film after 40 Years despite first rate competition.
Viewing this superb filmed stage production (as well and faithfully filmed as any stage production could be) many may question why a Shakespearian actor of Olivier's standing resisted playing The Moor of Venice as hard as he did.
The reason is absolutely plain in his performance - Paul Robeson's world shattering Broadway performance on Broadway for the Theatre Guild in 1943 (tragically, never filmed, but recorded complete by Columbia Records).It was Robeson (the first major black actor to play the part in a major commercial production - 280 performances at the Shubert Theatre, where A CHORUS LINE would eventually set musical records) who changed how we look at Othello - previously usually played as the MOOR Shakespeare wrote (frequently played in blackface, but the key element was the Islamic roots in North Africa - see Orson Welles' 1952 film, documenting for virtually the only time on sound film the earlier tradition - Welles would not have made a credible black man), and critics in 1943 drew the distinction between a Moor and a "Black-a-Moor".
After Robeson, it became nearly impossible to think of anyone but a black actor in the role.
Either way, the tale of the perpetual outsider, cautioning against jealousy and spousal abuse AGES before they became popular "causes" rings remarkably true.Finally persuaded to add the Moor of Venice to his Shakespearian repertoire, and ultimately (he toured it all over Europe first) to his long list of distinguished Shakespearian films - after his brilliant HENRY V, it is probably his best - Olivier did everything in his power to honor, even copy, the Robeson performance.YES, Frank Findlay runs away with the piece as Iago, and Maggie Smith's accent occasionally jars, but younger audiences will be astonished at the young "Professor McGonagall".
It is remarkable Smith didn't have whiplash after playing over a hundred performances of the extremely physical bedroom scene.
All told this all star cast still surpasses the excellent, frequently AS well acted but shorter, more "movie-movie" versions from Laurence Fishburne et al..Olivier is so good in this role which has been one of Fishburne's best, I'd love to see what Fishburne could do with HENRY V; I bet it would be great..
Surely this is his best Shakespeare role, but must admit I wish he could have filmed Macbeth.
This was film Shakespeare at its best--until Branagh's Hamlet..
As this is a filmed stage production, some concessions must be made for the extravagant, loud, performances of some of the cast, although this over-acting does tend to get in the way.
Laurence Olivier, as Othello, the moor of Venice, is extraordinary, and some moments in his performance are superb, but his constant habit of shouting at the top of his voice and throwing himself around the stage grates.
His voice, made deeper by vocal training, will surprise those who are used to seeing Olivier in other films, where he does not play an Arab.
Frank Finlay is an absolutely brilliant Iago, willingly talking to us, the audience, in his soliluquies, as though we were one of the characters, and taking malicious delight in his evil machinations.
CAST RATING (out of 10) Laurence Oliver (6) Maggie Smith (9) Joyce Redman (6) Frank Finlay (10) Derek Jacobi (8).
In fact William Shakespeare probably should have entitled the play Iago instead.Othello gets the title because the emphasis is on his reactions to Iago's hints of infidelity in regard to Othello's new wife Desdemona.
Because Othello, a Moorish soldier of fortune in the pay of the Duke of Venice passes Iago over for a promotion and gives it to another favorite named Cassio.
All that sucking up gone for naught, Iago plans subtle revenge.But in order to make this work, it's more than Othello he has to maneuver.
He drops lies and suspicions to Othello, Desdemona, Cassio, and even his own wife Emilia, to another suitor for Desdemona named Rodrigo, in short to just about the rest of the cast.
It's why I think Iago's character is central.Nevertheless Othello earned for Laurence Olivier another nomination for Best Actor and for Maggie Smith as Desdemona, Best Actress.
Frank Finlay as the subtle and clever Iago and Joyce Redman as his wife Emilia got nominations in the Supporting Actor categories.
And as Rodrigo who Iago plays like a piccolo is Robert Lang, both of whom are cast perfectly.Unlike Olivier's other Shakespearean work, this is essentially a photographed stage play.
I am very fond of Shakespeare's work so I was all for seeing Olivier's Othello having loved his Hamlet so much.
You couldn't have had a more perfect cast either, I think Laurence Olivier's Othello has more depth than his Hamlet, and to this day I still consider it one of his best performances on films, he is extraordinary.
Maggie Smith is poignant, delicate and determined as Desdemona, and a young Derek Jacobi is excellent as Cassio.
Frank Finlay's Iago is clever, conniving and altogether brilliant, for me the best of the supporting turns.
Olivier got a lot of flack at the time for the Al Jolson performance, from people who failed to take into account the exaggeration of gesture and make-up that goes with a stage production.
That's all it is, a film of a stage production, but visually the stage design is good and the photography presents it excellently..
Second, his interpretation is a valid one and I didnt know there was a rule that actors could not play characters of different races.
Olivier uses a full octave voice lower for the performance, unatural to his usual tenor voice.
If one simply judges the acting, it should be seen as a powerful piece of work.
Best Movie Version of Othello.
Laurence Olivier was nominated for Best Actor for his role as Othello, and deservedly so.
I was mesmerized by his performance, he was truly one of the greatest actors of all time.All of the cast performed very well: Frank Finlay as Iago, Joyce Redman as Emilia, Maggie Smith as Desdemona, and in his very first movie role, Derek Jacobi as Cassio.
The costumes were very good too - I far more enjoy watching Shakespeare set in it's original and appropriate time in history..
This version of Othello would be best enjoyed by the over 20 crowd.
Laurence Olivier is masterful in this film.
This version of Othello should also give good credit for the performance of Frank Finlay as Iago.
Maggie Smith also portrays a good Desdemona.
It is amazing at how well Laurence Olivier performs in Othello, yet to no surprise since he is a consummate Shakespearean actor.
No matter what, this film should be seen by all who enjoy Shakespeare.
Still, first of all, let's just say outright that this is a glorious adaptation of a great play, and my 9 rating would be a 10 if it had been made as a true movie instead of simply a filmed play.
As such, it is still glorious, but think of what Olivier might have done with it if given the resources he worked with in HENRY V.First of all, Othello IS a black man.
He is not simply a Moor, or a brown fellow, but black, and Othello and others say this many times in the play.
As for Olivier's make-up, it is NOT black face (which is a pejorative term rightly associated with minstrelsy) but simply coloring to make the actor look like the character he is playing.
I would go so far as to say that in my somewhat limited experience with white actors playing black roles - pretty much limited to OTHELLO, actually - but we may want to throw some Indians (red or brown, take your choice) or Hispanic roles in there, Olivier's is the most perfect visual realization of a black man I have ever seen by a white man.
If you were to look at any photograph of him in the role without the actor being identified as Laurence Olivier, you would not doubt for a minute that a black actor was playing this part.
Let's also dismiss this nonsense about Olivier paying any kind of homage to Paul Robeson in this role or, for that matter, that black actors didn't play this role before Robeson came along.
Also, although Robeson was a quite successful Othello, he was not a greatly lauded one at the time, but only in retrospect, mainly because although he had been gifted with one of the greatest natural singing and speaking voices of his time and was a good actor, he was not a great actor and pretty much supported both his singing and acting interpretations by relying on the glory of that natural voice (Richard Burton was kept from being a truly great actor later on due to that same reliance on voice rather than interpretation - call it 'technique', if you must).
The voice he puts on, which is certainly more of a bass than a baritone one, was one of the great shocks of my life when I first heard it - how could the always-tenor-toned Olivier get down there with Robeson, Welles and Ezio Pinza(!), but he did.
Also, there was a very noted black actor successfully playing Othello at the time, one whose natural voice was just about as deep as Robeson's (or Olivier's put on) voice, and that was William Marshall (Blacula, unfortunately, to later generations), who may actually have been a better actor than Robeson or Welles (Orson was a very great director, but only a very good actor).
Olivier had not played Othello before the 1960s because he was smitten with the role of Iago, which he did play to Ralph Richardson's Othello in the late 1940s.
(The story was that Olivier introduced a not-too-subtle homoerotic theme into Iago's hatred of Othello, but they never made Richardson aware of it, and it went right over his head.
Ralph was very straitlaced as well as very straight!)There may have been some criticisms of Olivier's Othello, but most of the criticism I remember of it at the time was overwhelmingly laudatory, so much so that the original English production got a quite huge article written about it in LIFE magazine at the time, and Olivier pretty much walked away with that year's entire London theatrical season.As for only black actors doing Othello now, that is pretty much true, but unfortunate, because any actor should be able to play any of the great roles which his talent will allow for, and for which audiences are willing to pay to see.
At the Met Opera, their recent production of Verdi's OTELLO dictated that the tenor playing the role eschew black make-up entirely, so that the black character, referred to so often as black in the opera, too, and part of whose baggage regarding his falling so easily for Iago's treacherous insinuations about Desdemona is that very blackness - his outsider status as both a black man and a non-Venetian (which should explain Olivier's 'strange' accent in the movie) making Iago's job easy.
A Great Performance By Olivier.
While the direction and cinematography weighs this movie down and keeps me from giving it 9 stars, Laurence Olivier's performance is so phenomenal it raises the film above mediocrity and makes it one that absolutely has to be seen - especially for those who aren't yet convinced of Olivier's greatness.
(Frank Finlay is also brilliant as the evil Iago.) A great story of jealousy and evil human schemes also makes this a tale that needs to be known.
See my comment in the Message Boards here for more about the DVD.Some trivia: The Italian film director Franco Zeffirelli said of Olivier's stage version: "I was told that this was the last flourish of the romantic tradition of acting.
I would call it a lesson for us all." John Steinbeck said that Olivier's performance on-stage was the greatest he had ever seen.
Other critics, particularly Bosley Caruthers in the New York Times, trashed the performance as rubbish both on-stage and screen, accusing Olivier of making the noble Moor into a racist caricature.
Sammy Davis Jr.' claimed that Olivier had come to see him perform multiple times and copied some of his mannerisms in his Othello.
Olivier said that the play belongs to Iago, who could make the Moor look a credulous idiot.
When Kenneth Tynan told Olivier that Orson Welles had described Othello as "a natural baritone", Olivier, a natural tenor, took voice lessons for several weeks.
Tynan wrote in his book "Profiles" (Nick Hern Books, 1989): "In the opening exchanges with Iago, Olivier displays the public mask of Othello: a Negro sophisticated enough to conform to the white myth about Negroes, pretending to be simple and not above rolling the eyes, but in fact concealing (like any other aristocrat) a highly developed sense of racial superiority...
Olivier's was not a noble, 'civilised' Othello but a triumphant black despot, aflame with unadmitted self-regard.
A wonderful tale of revenge, betrayal, jealousy and racism seen through the eyes of Othello, Iago, Desdemona and Cassio, the film is based on a National Theatre production of the play.
As it was made on a small budget, it is essentially a filmed stage play rather than the film adaptation of a play but that didn't bother me as the performances are brilliant - particularly those of Laurence Olivier and Frank Finlay - and Stuart Burge was a sufficiently talented director to make good use of the limited resources at his disposal.Iago is one of the most fascinating Shakespearean characters that I have yet come across.
Frank Finlay is excellent in the complicated role, delivering an extremely subtle performance.
He never makes the mistake of going over the top and playing Iago in an obvious, cartoonishly villainous fashion.
One of the major reasons why I thought that Olivier's version of "Richard III" was a lesser adaptation was that he committed all of the mistakes that Finlay avoids here.
Finlay was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for his role of Iago but, based on his screen time and the fact that he had the most lines, he would have really been nominated for Best Actor as Olivier was.
In what would obviously be unacceptable by today's standards, Olivier plays Othello in blackface as well as deepening his voice and putting on a strange accent.
However, it is a testament to Olivier's great skill as an actor that he is never less than completely engrossing as the title character, particularly in the scenes in which he displays hysterical anger.
He has succeeded as a black man in a racist society and as such he is the subject of scorn, being referred as "the Moor" in the play considerably more often than by his name or title.
However, Othello is not a particularly good man.
Othello is a tragic hero but he is more of a compelling character than a sympathetic one.In one of her first major roles, Maggie Smith is extremely good as Desdemona, the "sweetest innocent that e'er did lift up eye," and crucially has great chemistry with Olivier.
In his first film appearance, the 27-year-old Derek Jacobi is excellent as Cassio, playing the important supporting role with a great level of skill for such a young man.
For her role as Iago's unfortunate wife Emilia, Joyce Redman was deservedly nominated for Best Supporting Actress and her best work is seen in the character's extreme anger and distress after she discovers that Othello has killed Desdemona.
Like Jacobi, Michael Gambon made his film debut here but, unlike Jacobi, he was relegated to a "blink and you'll miss it" appearance in the background.Overall, this is an excellent version of one of the most absorbing of Shakespeare's tragedies..
Anyone who knows anything about Shakespeare's tragedies, or who even thinks about them for him/herself, knows that Othello is not about jealousy.
Nor, in spite of what Olivier is supposed to have said, is it about Iago.
As one or two of the more intelligent reviewers have noted, an actor is allowed to "act" any theatrical role he/she wishes, black, white or purple.
The scenery, and the rest of the business, is not really a priority, and should never excessively obtrude, or become "cinematic".If someone truly wants to know what Shakespeare's Othello is about, they should watch and listen closely to Olivier's delivery.
|
tt0119237
|
Gummo
|
A grainy voiced narrator (Solomon) recounts the events of the tornado while disturbing home-movie images play — mostly of the town's people. A mute adolescent boy, known as Bunny Boy, wears only pink bunny ears, shorts, and tennis shoes on an overpass in the rain.
A cat is carried by the scruff of its neck by Tummler, a teenage boy. He drowns the cat in a barrel of water. The film then cuts to a different scene with Tummler, in a wrecked car with a girl. They fondle each other, and Tummler realizes there is a lump in one of the girl's breasts.
Tummler and Solomon then ride down a hill on bikes. The narrator introduces Tummler as a boy with "a marvelous persona", whom some people call "downright evil". Later, Tummler aims an air rifle at a cat. His friend Solomon stops him from killing the cat, protesting that it is a house cat. They leave and the camera follows the cat to its owners' house. The cat is owned by three sisters, two of whom are teenagers and one who is pre-pubescent.
The film cuts back to Tummler and Solomon, who are hunting feral cats. They bring the cats to a local grocer, who intends to butcher and sell them to a local restaurant, and the grocer tells them that they have a rival in the cat killing business. They then buy glue from the grocer, which they use to get high via huffing.
The film then cuts to a scene in which two foul-mouthed young boys dressed as cowboys destroy things in a junkyard. Bunny Boy arrives and the other boys shoot him "dead" with cap guns. Bunny Boy plays dead and the boys curse at him, rifle through his pockets, then remove and throw one of his shoes. They grow bored of this and leave him sprawled on the ground.
Tummler and Solomon track down a local boy who is poaching "their" cats. The poacher, named Jarrod Wiggley, is poisoning the cats rather than shooting them. When Tummler and Solomon break into Jarrod's house with masks and weapons with intent to hurt him, they find photos of the young teen in drag and his elderly grandmother, who is catatonic and attached to life support machinery. The poacher Jarrod is forced to care for her, which he had earlier opined was "disgusting". Seeing that Jarrod isn't home, Tummler and Solomon decide to leave. Tummler then discovers the grandmother lying in her bed, states that it is "no way to live," and turns off the life support machine.
A number of other scenes are interspersed throughout the film, including: an intoxicated man (played by Harmony Korine) flirting with a gay dwarf; a man pimping his Down syndrome afflicted sister to Solomon and Tummler; the sisters encountering an elderly child molester; a pair of twin boys selling candy door-to-door; a brief conversation with a tennis player who is treating his ADD; a long scene of Solomon eating breakfast while taking a bath in dirty water; a drunken party with arm- and chair-wrestling; and two skinhead brothers boxing each other in their kitchen. There are also a number of even smaller scenes depicting Satanic rituals, footage seemingly from home movies, and conversations containing racial bigotry.
The next scene in the movie is set to the song "Crying" by Roy Orbison, which had been previously mentioned by Tummler as the song his older brother,who was a transsexual, would sing (the brother eventually went to the "Big City" and abandoned him). The final scene involves Solomon and Tummler shooting the sisters' cat repeatedly with their air rifles in the rain with jump cuts to Bunny Boy kissing the teenage girls in a swimming pool. Bunny Boy runs towards the camera through a field holding the body of the dead cat, which he shows to the audience, breaking fourth wall.
The final scene shows a girl, who shaved her eyebrows earlier in the movie, singing "Jesus Loves Me" in front of her parents in bed. The film finally cuts to black as they tell her to go to bed.
|
comedy, mystery, avant garde, cult, violence, psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
It only took me a few minutes to realize why so many critics hated it, which was the very reason I liked this film.Gummo is a classic case of style over substance.
On first viewing, Gummo appears to be a collection of random events, but after watching it a few more times, it it becomes more obvious how each scene and character link together (although there are still a few that I am unsure of!!).
Perspectives and values change as we grow older, whether or not a young man will mature to the point of recognizing the follies and dreams of his youth or he'll embrace the anger and grow up to be GG Allin, and whether or not settling down to a regular life is a personal betrayal of a former self, I think something like Gummo needs to be made and more of it.This is punk filmmaking at its scummiest, the vibe of antisocial angst despair and anger is pure necro punk rock like GG Allin throwing feces at his audience and smashing beer cans open on his head, it's about being violent and eccentric right now as a means of killing time and making something out of tearing down something else.
But it's good to have these things captured on film then thrown away for anyone who might wanna find them.I read a bit about Trash Humpers and it seems Harmony Korine doesn't feel there's anything to grow out of.
Set in Xenia, Ohio, Gummo feels like a deliberate riposte to Hollywood by its creator, Harmony Korine, whose penchant for subversion was already evident in his screen writing debut for Larry Clark's Kids (1995).
While there may not be a plot, it doesn't need one because the different stories it tells weave together perfectly and you get a great picture of the town and its residents.The film is shot brilliantly as well, Korine using so many different techniques so effectively.
Although the simple plot line of "White trash living in Ohio" might not seem that enthralling, the way the movie is shot, mixing documentary style (albeit acted) clips with an actual plotline, is excellent.
These aren't the (supposedly) proud and noble people who came to America on board the Mayflower, but rather those that travelled in the ships hull; those who eventually ended up in some dreary trailer camp and hamlet somewhere in the Midwest, simply because they weren't wanted anywhere else."The prophet has no honor in his own country", goes an old saying, which would explain the harsh criticism that director Harmony Korine has received, especially by American critics and reviewers.
Korine descends from a similar environment and I dare say that it took courage to explore such an uncomfortable background.The closest I can compare "Gummo" to is Werner Herzog's "Stroszek"; not only are the filming techniques very similar (whether Korine is a Herzog-fan I do not know, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least), blending together professionals, amateur- and non-actors seamlessly, but both films have a similar nihilist air, telling stories that are free of redemption, yet captivate the viewer's attention like a travelling freak-show or the birth of a two-headed cow.One of the main reasons that I was watching "Gummo" in the first place, before even realizing what kind of film it was, was the presence of actor Jacob Reynolds.
Not that i'm a photography or directing genius, but the director worked with many different kinds of film to bring out the grime and trash of the movie.
Then I'd be perfectly happy if another tornado came by and leveled the whole place.Watching this movie was like looking at those years through some really distorted mirror and finding recognizeable nuances of personality in it.
There are always going to be wannabe artsy types out there who claim to see things other people don't; they "get" movies like Gummo, or at least they pretend to, so they can act as if they're in on something the rest of the world just isn't smart enough to understand.
It goes like this: first, we get to watch a shirtless boy in a bunny hood spit and urinate off an overpass; next, we meet two teenagers who ride their bikes around the desolate and dilapidated town, looking for cats they can kill and sell to a local restaurant owner; then, we're introduced to three bleach-blonde sisters who don't seem to have any parents and who busy themselves with such activities as ripping electrical tape off their bare nipples.
We actually feel the dread, frustration, meaninglessness that people caught in these circumstances experience.This is why I read, go to movies, listen to music and experience all art - to experience life from the many different perspectives available.
If you only want to be entertained - there really are only a few stories to tell and there are many "artists" out there willing to serve you the same McArt to "satisfy" your needs, but for those of us who would like to know more about something other than ourselves and our ethnocentric, narcissistic experiences, movies like Gummo will always be admired.
I think the problem is that most of us expect something different from film, art, novels because we've been fed so much crap that (similar to my kids when they come back from a week at a friend or family member's house where fast food is the daily fare) we cannot taste the goodness of real meals.
Any 30+ year old film buff with a decent taste could probably watch "Kids" and at least get a bit of perspective, while maybe questioning the youth of the nation.Gummo doesn't have any questions to ask though.
It might seem pointless at first, but you may need to look a bit closer to truly analyze the themes of Gummo.The opening scenes describe how a tornado has destroyed the town of Xenia, Ohio, and we then begin viewing the residents of the town trying to find meaning in their pointless, hopeless, and overall miserable lives.Korine stated once that about 75% of Gummo was scripted.
The documentary feel adds to the film spectacularly because it forces the viewer to confront reality: that, somewhere in the world, there are people who behave as the characters in Gummo do.Even the name of Gummo is symbolic in a few ways.
Korine, here, is stating that Gummo is something new; something cinema has literally never seen before, even if it has seen its "relatives" ("Kids" possibly?)There are a number of assumptions that reviewers make when discussing the film; I'm not suggesting any of these are right or wrong, but they do exist.
It's not even sadness about poverty, or loneliness, but rather a state of hatred for anything and everything, the feeling of wanting to be dead, or at the very least have something to give life meaning.Gummo hits the audience over the head repeatedly with its horrors of this small town wasteland.
The comparison could be made that watching Gummo is like reading about the Holocaust; neither are fun to watch, and the imagery is nauseating at times, yet many people are fascinated by it, not in a sadistic sense of the word, but merely fascinated by the fact that it happened.
When I first started watching this film I was somewhat shocked having grown up very far away from anything like the town that the movie was set in.
The reality of the film is rather depressing but this is what a lot of America is like- the grimy scene when the two boys get milkshakes was a great slice of the crappy culture that is much of the United States and of the world.
Young Harmony Korine,who wrote "Kids"(1995),made his directional debut with this truly bizarre low budget piece of art about young people in small town of Xenia,Ohio.The main characters-two boys(Solomon and Tummler)kill cats for fun and break into a house to euthanize an old woman.Other oddities on display are a man who pimps his retarded sister,a strange shirtless boy in pink bunny ears etc,etc.I love "Gummo",because I'm in the position of enjoying everything what is different and controversial.Almost everything today is corporate Hollywood trash with an overblown budget and overpaid actors/actresses.It's truly a refreshing change to see something original like "Gummo".Of course it is intentionally outlandish,often repulsive and occasionally hilarious,but it's a treat,if you're fed up with MTV-oriented banal Hollywood crap.Personally I love the soundtrack of "Gummo"-great death/black metal stuff(Burzum,Bethlehem etc.)Especially Bethlehem is an unique band.They play totally depressing death/black/suicide metal with some of the sickest vocals ever recorded.It's truly an amazing music-check out especially their albums like "Dictius Te Necare"(1996)and "S.U.I.Z.I.D"(1998)!So if you don't mind to see something different,watch "Gummo"-you'll love it!.
I don't want to denigrate anyone, but those people really did give 'Southern whites' a bad image, in my opinion, kind of like the way ghetto trash makes people feel about other poor black people.
Nick Sutton (Tummler) was discovered by Harmony on a talk show that pertained to 'paint-sniffing survivors'- he commented that anyone who can survive copious amounts of inhalants must have a good constitution and that those were the kinds of people he wanted to work with...Much has been made of the shocking nature of this film.
I think I like the pointlessness of the film, the lack of story, plot, even character development.
All of this contributes to the picture Gummo paints.On the other hand, I think some more attention should have been devoted towards character development and plot, simply so we could understand the scene better.
Although set in Xenia, Ohio, Gummo was filmed in Nashville Tennessee because, I suspect, they would have been run out of town in Xenia, which is certainly not glorified in any way and is not even accurately portrayed, especially the accent.
If you think you'd share their opinion on a movie with no plot, disturbing central characters and almost no point, then don't see it.Gummo is a film that captures a certain time in a certain place with certain people.
It simply shows you these images, these people and says: "Look, this is what's happening behind our backs in America."Despite the fact that the characters are hollow, amoral and almost emotionless in this movie, there's an inescapable sense of innocence in all of them.
The characters (and real people!) in this film make an impression, even when they are only shown for a short time and have a few lines (or no lines, like Bunny Boy).
However, what makes Gummo so much more than a "shock" movie (as so many people seem to think it is) is its non-judegemental tone on the various "freakish" characters on display.Like a good anthropologist, Harmony Korine presents the various characters in Gummo without criticizing or placing value judgements on them.
by letting his actors improvise their scenes, he allows the actors to express themselves without worrying about whether or not the director approves of their "acting." So, in a sense, Harmony Korine is trying to bring a new "realism" to cinema, without the restraints of either cinematic techniques (i.e. lighting, camera angles, setting up the scene) or the dictatorial control of the director.So, that, in essence is why Gummo is such a breakthrough movie.
The film appears to be trying to show a snapshot of American life in a rundown town, but I don't believe it - has anybody been to a town like this, don't think so?There was no acting to speak of as pretty much everybody just emotionlessly reads lines or possibly just made stuff up - who knows - nobody says anything important or relevant so you cannot tell.The film could have started at any point and ended at any point and not detracted from it's contents (if it had finished 2 minutes after it started I would have been happier).
On the surface, this film is pure trash, but the more you delve into the disgusting and filthy masterpiece that is, Gummo, the more tragically beautiful the movie becomes.
And let me warn you, watching gummo is kind of like consuming a Harmony Korine "drug".
It's set out like a documentary so it doesn't need to have a plot, it's simply clips of weird things people do in this town of 'white trash'.
This aspect of the film makes Gummo one that can be viewed multiple times very easily,as there is not a major plot that gets resolved in the end.
These people could be anyone you or i knew, especially if you lived in a somewhat poor town in the midwest, like i did.You're not going to like this movie if you look at it to be anything other than what it is- a BRILLIANT and accurate social commentary on the sad, but at times bittersweet condition of "white trash" America..
Gummo is overated.I heard about this movie from many people.They all said how its so great and how I have to see it.Well,I enjoyed KIDS,it's a bit shocking,maybe a little perverse,but it was entertaining.Gummo is not shocking,but very perverse and quite pointless.Hicks ride around on bikes,get dirty,kill cats and have sex with retards.I cant tell you how long Ive waited for someone to make a movie about that!Thought provoking?Definately.I will definately think twice about renting another one of Harmony's movies.Dont see this movie if you respect yourself.Dont believe the hype.Its not a brilliant,modern,shocking,innovative or unique film.It sucks.Plain and simple.Rent Gone with The wind or Casablanca,maybe even the Pokemon Movies,but dont see this..
Trash like this inevitably triggers reviews rife with words like "genius," "misunderstood," "surreal," and "cult." The lower-middle-class white Midwest has become the happening place for hipster artists to go slumming for material, but all Korine seems to have done is slap together a shock-value home movie featuring some cheesy film-school-assignment cinematography and editing.
(Kids was written by Harmony Korine and Chloë Sevigny plays the lead female role)The only good thing about this movie was the pink bunny ears which I'm sure had no metaphorical value of any sort or any reason other than to make viewers think there was one....but hey, pink bunny ears are pink bunny ears regardless..
Perhaps Harmony Korine saw this sequence too many times, and subconsciously made it his goal to bring all viewers fears of what exactly was in that boy's head to fruition through the creation of Gummo's character, Solomon (curiously similar in appearance).
Amid a slur of controversy, aptly launched by a string of indie directors enthralled by Harmony Korine's previous movie, Kids, the newly declared genius director was encouraged to deliver yet another account of life in white trash America, set in a fictional town hit by a tornado.
I have not yet seen Korine's other films, but at this time I think Korine had all the basic elements of making a movie, he just isn't sure how to develop a rational plot, sequence, or character background for anyone.
I suppose its over length contributes to my being unmoved by a majority of the complete randomness of the supposedly "shocking" sequences throughout; each action committed by a person in the movie just goes nowhere
I believe Harmony Korine was trying to show that in real life, people like this are as aimless with their futures as they are depicted here, and just do whatever they are used to, no matter what it takes.
Its characters consist of dysfunctional and generally uneducated townsfolk and we see them trawl through their everyday lives.The movie is well directed and some of the scenes work very well with the cleverly chosen music, the ending being a good example.Overall however, I just can't escape the feeling that Gummo is too arty for its own good.
There are three sisters who have a cat, a sub-humanoid child who lifts weights made out of silverware and his teenage friend who he goes off with to sniff glue and competes with a boy who kills cats and seems to want to be a model, a group of people who wrestle and demolish a chair, a Jewish midget who is gay and black that gets told stories from another kid(played by director Harmony Korine) about how he was sodomized as a child, an albino woman looking for a man, and, in particular, a boy with rabbit ears who skateboards around town and is harassed by a couple of other boys.
I hate how it has nothing to say about this rural, poverty-stricken town except "haha, look at this shithole." I've heard Harmony Korine talk about his ideas of universal transcendent beauty, and how nothing portrayed in this film is "ugly" to him, so it can't be exploitation.
And instead of resulting in a project that doesn't know what it wants to be, it helps the film achieve the exact, dream-like aesthetic that it sets out for.Korine shows the same knack for pacing and dialogue that he did in "Kids", even if he uses it to create a much more nonlinear narrative this time around.
The movie Gummo can be described as raw, real, honest, exploitive, distasteful, explicit, artistic, and even "life-changing" as one film critic had said.
A great cutting-edge indie exploitation film with a touch of avant-garde film-making is Gummo, and I don't think that you can find a single movie out there quite like it.
Well, there is "Julien-Donkey Boy" (also directed by Harmony Korine and stars Chloe Sevigny), but even that good film doesn't match up to Gummo.
People have complained of a lack of plot in "Gummo" but who could deny that the film does indeed tell a story set firmly in its own doomed present.
This is just like watching and documentary about real people, except it isn't, and for that I think it deserves praise.Some have criticized it's lack of plot, I felt completely mesmerized by each scene.
Gummo is probably the best artistic film ever made, even though most of my favorite movies are from Hollywood or are foreign.
|
tt2290065
|
100 Bloody Acres
|
Reg and Lindsay Morgan own and operate a small blood and bone fertiliser business in country South Australia. While making local deliveries and the occasional roadkill pick up, Reg encounters the crash site of a van, the driver dead inside. Reg recovers the body from the crash and puts it in the back of his own truck. Making his way back to the brothers' plant, Reg is delayed again, this time by three tourists stuck on the side of the road: Sophie, a young woman; James, Sophie's boyfriend; and Wes, James' friend, with whom Sophie is having an affair. Reg takes an instant attraction to Sophie, and, against his better judgement, allows the three to ride with him.
Wes and James ride in the back of the truck with the hidden corpse, and Sophie rides up front with Reg. Sophie gets to know Reg, while James tells Wes that he plans to marry Sophie. The pair soon discover the corpse and fear for their lives. Sophie starts to find things in common with Reg, but Reg's anxiety gets the better of him. This unnerves Sophie, and, as soon as the truck arrives at the plant, Reg detains her. Lindsay arrives and demands to know what is going on. Reg suggests that they can grind the people into fertiliser, and Lindsay berates him for his lack of planning for such a bold crime. Ultimately, Lindsay agrees to Reg's idea, and it is revealed that the pair have ground humans in the past: in order to create a new formula for their fertiliser, the pair ground a group of charity volunteers who crashed and died in a nearby road accident.
Wes and James are soon detained with Sophie, and the trio watch as Reg and Lindsay grind the driver. At the last minute, Reg becomes convinced that the man is still alive and tries to save him, to no avail. When Wes cuts himself loose and escapes, Lindsay pursues him. Sophie takes advantage of the situation and attempts to seduce Reg, much to James' chagrin. Reg catches on to the ruse and exposes Sophie's infidelity with Wes, further angering James. Lindsay soon returns with Wes, accumulating the body of a local police officer along the way. Reg now begins to have serious second thoughts about the pair's actions. When Nancy, their elderly neighbour, surprises the brothers with a visit, Lindsay stuffs Reg in a car boot with Wes, cutting off Wes' hand in the process. Reg and Wes work together to escape, and Reg enters the house alone to confront his brother.
Reg overhears Lindsay tell Nancy that Reg has moved away, perhaps permanently. As Reg gathers his courage, Lindsay and Nancy begin to have sex. Severely disturbed, Reg decides instead to stealthily steal Lindsay's keys. As he is about to take them, Wes stumbles into the house, looking for his missing hand. In a fit of rage, Lindsay kills Wes and Nancy, and Reg flees with the keys. James and Sophie panic when they hear the gunshots, but Sophie decides to return to the farm when she hears Reg call out to her; James angrily breaks up with Sophie as she leaves. After a brief struggle, Lindsay overpowers and ties up Reg. As Lindsay prepares Reg for grinding, Sophie returns and distracts Lindsay. Reg is able to pull him in to the grinder, killing him; afterward, Sophie and Reg share a momentary attraction. In a post credits scene, James hysterically runs onto the road and is killed by a reckless driver.
|
comedy, murder, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
More of a comedy than anything else, in spite of the blood&gore.
On the other hand, there was sufficient blood&gore to let it fall under the Horror category.
Still, I found it more of a Comedy rather than anything else.The plot elements were cleverly employed, like the use of human bodies (from travel accidents, at first) to "improve" the fertilizer that the two brothers produce.
Those movie lovers fainting on the sight of blood, are better off when they avoid this one.The real secret ingredient of this film, however, is the humor that is incorporated all over the story, and works very well in hiding there is no real story to tell.
It is a Comedy rather than a Horror movie, is my conclusion, with the blood&gore only as binding element.All in all, I found this Horror very enjoyable.
I usually try to steer clear of blood&gore movies, but this time it is not the central theme that binds the scenes, unlike some other movies with no recognizable story line other than providing for reasons to miserably end other people's lives.
The relationship between the two fertilizer making brothers is much more important, as is the hasty and uncoordinated way they try to cover their tracks when the darker side of their business might be exposed.
Co-writer/directors Cameron and Colin Cairnes, in their feature film debut, successfully deliver all the essential elements needed to both make you laugh & squirm in their new black comedy "100 Bloody Acres".
A story of two unscrupulous brothers, Reg(Damon Herriman) and Lindsay Morgan(Angus Sampson) and their quest to be the unrivaled top dogs of the local fertilizer industry, a status that they will stop at nothing to achieve.
Our story starts out with Reg, while out driving one day he encounters a trio of kids, Sophie(Anna McGahan),James(Oliver Ackland) and Wesley(Jamie Kristian) who happen to have the bad luck of having car trouble and are looking for a ride into town to attend a local music festival.
At first Reg resists, but after some thought & a little nagging, he reluctantly welcomes James & Wes into the back of his cube truck & Sophie up front to ride with him.
Any good intentions soon vanish as the guys discover the body of a man Reg previously collected from an accident scene.
Thus the film descends into a quite comical & altogether gory fight as the trio does their best to remain "unprocessed" at the brother's fertilizer factory.While the plot consisted of conventional & somewhat clichéd ideas it used those elements to their maximum potential.
With fine acting from the entire cast, skillful gore effects and proper production values, the film managed some serious laugh out loud moments while also delivering a few bona fide quirky uncomfortable scenes of horror, all of which were delivered in fun, as it stayed mainly on the black comedy track.
If you don't mind gore and have the urge for a hilarious Aussie dark comedy, I absolutely recommend it.--^--7.4/10--^--.
Australian horror-comedy, 100 Bloody Acres starts off promising enough, but falls flat quickly as it falls into the trap of recycling past material.
The film fails at both being a comedy and a horror; being cheap, tacky and clichéd, this film doesn't reach any height that a toddler couldn't.Quite a boring expedition into the 'Wild Australian Outback' with this mock of a Wolf Creek like killer.
Cameron and Colin Cairnes wrote and directed a gem in 100 Bloody Acres.Starring Angus Sampson has also been another classic flicks, Insidious 2010, Insidious: Chapter 2 2013, Insidious: Chapter 3, Mad Max: Fury Road 2016 and a series of the classic television series, Underbelly 2008-2013.Also starring Damon Herriman who has also been in other classic flicks, House of Wax 2005, Son of a Gun 2014 and Praise 1998.Also starring Anna McGahan who was also in a series of the classic television series, Underbelly 2008-2013.Also starring John Jarrat who has also been in another classic backwoods flick, Wolf Creek 2005, Wolf Creek 2 2013 and other classic flicks, Django Unchained 2012, Rogue 2007, Dead Heart 1996, The Chant of Jimmy Blacksmith 1978, Dark Age 1987, Blue Murder 1995 and an episode of the classic television series Police Rescue 1989-1996.I enjoyed the violence, comedy and the scenes where the knife gets flicked and the aunty on the chair in the lounge room scene!If you enjoyed this as much as I did then check out other classic backwoods flicks, Hatchet III 2013, The Cabin in the Woods 2012, A Lonely Place to Die 2011, Resurrection County 2008, Straw Dogs 2011, Transit 2012, Tucker & Dale vs.
Both are comedies with horror elements if you will (or the other way around), but the way they are presented is more than different.
Not to mention the facets of the characters involved here.Tucker and Dale is simpler, which is not supposed to be a judgment, I loved the movie.
Full of dark humor and twisted gore!.
'100 BLOODY ACRES': Four Stars (Out of Five) Brothers Cameron and Colin Cairnes make their feature film debut writing and directing this Australian horror/comedy film about brothers who run an organic fertiliser business that's dependent on dead bodies (as it's secret ingredient) to make it work so well.
The movie stars character actors Damon Herriman and Angus Sampson as the brothers and the beautiful Anna McGahan as one of their captured victims.
The movie is full of dark humor and twisted gore.
If you like dark Australian comedy and horror this is the movie for you.Lindsay Morgan (Sampson) and his brother Reg (Herriman) have been running a successful organic fertiliser business for some time, that's finally getting it's first radio add, but the only problem is it's dependent on dead bodies, ran through a meat grinder, to make it work so well.
The Morgan brothers have been collecting car crash victims to supply this 'secret ingredient' to their fertiliser and as the film opens Reg has just found another body at a crash site.
While he's hauling the body home though he comes across a young woman, Sophie (McGahan), and her two male friends (Oliver Ackland and Jamie Kristian).
Due to the lack of dead bodies recently he decides to take them home, to his brother Lindsay, to use as the fertiliser ingredient instead (in an attempt to impress his bossy older brother).
Things don't go as planned though as Reg develops feelings for Sophie.If you couldn't tell the movie is part romance as well (twisted romance).
It's definitely not for the faint of heart though (or for those who become sickened by the site of blood and gore) but as a dark comedy and horror film it really works.
The Reg character is actually pretty likable and Sophie is one of the coolest and most ideal women a guy could hope for.
I love films like this; their great as long as you don't take them seriously.Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JQ4A-I9-JM.
100 Bloody Acres a great example of Australian film making, written and directed by the Cairnes brothers, it marked their feature length debut.
The Australians have a long history of great quirky films that tend to offer something a bit different and this one fits right into that history!
Its the story of a pair of brothers,Reg and Lindsay, who have an entrepreneurial spirit and the willingness to go the extra mile to get it right.
Reg comes across an accident scene, checking it out he realizes the driver is dead and hatches a plan for success.
Driving back to the family farm, and production facility he offers to help some unlucky travelers on their way to a music festival, who have run into a bit of car trouble.
He picks up the trio, Sophie, James and Wes, The boys go back into the back of the truck where the body is hidden and sophie rides shotgun with Reg. They pair begin to chat it up, as the boys in back find trouble.
Reg is desperate for his brothers approval, so he soldiers on but it isn't long before he has second thoughts and thats where things get really interesting.
Is there music and love in the future for our travelers or will they be spread between the rows like so much manure??100 Bloody Acres is a great film!
It has everything you need for a good time some weird sex, infidelity, sibling rivalry, a bit of good gore, hilarious action scenes and more!
It reminded me a bit of Black Sheep in the feel and tempo of the film, but was something very different in story.
I definitely recommend this one, its not going to have you jumping out of your seat but it will probably make you double over in laughter, while still giving enough tension and gore to appease your horror appetite!
One bloody funny comedy.
What this movie has going for it, is that it is an impressively funny comedy, and the gore isn't really that disturbing, because it looks very fake, but this is exactly how the film, was meant to be taken.
The always talented Herriman and his domineering brother, a real deeply dark, and disturbing performance by our Angus Sampson who played Prozac in Dags, run a dark organic fertilizer business, and have a guess what gets mixed in with the fertilizer.
There's some classic moments, and there's some of that real sharp cutting humor that made Two Hands the hit it was, and we do see a greater loss than hands go astray, and too we too have one gross, abhorrent, repellent, and gross, sex scene you'll never see coming, where if like Herriman, trying to acquire those keys, you'd want to parry your eyes as much as you could, or may'be sneak a peek in morbid fascination.
Yes this film is a little morbid, and likable Anna Gaghan as one of the hostage witnesses to Herriman's and Angus's insane operation, again shows her natural and realistic acting as a two timing sl..
no I won't say that word, who now falls in love with Reg, (Herriman) and you probably, thinking they live happily ever after right.
This film is fantastic and as far as comedy horror is concerned, one of the best.
The acting is the best I've seen for this kind of film and the special effects are great.
100 bloody acres is a cross between Lunchmeat/TCM and just about any roady horror film of the last 10 years or so but what I loved about this film was it didn't stop being fun.
They slowly start showing more gore, but that doesn't save the movie.The characters are boring which is what kills the movie.
It totally doesn't work.The saving grace is the mild humor from one of the characters who takes 'acid' which gives some decent comedic moments.
No mistake there's a lot of ickiness but when this charming feature gets going with its well-drawn oddball characters it's a delicious dark comedy above all.
The high-school gags and just the plane quirkiness lifts this out of the horror zone in the main and has a almost a relaxed country pace overlaid by timeless Aussie music on the radio.
Seems a little high on concept and maybe too many stupid ideas for one film - like an over eager film studies submission but it's a jolly good ride, bumpy, hairy, and a bloody good laugh..
A Funny and Twisted Dark Comedy..
I ran across this movie while looking up information on the actor Angus Sampson, after my girlfriend and I finished the second season of Fargo.
I wasn't disappointed with '100 Bloody Acres, and is a great addition to the dark-comedy genre.The real gem in this film is the comedy duo of Reg and Lindsay Morgan; two bumbling bogan brothers who run their own fertilizer business in rural Australia.
Damon Herriman plays the younger of the two (Reg) who only lives to impress his brother played by Angus Sampson.
They play off each others' dialogue, action and mistakes so well, that it's easy to believe they're siblings just trying to make ends meet, but are so mental that they both suffer from the same disorder: severe stupidity.Sure the movie is fairly predictable throughout, and there is some absolutely terrible acting from the main trio who end up in trouble, but events unfold and there are some very funny and gross moments in this film.
Direction wise it's a short and sweet little film without too much going on.
By the end of the film, they were definitely focusing on the dark and gory side of things.If you enjoy a twisted comedy then I would recommend this one.5/10.
Offbeat horror comedy that doesn't break any new ground but does entertain.
This Aussie romp about inept murder-brothers (played by Angus Sampsonand Damon Herriman) exemplifies what a horror-comedy should be.
The quips are laugh-out-loud worthy, the physical humour is never absurd or bad enough to take you out of the moment, the premise is original enough, the reference humour is played well and doesn't get in your face (which I truly appreciate, and makes for the much better laugh), it's just haphazard enough to feel roller-coaster-y without feeling disjointed, from a formulaic standpoint it stands heads and shoulders above most other films of the genre.
It's a solid film, a recommendable one even, but there's no real staying factor here, and I fear its value will slip with the passing of time, which is unfortunate for such a rare bit of perfectly-toeing-the-line horror/comedy.
Unfunny "horror" film.
The acting was good, but when the screenplay is this bad you really have to feel sorry for the actors for doing such a commendable job with such a weak script.Horribly unfunny.What little humor there was in this movie was of the situational variety, which works well in a TV sitcom if the jokes and acting back it up.
Horror, gore and comedy..
This Australian horror movie is directed and written by brothers Cameron and Colin Cairnes.
Brothers Reg(Damon Herriman)and Lindsay(Angus Sampson)Brown own and operate an organic fertilizer company and are running a bit behind on orders due to the lack of their "special ingredient"...road kill.
As Reg is running the roads in search of well, you know...three friends James, Sophie and Wesley encounter car trouble on their way to a much anticipated music festival.
It is not hard to convince Lindsay to fire up the grinder, when Reg arrives with fresh stock to complete the current run of fertilizer.Besides being funny, there are enough moments that will have you cringing, flinching and possibly gagging.
This horror film is a hoot!
Very funny, if derivative horror/comedy.
This was a very enjoyable low budget, black comedy about two brothers with a fertilizer company, who find an innovative way to increase the potassium level of their product.
This type of thing has been done before (Motel Hell, Blood Diner, The Undertaker and His Pals, etc...), but this flick kept things moving with a lot of quirky characters and funny lines that kept it flowing right to the end.
When Australian movies have a hip sense of humor like this one had, they make for a great viewing experience, but there really aren't that many that I've encountered that are particularly funny.
The performance of the brothers, the cop, and the old lady with her Corgi were the comic highlights of the film.
I don't know if the songs on the radio that were played almost continually throughout the film were written especially for the movie, but they were hilarious also.
Searching on Amazon UK,I found a 100 acre Aussie Horror Comedy.View on the film:Down on the farm with the Morgan's, co-writers/directors Cameron Cairnes & Colin Cairnes harvest Ozploitation gore with uneven gallows humour.
Stuffing the soundtrack with thigh-slapping Hicksploitation Aussie Country tunes, the directors give the Morgan's human meat grinding a grubby, dried blood and sand appearance which gets under the nails in the most grisly splatter moments.
Hitch-Hiking a trio into the Morgan's business, the directors chop thick slices of black comedy from sheer over the top level of pain inflicted on the trio.
Although the Horror-Comedy hits when dealing in Slap-Stick, the screenplay by Cairnes and Cairnes has an oddly dry tone, due to little time being given to build the Morgan's as a serious threat before the hit and miss darkly comedic one-liners roll out across 100 bloody acres..
Sophie (Anna McGahan) along with her BF (Oliver Ackland) and Wesley (Jamie Kristian) a male rival are headed via the back roads to a music festival when their automobile breaks down.
They get a ride from Reg Morgan (Damon Herriman) who is driving the company truck of Morgan Brother's "Blood and Bone" organic fertilizer.
Not too hard to figure the rest out.The film has some blood splatter scenes, but lacks the gore.
This slasher film is in part dark comedy as Reg, is the younger partner brother who is insecure in what he does as well as being sexually repressed.
While facing death, Sophie's boyfriend is more concerned about her infidelity, wanting to know the details of what she did, rather than being worried about the situation at hand.The film is a good concept, but comes off as going through the motions.
100 BLOODY ACRES is something of a mixed bag when it comes to horror film-making.
100 BLOODY ACRES is posited as a black comedy so the laughs here are largely intentional.
The set-up tends to be better than the pay-off and it all becomes a bit aimless in the second half, throwing in gross-out gags and random gore rather than telling much of a real story.
I especially loved the Aussie country music, which is every bit as goofy as you'd expect.I have no proof of this, but I suspect the movie was inspired by an Ambrose Bierce story called "Oil of Dog."
|
tt0016654
|
The Black Pirate
|
The film begins with the looting of a ship already captured and badly mauled, by the pirates. After relieving the ship and crew of valuables, the pirates fire the ship, blowing up the gunpowder on board, sinking her. While the pirates celebrate, two survivors wash up on an island, an old man and his son. Before dying, the older man gives his signet ring to his son (Douglas Fairbanks). His son buries him, vowing vengeance.
The Pirate Captain and Lieutenant bring some crew to the other side of the same island to bury some of their plunder. They then plan to murder the other pirates: "Dead men tell no tales." But first, Fairbanks appears as the "Black Pirate", who offers to join their company and fight their best man to prove his worth. After much fighting, the Black Pirate kills the Pirate Captain. The Pirate Lieutenant sneers, and says there is more to being a pirate than sword tricks. To further prove his worth, the Black Pirate says he will capture the next ship of prey single-handed, which he does. He then uses his wits to prevent the pirates from blowing up the ship along with the crew and passengers, suggesting that they hold the ship for ransom.
When a woman is discovered on board, the Pirate Lieutenant claims her. In love at first sight, the Black Pirate finds a way to temporarily save her from this fate by presenting her as a "princess" and urging the crew to use her as a hostage to ensure their ransom will be paid, as long as she remains "spotless and unharmed".
The pirates cheer the Black Pirate, and want to name him captain. The Pirate Lieutenant jeers but consents to wait to see if the ransom is paid by noon the next day. However, he secretly has a confederate destroy the ransom ship later that night to ensure it will not return. Then, when the Black Pirate is caught trying to release the woman, the Pirate Lieutenant exposes him as a traitor and the pirates force him to walk the plank.
At noon the next day, with the ransom ship having failed to show, the Pirate Lieutenant goes to the woman to claim his prize. But just then, the Black Pirate, who with the help of the sympathetic one-armed pirate MacTavish had survived being sent overboard, returns leading troops to stop the pirates. After a long fight, the pirates are routed. In the end, the Black Pirate is revealed to be a Duke, and the "Princess" he loves a noble Lady. Even MacTavish is moved to tears of joy by the happy ending.
|
revenge, action
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0365653
|
Dinocroc
|
A North African dinosaur, related to the crocodile, is found which could grow up to fifty feet long. Dr. Campbell (Bruce Weitz) uses its DNA to create two hybrids of it with a modern-day crocodile at Paula Kennedy's Genetic Research Co. (Gereco) lab. One creature kills Dr. Campbell's assistant and the other creature before escaping. This information is kept from Sheriff Harper (Napier) by Kennedy, stating the dead creature killed Campbell's assistant. His daughter, county dog catcher Diane Harper, helps her ex welding artist, Tom Banning, and his 12-year-old brother Michael (Jake Thomas) find their three legged dog, Lucky, who was lost a few days earlier.
Meanwhile, Kennedy sends a trapper to feed Dinocroc (the animal still being on Gereco Property). The trapper uses Lucky as bait, but Lucky runs away and Dinocroc quickly devours the trapper soon after. Later in the morning Diane and Tom find Lucky running around in the woods and try to catch him unaware that Dinocroc is lurking nearby, but Dr. Campbell saves them by shooting at it. Kennedy then hires an Australian crocodile hunter, Dick Sydney (Costas Mandylor), to help kill the Dinocroc. Later that night, Michael sneaks out to look for Lucky when he comes face to face with the creature. Dinocroc chases Michael through the forest into a tool shed sitting above water. The Dinocroc then gets under the shed and engulfs Michael from below, leaving only his head.
The next day, not having noticed that Michael has gone, Tom, Diane, Dick, and Campbell find that the creature is headed toward the town's lakeside beach. It kills 3 people, the last one being Campbell. In a press conference after the incident Kennedy lies that Campbell was not part of Gereco. Sheriff Harper then plans to kill the creature with his police force and Diane. While looking for it, they stumble upon Michael's damaged bike and Michael's remains in the shed. Tom, who knows Michael is missing, appears on his motorbike, then speeds away after seeing what is left of his dead brother. After trying to get drunk, Tom cries loudly over his brother and Diane comes to comfort him along with Lucky. Meanwhile, 5 of Sheriff Harper's officers are killed by the Dinocroc.
The next day, Tom, Diane and others devise a plan to trap Dinocroc in a tunnel and gas him to death. Sheriff Harper uses some dogs for bait, which Diane and Tom object to, so Harper has them handcuffed and put in the police car. The two escape and use a blowtorch to release the chained dogs, while the creature chases them. They trap Dinocroc in the tunnel and gas it, seemingly killing it.
While a local news crew is taping Kennedy (who arrived after the creature's death) inside the tunnel, telling the reporter false stories about the events, Dinocroc awakens, eats her whole and comes after Tom and Diane, who are left after the news crew drives away quickly. After hiding under a truck they hear a train and lure Dinocroc across the tracks. It is rammed by a passing train, followed by Tom stabbing it in the eye with a small pipe as revenge for Michael's death. As the sun rises the next day, Diane and Tom drive away, contemplating leaving for a vacation together. Then the camera pans slowly back as their truck passes and Dinocroc is seen walking weakly across the road still alive.
|
violence, revenge, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
A mixed matched handful of people go out to stop it, before it kills any more.In addition to fairly weak acting, and visual effects that wouldn't fool a four year old, Dinocroc also has several blatant Jaws rip-offs.
These movies are usually made for no more than a couple of million dollars, but Roger Corman has made so many that together they probably cost as much as Titanic.
Then there's an Australian croc hunter, loud and obnoxious, but with a tender side, blah blah blah.The film moves along okay until the ending, which is not only utterly unbelievable, but anti-climactic as well.Overall, a somewhat below average creature feature, but the CGI was perhaps a bit better than usual.
This is a low budget Roger Corman horror/creature flick.
We only get a few glimpses of the huge two-legged dinosaur descendant and some of the best "kill" scenes in a small budget film.My favorite scene is of a moronic character trying to use a three legged dog for bait and becomes croc food himself.
Roger Corman's DINOCROC is a true b-movie in the grand tradition of atomic age monster movies.
And make no mistake about it; this is an old-fashioned creature feature and not a typical nature gone amok/killer animal movie.
The Dinocroc may be a prehistoric Supercroc but gene manipulation has evolved it into a two-legged dinosaur-like creature that makes for a pretty cool movie monster.
The film clocks in at a scant 82 minutes (plus almost another 4 minutes of needlessly long end credits to pad out the running time) zipping along at a breezy pace without getting too bogged down with lots of boring exposition, moralizing, etc.
The fact that they didn't get on my nerves by being annoying as hell or by constantly doing incredibly stupid things as characters in so many horror movies of today tend to do, especially the low budget variety, is also a major plus.
The movie also has one of the best kills I've seen in a movie in quite some time and it happens to a character that I didn't think was going to get it especially in such a brutal fashion.
At times it seemed very reminiscent of the abomination that was the Tristar Godzilla but the Dinocroc is actually a much more fearsome looking beast what with teeth outside of and on top of its mouth and this constant mad dog gleam in its eyes.
For a low budget monster movie the CGI was actually pretty darn good.
Even at it's worst it isn't bad enough to completely take you out of the movie unless you're just a stickler for computer effects.
Much of the CGI is actually on par with or better than that found in some movies with astronomically higher budgets like say THE MUMMY RETURNS and I suspect Dinocroc's budget was probably only slightly more than the amount spent on that film for Brendan Fraser's hair.
If so, I hope they give it a bit higher budget and allow the Dinocroc a bit more interaction with the characters next time other than jumping out and going `Rahr!' every so often as it does for most of the movie.
I wanted more Dinocroc action.With one more rewrite and a little more budget I think DINOCROC could have been a great monster movie but it will just have to settle for being a fun guilty pleasure and there's nothing wrong with that.
What if I were to create a really really cheap and crappy looking Dino and crocodile polygon model in Maya and then proceed to cut and paste that into an amateur video clip having people scream and getting eaten by the same thing?
How can anyone even believe that an utterly fake CGI dinocroc that looks completely out of place, would influence the events in this movie?
I know that its B-grade, low budget and all but the producers could do better than making a piece of crap that no one will ever seen see or sit through.
For example the scene where the hunters mentions "I got spiders on my dick", "I like dick", playing in the mud scene, or a bar scene where a professional dinocroc hunters main job is a snake charmer.How about other terribly incoherent scenes featuring a woman, Diane who wants to loose her virginity to a boyfriend who walks like he wears women's panties three sizes too small.
All these strange scene could easily be re-dubbed and billed as a comedy.Here in my local town, the cineplex theaters had been advertising for months about Dinocroc, and I am glad I didn't watch it because I later found out it was shown only for 1 or 2 days before it was canceled.
I suspected that Dinocroc was not a good movie looking at the preview.
It features the leg of Dinocroc that looks like a child wearing green pajamas and slippers with claws and walks up and down like a 2 year old.
Such as Diane's boyfriend who walks like he had an advanced case of syphilis makes you wonder what the poor woman sees in this guy who looks drunk even before he get to drink beer.
The panties man looked more more interesting than the entire movie of Dinocroc.
She loves animals, can't even put them down when the sheriff ( also her dad) tells her to put down the dogs to make more room.Her on again off again boyfriend Tommy then helps her and the idiotic gene- manipulation plant to battle a creature that is half-dinosaur and half-crocodile and twice as deadly.The most interesting character by far is an Aussie herpatologist and hunter named Dick.
Whenever he's on-screen, your attention goes right to him.Throughout the film, Dick and Tommy seem to have a 'special' relationship, even though Tommy sleeps with the animal control lady once.Overall, an interesting watch and not bad for a straight-to-video movie.
On the other hand, I was very mixed on the story, it didn't ever bore me, it did start off well and it deserve credit for not being too derivative of Jurassic Park, on the other hand it has a very standard concept which was partly why I was never surprised at what went on in the film, the attack scenes are not suspenseful and come across as goofy instead and the the climax is abrupt and just not convincing on any level.
Apart from the scenery, Dinocroc was lacking for me visually also, the editing is not as choppy as similar movies I've seen but there are moments where it is rather obviously done which detracts from any kind of nail-biting terror or suspense.
The script is horribly cheesy also, while the characters are stereotypical and made to do irritating things(like the man using his dog as bait but is still killed) and the acting is bad, especially from a bland Matthew Borlenghi and an over-the-top Costas Mandylor.
It's not Roger Corman that I hate, it's this god-awful movie.
Which is another thing, the CGI sucked out loud; I hate this movie dreadfully.
The Dinocroc itself looked great but i thought the movie itself needed a little bit more weight as in action and violence because whenever the croc is shown or is in a fight scene not very much goes on except the croc is shown and the croc either kills or runs off in a repeated process.
Jane Longenecker was hot which is a plus and the acting was better than average and the most surprising thing is that the croc looked fleshy instead of like a cartoon coughs* curse of the komodo*coughs.
A grieving brother (Borlenghi) then sets about taking revenge with the assistance of Aussie game-hunter doubling as an ichthyologist (Mandylor) and Corman veteran Charles Napier as the local sheriff.Joanna Pacula's role as the firm's chief could have been a stroke of deft casting, but she receives so little air time, her role is reduced to a caricature of the stereotypical villain.
But even more disappointing is the reliance on CGI animation and post-production effects to create the action sequences with the "Dinocroc".
Much of the camp quality of the Corman-inspired monster movie was in the flimsy, plastic construction of the title beast.
If there's any redemption at all, you might draw visual relief in the fresh-faced and feisty Jane Longenecker who in spite of her lower order billing, is the constant presence throughout (and much better looking than either Mandylor or the "dinocroc")..
the film looks like as if the director was forced to make this movie by some gang of terrorists .
i mean isn't he ashamed of looking at peoples faces after they have seen his movie ?
the dinocroc looks as if it was made in power point and pretty much cut-and-paste stuff.
Overall, worth renting if you enjoy the genre.1.5 (out of 5) Rated: "R" for some creature violence/gore, and language.Summary: DinoCroc is what you get when you mix SNAKEHEAD TERROR and CROCODILE 2: DEATH SWAMP.
Most of the films are very good, like 'Mud,' 'Jack Reacher,' 'Bandits' and 'Flight,' but this one is awful.The only redeeming value is Jane Longnecker, who is a cute, petite woman whom every man adores.
Roger Corman makes entertaining movies, and he's made several giant monster movies for the sci-fi channel.
The classic style that didn't work includes the monster not showing itself, lots of people shots that are just fillers, and slow story development.The special effects croc is a joke.
The later productions has much better quality.I couldn't warm up to this movie, and this is not one of the best of super monster series that came from Roger Corman's production..
In this Corman movie, the sets, props, and the cinematography look much better than usual.
As for the special effects (mostly CGI work), for a low budget movie they are impressive.
While it's true that the dinocroc looks real bad when it's seen in full light, when seen underwater or in darkness it is an acceptable special effect.
First of all, the special effects looked like it was done by a twelve year old.
This is just a joke of a movie,they lost me already at the opening scene (Spoilerwarning) dangerous creature kills other creature in his cage,this is watched by a scientist that works there on a monitor and guess what she does,well lets go in to the cage to check the stuff out,omg how dumb do those writers think human beings are come on thats the same like jumping in a fish tank with a great white shark because it ate your goldfish...Pretty useless and even more dumber.And i will not even talk about the cast because they aren't worth the effort.
Only good thing where the cgi that is better then average for these kinda low-budget movies.If these kinda things don't bother you go see it,but be warned if your IQ is above 60 you will probably hate it..
I'm surprised Dinocroc doesn't have a somewhat elevated reputation within the realm of low-budget sci-fi monster movies.
The script tells a familiar story of science gone wrong as a genetic experiment results in a ravenous prehistoric pseudo-crocodile which proceeds to terrorize the people of a small town.
The monster--that would be the Dinocroc of the title--looks decent for a low-budget creation and is appropriately fearsome.
The big difference between Dinocroc's script and that of many similar features is that a great deal of time is invested in the main characters, who generally come off as rather more realistic than the types who usually populate such films.
Obviously Dinocroc isn't a classic and it is very much a b-movie, it is nonetheless much better than some of its contemporaries and worth a watch by fans of the genre..
Now rather than reveal any more of the story and risk spoiling the film for those who haven't seen it I will just say that this movie was pretty much what I expected from a Roger Corman film in that it had a definite B-movie quality to it.
In any case, while I don't consider this to be a good movie by any means I suppose it wasn't terribly bad either and so I rate it as just slightly below average..
I like me a bad movie now and then but this one was TOO BORING.
It's one of the first kills in the movie and a bad way to kick things off.
First of all the movie is starring Lizzy McGuire's brother as the annoying little kid that goes looking for his lost 3 legged dog.
And heres another point for pondering, why do they show the Dinocroc on the back of the movie box being enormous and actually in the water?
The only thing worse then the acting was the end of course the heroes spend about what seems like 2 hours talking and planning some long elaborate way of killing the dinocroc only to have it fail and kill it in an ordinary way that could have taken about 15 seconds to come up with.
Dinocroc is set in a small US town where Gereco laboratories has it's headquarters, chief scientist Dr. Campbell (Bruce Weitz) has genetically engineered a live creature using DNA from a Dinosaur ancestor of the modern day Crocodile.
After a laboratory accident the Dinocroc creature escapes into the nearby reserve, the top brass at Gereco hire world famous Australian big game hunter Dick Sydney (Costas Mandylor) to kill the beast & keep bad publicity down to a minimum.
However animal control operative Diane Harper (Jane Longenecker) & her dad the local Sheriff (Charles Napier) discover that the vicious Dinocroc is loose & take over the remit to kill it before it eats anymore innocent people...Directed by Kevin O'Niell I was pretty surprised to find out that Dinocroc wasn't an original Sy-Fy Channel film but was far less surprised to learn that cheap rip-off merchant Roger Corman was behind it, apparently had the working title Primevil & it's just about as bad as any of those awful Sy-Fy Channel creature features.
The script for Dinocroc takes a little bit of Jurassic Park (1993) with it's DNA Dinosaur cloning aspect & adds a whole dollop of Lake Placid (1999) as a small community is terrorised by a giant Crocodile monster thing & it's up to a big game hunter & the local Sheriff amongst other's to try & stop it.
The story makes no great sense, there is no explanation given as to why this company Gereco are cloning prehistoric Dinosaur Crocodiles or why that stupid scientist decides to just open the door to it's cell & just sort of stand there totally unarmed, what did she think was going to happen?
With a throughly predictable & sometimes embarrassing (the montage as Tom drowns his sorrows over his brother's death is really bad) script Dinocroc fails to deliver any sort of entertainment value, the attack scenes are dull & quite why the Sheriff didn't just call the army in I'll never know.The CGI computer effects are average for this type of fare, while not the worst looking monster out there Dinocroc is hardly convincing.
That moment raised a smile from me & is probably the best part of the film.Dinocroc has reasonable production values but nothing special, the acting isn't that good with seasoned actor Charles Napier slumming it here, Costas Mandylor turns up as the Australian hunter a couple of years before his star role in the Saw franchise started in Saw III (2006).Dinocroc is terrible, it's as bad as it's Sy-Fy Channel counterparts & offers nothing new.
Gereco Biotech company is fooling around with growth hormone research, accidentally releasing a baby crocodile which is evolving at an accelerating rate.B-movie cast add a deal of fun to this run of the mill "genetic mistake monster movie".
This DinoCroc spends most of the movie walking on two legs like a dinosaur.
His little brother Michael spends the whole movie looking for his lost, three-legged dog Lucky (the assumption is that Lucky was an early DinoCroc victim), and you're kind of rooting against the kid too.
This movie also has the mad scientist from the amoral genetic research company, the "crocodile expert" who thinks he knows how to capture/kill it, the sheriff who doesn't want anyone else to tell him how to handle the situation and all the usual monster-gone-amok movie stereotypes.
Overall, despite all the ranting, you could do a lot worse making a killer-dinosaur/crocodile movie than this.
The monster effects aren't "Jurassic Park" quality, but are better than most lower-budget monster movies.
"Dinocroc" wasn't as bad as it could've been, considering where it comes from.**SPOILERS**Gereco Labs has been experimenting with a growth hormone found in the DNA of a newly-discovered prehistoric crocodile, which escapes during an accident into the neighboring community.
As the townspeople nearby start dying, the three team up to take down the now fully-grown crocodile from rampaging through the town.The Good News: Another one of the Sci-Fi Channel original creature features, this one is one of the better ones.
At times, the Dinocroc is actually a fearsome looking beast what with teeth outside of and on top of its mouth and this constant mad dog gleam in its eyes.
The Dinocroc also had a great way of also jumping out of everywhere to attack a victim, making for some small jumps here and there.
A scene that was quite annoying was, in a moment of monumental stupidity, the two lead characters intentionally sabotage a plan to capture the Dinocroc because a few dogs from the local animal shelter get used a bait.
It doesn't add to the suspense of the scene, which is what it was intended to be, and it makes you wonder why they have to rush to get out of the creature's way when they could've trapped the creature.The Final Verdict: While certainly not the worst movie Roger Corman has ever attached his name to, this isn't his greatest either.
|
tt0115128
|
Casper
|
Following the death of her father, neurotic and spoiled heiress Carrigan Crittenden discovers he has only left her Whipstaff Manor in Friendship, Maine. Carrigan and her attorney Dibs discover a vast treasure allegedly is in the manor, but they find it is haunted by a friendly ghost named Casper and his obnoxious prankster uncles, the Ghostly Trio, who scare the two off the property, causing them to try several attempts to get the ghost out of the house, but with no success. A lonely Casper watches a news report of paranormal therapist James Harvey, and is instantly smitten with his teenage daughter Kat, which led him to inspire Carrigan, so she can summon Dr. Harvey to Whipstaff. Harvey and Kat have an estranged relationship due to the former’s reputation, and searching for the ghost of his late wife Amelia. Moving into Whipstaff, Kat and her father quickly encounter Casper, who tries to befriend them, while his uncles try to scare them out of the house.
After befriending Casper over breakfast, Kat goes to school with Casper following her. She becomes popular when her class agree to host their Halloween party at Whipstaff upon learning she lives there. Amber, Kat’s classmate who immediately dislikes her, becomes envious of Kat stealing her spotlight since originally the party was going to be at her place and plots with her boyfriend Vic to humiliate Kat during the party. Harvey attempts to have therapy sessions with the Ghostly Trio, who reveal to know Amelia; in exchange for getting Carrigan to leave them alone, they promise to go through the "red tape" involved to get Harvey a meeting with his wife.
Meanwhile, Kat learns Casper has no memory of his life, and unlocks his old bedroom to remind him. Casper comes across an old wooden sled, recalling that when he was a young boy, his father bought it for him. Casper was so happy that he played outside on a very cold day until he caught a severe cold and died of pneumonia. After his death, he became a ghost to keep his father company. A newspaper article reveals that Casper’s father was declared legally insane after he built a machine named the Lazarus, which he claimed could bring the dead back to life. Casper and Kat venture down into the manor’s basement, discovering the Lazarus. Carrigan and Dibs sneak in, stealing the formula that powers the Lazarus and plot to use the machine to their advantage, believing it could grant them immortality. However, the two attempt to kill each other as an experiment; as a result, Carrigan falls off a cliff to her death and rises as a ghost.
Meanwhile, Dr. Harvey becomes dispassionate, encouraging the trio to take him out for a night on the town. But unknown to him, they plan on killing him to make themselves a quartet, but ended up having a change of heart after a drunk Harvey states that he is going to tell Carrigan off so they can stay in their home. However, Harvey accidentally falls to his death down in a manhole.
Back in the secret laboratory, Carrigan confronts Casper and Kat and launches Dibs out of a window when he tries to double-cross her. Casper and Kat trick her into stating that she has no unfinished business on Earth, causing Carrigan to be involuntarily ejected into the afterlife. The alleged treasure is revealed to be Casper’s prized baseball signed by Duke Snider. After Dr. Harvey has returned with Casper's uncles now as a ghost, which causes Kat to be in despair, Casper sacrifices his last chance to be alive once more to restore her father.
The Halloween party kicks off upstairs, and Amber and Vic’s prank is thwarted by the Ghostly Trio. Casper is visited by Amelia who became an angel in heaven instead of a ghost. She temporarily transforms him into a human boy as a reward for his sacrifice until ten o’clock. Casper dances with Kat, while Amelia speaks with Harvey, revealing that she was so content alive that she had no unfinished business, encouraging him to move on. Amelia departs as the clock chimes ten, and after kissing Kat, Casper transforms back into a ghost, which scares off the party guests, leaving him and the Harveys to dance to the ghostly trio's music.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
I loved this show.
I absolutely adored the 1995 film and was very excited that there was going to be an animated version.
This cartoon was made by many of the same people who worked on the movie, and it showed.
Now, I'm an old lady, and I grew up on the classic Harvey cartoons; but I found this version of the Casper cartoon a refreshing change.
How cleverly they integrated some of the classic supporting characters!
The Trio were some of my favorite characters growing up, and ordinarily I might be miffed at them being altered so drastically - but I wasn't.
The new Trio are now also among my favorite animated characters of all time, alongside the old.
This show aired while I was in college and I was unable to catch even half of the episodes.
I wish they would re-air it, so I could actually see it.
I have all 6 of the commercially-released tapes and it is nowhere near enough!.
Re-runs, please!.
I've been wanting to see this show on the air again for years.
Come on, kids channels.
If you can show stuff as old and as over-played as The Flintstones and The Jetsons, surely you can make a slot for this fantastic series.
I'm 21, and still enjoy the few episodes I have on tape (another big bummer, not enough episodes were released!).
I very much enjoyed hearing Joe Nipote, Joe Alaskey, Brad Garret and Malachi Pearson reprise their roles for this series.
It really gave it that extra kick and the warmth that people felt towards the movie transfered on to the small screen.So please bring back the '95 series!
It's sorely missed..
Surprisingly good.
Before I first saw this show, I expected it to be like the older series, boring and not at all funny.
That's why it was a pleasant surprise.
It was a lot like the 1995 movie, making this show very funny and fun to watch.
It is a shame it is over..
A great show and refreshing too.
I really liked the 1995 film, especially for Cathy Moriaty and Casper himself, who is just so cute.
I do love the old cartoons as well, but I think this Casper based off the 1995 film is great and a refreshing change.
The animation is really quite nice, I liked the atmospheric yet colourful colours and backgrounds and the characters are well-proportioned.
The music is memorable too, the story lines are fun and refreshing and the writing amuses and delights.
The characters all maintain their likability, Casper is still very cute and the ghostly uncle trio are still hilarious, and it also helps that the voice work is as excellent as it is.
Overall, great and refreshing, definitely worth the look, same with the 1995 movie, Casper Meets Wendy and Spirited Beginning in my opinion aren't worth bothering with.
10/10 Bethany Cox. Goofy ghost gunk.
A supposed to be ghostly comedy with cool animation, uproarious hilarity, really hot props & slick gizmoes, and choice acting by big name stars.
Instead we get one big monumental bore.
This crap should make like an apparition and disappear.
|
tt4773278
|
Verdades Secretas
|
Fame, power and money. Skin-deep pleasure. Pulsating passion. Intense frenzy. Seductive situations that can be deceptive, the leading character in the telenovela is Arlete (Camila Queiroz), a beautiful young girl full of dreams. She arrives in São Paulo willing to become a model, but she ends up working as a luxury prostitute.
Hit by the needs that life imposes, she cannot overcome the traps disguised as opportunities, allowing herself to be taken by an obscure reality, which goes far beyond the catwalks. This is when Alex (Rodrigo Lombardi), a powerful, rich, seductive and experienced man, comes into her life. She is enchanted by Alex. And he is mesmerized by his young lover.
|
revenge, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt1753693
|
Detour
|
Piano player Al Roberts (Tom Neal) is drinking coffee at a roadside diner in Reno, hitchhiking east from California, when a fellow patron plays a song on the jukebox that reminds him of his former life in New York City. At the time, Al was bitter about squandering his talent working in a cheap nightclub. After his girlfriend Sue Harvey (Claudia Drake), the nightclub vocalist, leaves to seek fame in Hollywood, he decides to go to California and marry her. With little money, he is forced to hitchhike his way across the country.
In Arizona, bookie Charles Haskell, Jr. (Edmund MacDonald) gives Al a ride in his convertible and tells him that he's in luck: he's driving all the way from Florida to Los Angeles to place a bet on a horse. During the drive, he has Al pass him pills several times. That night, Al is driving while Haskell sleeps. When a rainstorm forces Al to pull over to put up the top, he is unable to rouse Haskell. Al opens the passenger-side door and Haskell falls out, striking his head on a rock. Al then realizes the bookie is dead. Fearful that the police will believe he killed Haskell, Al drags the body off the road, takes the dead man's money, clothes, and identification, and drives away.
After spending the night in a California motel, Al decides to drive to an urban area and ditch the car. At a gas station, he picks up another hitchhiker, Vera (Ann Savage). After some time, she suddenly asks him what he did with the real owner of the car. It turns out she had been picked up by Haskell in Louisiana; she scratched him and got out in Arizona after he tried to become too friendly. Al claims to be Haskell, but she calls his bluff and blackmails him by threatening to turn him in. She tells him that they should sell the car rather than abandon it.
In Hollywood, they rent an apartment, posing as Mr. and Mrs. Haskell to provide an address when they sell the car. However, Vera learns from a newspaper that Haskell's wealthy father is near death and looking for his son, who ran away as a youth after accidentally injuring his friend. Vera demands that Al impersonate Haskell as soon as the father dies, but Al balks at this notion, pointing out that he knows next to nothing about either man.
Back at the apartment, Vera gets drunk and they begin arguing. She threatens to call the police, running into the bedroom with the telephone and locking the door. She falls into a stupor on the bed with the telephone cord tangled around her neck. Al pulls on the cord in an effort to break it. When he finally breaks down the door, he sees that he has accidentally strangled her. He gives up ever seeing his girlfriend Sue again and returns to hitchhiking instead, imagining his probable future arrest by the police.
|
suspenseful
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Glad i didn't listen. I read the review complaining about this film being boring. And i almost didn't watch this. But I am really glad I and decided to watched it. I suppose I can understand why someone might call it boring. It doesn't have a ton of over the top freaking out. It isn't full of screaming and ranting or constant in your face action. What it does have is an actor able to carry a movie through until the end on his own. And believable emotional stages of such a situation. The lack of over the top acting and panicking made this movie believable and intriguing instead of annoying. I really felt for the poor guy. I felt the lack of air and claustrophobia. If you prefer a lot of noise and yelling this isn't the film for you. I gave this film a seven because it kept me watching and made me really feel the subtle panic. Only thing lacking is maybe five more minutes at the end. But that need for more closure is just a personal preference.. It's worth your time. If you enjoyed Cast Away, 127 Hours, All Is Lost, or Gravity, then this film might be for you. I am always amazed by how strong a human being can be to survive, and this film amazed me. Detour is an intense and thrilling story about a literally buried man that puts all his efforts to survive. How did he end up there? Will he survive? If so, how? These are the questions that kept me in my seat.Director and co-writer William Dickerson teaches us to appreciate life and what we have. The filming, which explore the small set, is great.Whoever wrote The Rat's Rabbits Are Calling song is a genius: the lyrics are monotonous but catchy at the same time, and I can't get this song out of my head.Neil Hopkins does an incredible job: he is able to carry the film through until the end.More at afilmadaybysonia.blogspot.com. A Sleep Drug in Film Form. 3.4 of 10. I nodded off, slept, woke up, backed up to the last scene I remembered, and forced myself to watch it all. Excellent as something to get you to sleep without any drugs. While the ending is technically impressive and the overall story a good idea, it's not executed/produced well.Claustrophobia and other confined phobia stories are difficult challenges for film, especially when the entire film is based on it rather than just some scenes. It seems to be catching on as one of the latest fads for directors to try to prove that they can make an entire film about it interesting. As compared to Buried (2010) where the ending rescues the film, Detour's ending only makes it more entertaining and not enough so.In short, it's more of a resume film for some technically skilled directors/cinematographers, not something to watch unless you have a job/class that requires it. If you have a class that requires it, consider it a tip to switch schools or at least cancel and opt for a different class.
|
tt0037884
|
The Lost Weekend
|
Thursday - An alcoholic New York writer, Don Birnam (Ray Milland), is packing for a weekend vacation with his brother Wick (Philip Terry), who is trying to discourage his drinking. When Don’s girlfriend Helen (Jane Wyman) comes to see them off, she mentions in passing that she has two tickets for a concert, to which Don urges Wick to accompany her. Don heads for Nat’s Bar, deliberately missing his train, and then sneaks back into the flat to drink some cheap whisky he has bought, avoiding Helen who is worried about him being left alone.
Friday - Back at the bar, the owner, Nat (Howard Da Silva), criticizes Don for treating Helen so badly, and Don recalls how he first met her. It was due to a mix-up of cloakroom tickets at the opera-house, where he had to wait for the person who had been given his coat-check in error. This was Helen, with whom he strikes up a romance. When he is due to meet her parents for lunch at a hotel, he loses his nerve and phones a message to her, crying off. Presently he confesses to her that he is two people ‘Don the writer’, whose fear of failure causes him to drink, and ‘Don the drunk’ who always has to be bailed out by his brother. Still, Helen devotes herself to helping him in his plight. Back in the present day, Don has moved on to another bar, where he is caught stealing money from a woman's purse to pay his bill, and he is subsequently thrown out. In the flat, he finds a bottle he had stashed the previous night and drinks himself into a stupor.
Saturday - Don is broke and all the pawnshops are closed for Yom Kippur. At Nat’s Bar, he is refused service. In desperation for money, he visits a girl who has had a long held crush on him, but stood her up during this latest binge . Leaving her flat, he falls down the stairs and is knocked unconscious.
Sunday - Don wakes up in an alcoholics’ ward where 'Bim' Nolan (Frank Faylen), a cynical male nurse, mocks him and other guests at ‘Hangover Plaza’, but offers to help cure his delirium. Don refuses help, and succeeds in escaping from the ward while the staff are occupied with a violent patient.
Monday - Still broke, Don steals a bottle of whisky from a store, and spends the day drinking and hallucinating. Helen returns, alerted by a call from Don's landlady who can hear his screams. Finding him in a delirious state, she vows to look after him and spends the night on his couch.
Tuesday - Don slips out and pawns Helen’s coat - the thing which had first brought them together - in order to buy a gun. She trails him to the pawn shop and finds out from the pawnbroker that he traded the coat for a gun he had pawned earlier. She races to Don's apartment and catches him just before he is about to shoot himself in the bathroom. He tells her their relationship is over, and she glimpses the gun which he has hidden in the bathroom. As they struggle for control of the weapon, she reminds Don of her love for him, and her concern that he should stop drinking. She is able to convince him that ‘Don the writer’ and ‘Don the drunk’ are the same person. He finally commits to writing his novel The Bottle, dedicated to her, which will recount the events of the weekend. He drops a cigarette into a glass of whiskey to make it undrinkable, as proof that he is cured.
|
bleak, melodrama, realism, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0110443
|
Major Payne
|
U.S. Marine Corps Major Benson Winifred Payne, a hardened Marine, returns from a violent but successful drug raid in South America, only to find out that he was once again not promoted to lieutenant colonel. Payne receives an honorable discharge on the grounds that "the wars of the world are no longer fought on the battlefield", and that his military skills are no longer needed.
After he leaves the military, Payne finds life as a civilian unbearable and reaches his breaking point. To help adjust, he applies for a job as a police officer; however, during the test to see how applicants handle domestic violence disputes, he overreacts and repeatedly slaps the man who hit his wife in the scenario. Payne is put into jail on charges of assault. His former general visits him and informs Payne that he has secured a job for him that will get him back in the military.
Payne arrives at Madison Preparatory School in Virginia, and is informed by the principal that his job is to train the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps "green boys", a disorderly group of delinquents and outcasts who have placed last in the Virginia Military Games eight years running. When Payne sees his company, he immediately tells them that, under his direction, they will win the games at all costs, regardless of their various shortcomings: being overweight, sickly, deaf, cross-eyed, orphaned, or from a dysfunctional home; they are all pushed equally. He clashes with Emily Walburn, the Academy counselor who tries to soften Payne's discipline with understanding and feelings, particularly towards six-year old orphan Tiger.
Payne's training and punishments are harsh, which force the cadets to execute a series of failed schemes to get rid of Payne. Things come to a head when Payne offers them the chance to get rid of him - if they get the Military Games trophy he will resign voluntarily, so the boys sneak into rival Wellington Academy to steal it. However, Payne places an "anonymous call" to Wellington, leading to the boys being ambushed by their rivals.
Outside of the academy, Payne bonds with Emily and Tiger. Returning to the academy, Payne is confronted by lead misfit Alex Stone (Steven Martini) about his deception, but Payne claims it was to show them what the real prize was. With their desire to honestly earn the trophy added to their desire to be rid of Payne, the boys begin to train hard to win. When Stone's alcoholic, obnoxious stepfather appears unannounced and harasses Alex, Major Payne orders him away, granting Payne an iota of respect with the cadets.
Payne is asked to return to the Marines to fight in Bosnia, but his deployment means he will miss the Military Games and disappoint the boys and Emily. As he waits for his train, he sees a family spending time together, has a vision of Emily, Tiger and himself barbecuing in a front yard, prompting him to realize that he has fallen for Emily.
At the games, the boys are holding their own until a Wellington cadet trips up Alex during the race, spraining his ankle and rendering him unable to lead the drill. This also incites a rumble between the teams that threatens to disqualify Madison. However, Payne gives up his commission and shows up at the last minute, smooths things over with the referees and appoints Tiger to lead the cadence. The group executes an unorthodox but entertaining routine which wins them the trophy.
On the first day of the new school year, Payne resumes being an instructor, having settled down with Emily and Tiger, with Stone resuming his role as a squad leader. When a new wise-cracking blind cadet shows up, Payne proceeds to shave him and his seeing-eye dog bald with his field knife, proving once again that new recruits must earn his respect.
|
cult, comedy, humor, prank
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Both these things lead me to imagine that Major Payne has all the makings of a great cult comedy in the truest meaning of that term.If I were to offer anyone advice it would be to watch the first ten minutes of the film next time it's on TV.
I suspected it was going to be another one of those parody flicks like Scary Movie or Hot Shots, but was pleasantly surprised at the way it panned out.
Yet it still works, because even though they don't let on that they know, you still know that the film-makers are aware how cheesy it all is, and in fact I think they are gently sending up all those "inspirational" feelgood movies, without being offensive towards them.
This is achieved in part through Wayans' stand out performance, and the blend of realistic (Payne's behaviour towards his charges is apparently mirrored in some real drill instructors) with ridiculous (a 6 year old military cadet??!!) Also, the director's use of music is inspired - consistently over the top at the right moment (eg "Respect") to heighten the humour.Standout moments for me were the 'Little Engine Who Could' scene and Payne's "vision" whilst waiting at the station.
10 minutes is the cut off point!I should just add that although I was in the R.A.F cadets at school, and have a brother in the British army (a Major, no less!!!) I have not been through the 'boot camp experience', yet still found the movie to be very funny.
This is the kind of movie that you tell your friends they just HAVE to see, and HAVE to buy to watch over and over.I was an ROTC student in high school, and while it's not even remotely as melodramatic as this movie, the drill team scene at the end brought back fond memories (yup, we really did cool drills like that)...Damon Wayans is just...damn, he's funny.
It's a movie about a Major who was discharged from the Military, and was assigned to an Junior ROTC program, it proves to be the biggest challenge of his life.
Major Payne, nothing but a funny movie..
Here's a movie that I watch all the time.Major Payne is just a funny movie.It's a true classic.The jokes are just so well done that you want to watch this movie over and over again.The acting was okay, but is made up for when the way the movie is meant to be funny.The music is very good with a great mix of all kinds of music.I just have fun watching Major Payne.Overall if you want a classic movie that is very funny, then Major Payne is the movie for you.I give Major Payne 10 out of 10.A true Classic..
As a whole Major Payne was one of the most funniest movies I've ever watched.
Damon Wayans did an excellent job as Major Payne.
Major Payne took an unexpected approach by putting those kids through hell as though they were in boot camp with Sargent Hartman from "Full Metal Jacket".
I'm not much of a Damon Wayans fan, but this is one of my favorite movies.
The cover is misleading since Major Payne doesn't smile much in the movie.
I think Damon Wayans is a genius the way he makes it seem like the movie was written specifically for him.There are parts of this movie that nearly put me on the floor with laughing.I wish there were more comedies of this standard..
I don't know, maybe its just me but I think Major Payne is a great movie it's definitely a classic!!
Major Payne is an extremely funny film.
I guess peacenicks and the sort would be offended by such 'violence' but no-one forces them to sit and watch, right?This movie is hilarious, especially after being mistreated by a Drill Instructor myself down in Parris Island.
You have to be a Marine to understand that folks like Payne are not that rare, only they are more obnoxious about the pride of belonging to the Corps.Great family entertainment..
I can't think of a better movie to watch to give comic relief and some emotional counterbalance to the whole dreadful experience of boot camp.Many of the gags are side-splittingly funny, and the vocal tones and mannerisms of Major Payne are just spot-on hilarious (again, not everybody will find it funny, mainly it's for those who were there).
Well, I was wrong.Nonetheless, to point out the good parts, Damon Wayans was funny as "Major Payne," dishing out some genuinely funny insult lines to the kids.
She looks and sounds a lot like Jada Pinkett.This is a fun movie...but I don't recommend it for kids..
Major Payne (1995) ** 1/2 (out of 4)Major Payne (Damon Wayans) is a killing machine but when he's discharged from the marines he is forced to take over a group of unfit and misguided children.Throughout the history of cinema, going back to the silent era, there have been comedies about tough Army men who end up with idiots that they have to deal with, which is pretty much what you got with this film.
There's certainly nothing ground-breaking in the material but if you're a fan of Wayans then you'll probably enjoy his act here.Obviously, seeing Wayans act like a tough guy is where most of the laughs come from as he struts around barking orders as well as insults to the children.
I remember seeing this in a theater and hearing complaints from some parents who thought the jokes crossed a line but for the most part they are funny for what they are.The support cast of characters are good for the most part but they're obviously just punching bags for the lead character.
As with most films like this, the loveable ending seems a bit forced and is a bit silly but the film delivers enough laughs to make it worth watching..
If it's not the funniest movie ever you will at least have a lot of good lines to use the rest of your life.
The dichotomy in reviewer assessments of MAJOR PAYNE has, I fear, more to do with the reviewers' life experiences than the film.
MAJOR PAYNE is like a time capsule, a reflection of a world long gone.
i love this movie and this is actually the first time i have watched it in about 2 or so years except for gifts of the end from a cable Chanel a while ago, all in all It is a great movie, Damon Waynes is a great comedian/actor and the next on my movie line up is Waynes world 1 and Waynes world 2, both also great, and i might siphon sin city from my living room but anyway great movie love it major Payne is utterly brilliant...........................
Before Damon Wayans started appearing in movies like "Bamboozled", he starred in completely silly flicks like "Major Payne".
As you might expect, there's a lot of humor that seems like they deliberately wanted it to be stupid, but the movie does elicit a few laughs.
Last night I was looking for a movie to watch and I came across Major Payne, with Damon Waynes as the star.
I wasn't too sure if the movie would work, from the looks of the cover, it just looked like an over the top comedy that would have forceful humor.
This movie is by no means Oscar material, but it's just a fun little comedy that I'm sure will get you a few laughs.
The story is Full Metal Jacket, just the more fun and light version.Major Payne is kicked out of the military after having a few "anger" problems.
He drives them crazy, so much so, to the point where they wanna prove themselves and win the trophy against other tougher military schools and prove to Major Payne who's the best troop around.Major Payne is pretty stupid at times, but it was just a fun comedy.
I couldn't help but laugh at the part where they hire Bam Bam to beat up Major Payne, it looks like the kids finally won and yet of course, Major Payne wins again.
Not to mention when Major Payne was reading one of the kids a bed time story and how graphic he got with it, I know it was a stupid part, but it was just so funny to me.
Major Payne is worth a look, I thought it was a cool comedy that put a different twist on boot camps all around the world.6/10.
'Major Payne' is a film about a major who makes life a living Hell for his small group of boys in the marines.
I liked the beginning of the movie where this soldier gets shot, and Major Payne breaks his finger to forget about the gunshot wound.
I think if you are into comedies then this is must see movie, but even if your not it's still worth a watch!!!.
After being passed over for promotion yet again, Major Benson Payne accepts that his brand of `killing machine' is no longer required by the military and goes to take a job with the military academy within a preparatory school.
Teenagers are probably the main audience but hopefully we are raising kids to have better taste that this type of trash!Wayans is an OK clown most of the time but here he puts on an absurd cartoon voice that is more irritating than funny did someone tell him this was a good idea or was it his decision?
MAJOR PAYNE comes a refreshing surprise to anyone who sits down expecting to see a standard 'kids vs adults' story, mainly due to Wayans playing against type and some wicked black humor.
Major Payne is one of the funniest movies in the Hollywood community.
I thought that Damon Wayans delivered a knockout performance as the loud-mouthed, gold-toothed, trash talkin, squeky voiced Major Benson Winifred Payne.
He was so funny that I nearly had a heart attack while laughing at the same time.After a major drug bust goes extremely well in South America, Major Payne (Damon Wayans) returns to Parris Island, South Carolina and finds out that the U.S. Marine Corps is throwing him out of the military back into civilian life.
It becomes a fight because the boys do what they can to put Major Payne out of their lives!Damon Wayans (My Wife & Kids, Blankman) stars in this hilarious raunchy teen comedy that will leave you breathless by the end because you will be laughing your a$$ off!
Major Payne wasn't hilarious but it was good and amazingly realistic.
I haven't seen the original movie this is the remake of (some 1950s film), but it simply has to be better than this newer bastardization.A major gets kicked out of the military for being a fringe element, and winds up teaching children at an ROTC school.
I wouldn't mind slightly more Bam Bam, but I think he carried the role of "biker" about as far as it could be carried for a military film.And then there's the attractive teacher, who someone falls for Major Payne even though he treats the kids poorly, has no social skills and is simply impossible to convert into someone you would want to spend time with.
I'm not sure which (though it would seem "stupid" since the movie makes it clear she gets out of the house often enough).Wayans had one shining moment: a dance sequence where he performs a series of moves (including a very nice "robot"), and with the help of music from 2 Live Crew.
A few laughs A feel good movie Didn't expect much more.
Maj. Benson Payne (Damon Wayans) is a super soldier, except he has failed to get a promotion for the second time and gets discharged.
He finds his skills are not really appreciated by the kids either.Damon Wayans is doing a pretty funny bit here, but it could be tiresome at times.
True I can well say the occasional amount of good damon wayans humor was pretty much the only good part of the film,I know it's supposed to be boot camp but did they had to get a 6-year old to go through the basic-training-styled verbal abuse,& seeing children getting pugnasciously beaten up just for some "hunt the enemy statue mission",so if it weren't for the damon wayan's styled humor the film would've gone down majorly & the "trying to get payne sensitive" was a bit of a good help,& the funniest parts of the films I thought were the "I do feel like a jack&$^" & the leave it too beaverish family moment in a Major payneish twist so you should really see it only if you're a Damon wayans fan or a fan to some or all of his movies..
Unfortunately it is so OUT of character it feels like it's from another movie.All this would be permissible if any of it was funny.
We see that the kids can have discipline yet still be kids, and the adults can be strong role models and be sensitive.Wayans's voice and high strung nature may turn some off, but they truly accentuate his character.The film has a happy ending where all has turned out for the best.This is a film you can watch over and over.
It's about a hardened kill happy Major who doesn't have anything else left to do in the army so his commanding officer gives him a job training a bunch of cadets.Daman Wayans is fantastic as Major Payne and really makes the character shine.
This movie isn't about a bunch of unruly kids making Major Payne's life hell but more like the other way around.
It takes a good three quarters of the movie before the kids warm up to the Major.
A really funny movie that is for everyone and just when you think it's going to turn sickly sweet in a couple of the scenes....well you'd better watch it to find out.
My family was at the drive in packing up after the first movie when they announced Major Payne as the next movie- the four kids of course talked me into staying the first few minutes, and that was all it took.
I am no longer married, but I did get the copy of Major Payne in the divorce and still watch it with the kids We laugh at it, remember the good times and can talk and still offer to "Show you something to take your mind off that pain." W.C Fields hated to work with kids because he feared they would upstage him.
Damon Wayans plays a killing machine in the US Military and is then discharged when "there's no one left to kill." He then take up a job as a ROTC commander at a Virginia school.
A Wayans movie that is pretty good!.
But individually, they have the potential to add to a movie greatly.So it is with Major Payne.
The kids all give great supporting roles and nobody lets the film down.Another plus for this movie (at least as far as I was concerned) was its absolute failure to be anything like politically correct in regard to Payne's treatment of the kids under his charge.
The way that Payne throws out the horrors of war during the telling is just hysterical.Of course, it is a feelgood movie so you know everything will work out in the end.
That doesn't stop you smiling the whole way through, or of hanging on Payne's every utterance (which are nearly always hilarious).I guess the movie is not for everyone, but take it from me (as an avowed Wayans hater!) that this movie is worth your time.
If you don't like it by the time Payne does his "Failure to communicate!" line then maybe it isn't for you.
VERY MINOR SPOILERSMajor Payne is the story of a Major (Wayans) who is discharged from the Marines.
It is a real funny movie and all the cast does a good job..
Major Payne (1995): Dir: Nick Castle / Cast: Damon Wayans, Karyn Parsons, Steven Martini, Michael Ironside, William Hickey: Formula driven military comedy about an individual succeeding the thresholds of war and now reduced to a different trial.
Damon Wayans plays Major Benson Winifred Payne who returns from a South American drug raid that contains a hilarious reference to Apocalypse Now. Unfortunately he is placed in charge of a group of misfit kids that he immediately lines up and unloads every insult possible in accordance to any physical standout in their appearance.
Watching the movie again made me realize there are some things that are weird, Like the deaf kid being able to hear.
I realize this movie is not for everyone but people who enjoy movies like Police Academy will find Mayor Payne a funny movie with a good message behind it.
Major Payne: ReviewAs with all movies, specific audiences are targeted to maximize a film's profit.
Major Payne is a comedy that portrays a hardened killing machine of a soldier who is transformed into a loving, friendly father/mentor figure.After watching this film, people will either absolutely love it or hate it.
They are funny, well timed, and make for a movie that is hard to forget.
Ultimately, Major Payne could end up being one of the next great cult classics like Monty Python: The Holy Grail.One of the wisest choices of the entire movie is the use of music throughout the film.
Damon Wayans plays his role perfectly as Major Payne.
His personality and standup comedy routine-like performance is exactly what makes Payne so funny and likable.
Throughout, Major Payne acts as the narrator to further show how tough of a marine he really is.
Ultimately, Major Payne works as a film because Damon Wayans portrays his character perfectly (Ebert).
All in all, I would give Major Payne a 5 out of 5 star rating as a must-see movie because of the comedy and execution of the story line.Work Cited: Major Payne.
|
tt4285496
|
El abrazo de la serpiente
|
The film tells two stories thirty years apart, both featuring Karamakate, an Amazonian shaman and last survivor of his tribe. He travels with two scientists, firstly with German Theo von Martius in 1909 and American named Evan in 1940, to look for the rare yakruna, a (fictional) sacred plant.
Theo, an ethnographer from Tübingen who has already resided in the Amazon for several years, is very sick and is travelling by canoe with his field notes and a westernised local he saved from enslavement on a rubber plantation named Manduca. Karamakate prolongs his life, blasting white powder called "the sun's semen" (possibly a hallucinogenic made from virola) up his nose, but is reluctant to become involved with a westerner and refuses his money. Theo is searching for yakruna as the only cure for his disease and the three set off in the canoe to search for it.
Many years later an American botanist, Evan (Brionne Davis), paddles up to a much older Karamakate (Antonio Bolívar) who has apparently forgotten the customs of his own people. Evan says he is hoping to complete Theo's quest and Karamakate does assist, again reluctantly, saying his knowledge is spent. Evan has a book of Theo's final trek, which his aide sent back to Europe, as he did not survive the jungle. The book includes an image of Karamakate, which he refers to as his chullachaqui, a native term for hollow spirit. Karamakate agrees to help him only when Evan describes himself as someone who has devoted himself to plants, although Evan's real purpose is actually to secure disease-free rubber trees, since the United States's supplies of rubber from South East Asia had dwindled due to the Japanese wartime advance.
Both expeditions feature an "Apocalypse Now"-style Spanish Catholic Mission by the side of an Amazon tributary, run in 1909 by a sadistic, lone Spanish priest who beats orphan boys for any "pagan" behaviour, and in 1940 by a delusional Brazilian figure who believes he is the Messiah. He only trusts the visitors when he believes they are the Biblical Magi, but Karamakate wins his respect when he heals his wife. By now the children of 1909 have grown into disturbed and violent acolytes.
In 1909, we are left with Theo, sick and having fled the Mission, arriving at a frontier post just about to be invaded by Colombian soldiers during the Amazon rubber boom, where the sacred yakruna is being abused by drunken men, and cultivated, against local traditions. Karamakate is furious and destroys it. In 1940, Karamakate does show Evan the origin of the plant in striking denuded dome shaped mountains (Cerros de Mavecure), allegedly the home of yakruna. He reveals one yakruna flower that is on the last plant – he has destroyed all the others – and prepares it for Evan. The preparation being hallucinogenic, aids Evan in undergoing a superconscious experience. A part of this experience has been shown in colour to signify its intensity. The film ends with a transformed Evan remaining enamoured by a group of butterflies.
|
violence, cult
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Winner of the top Director's Fortnight Award at Cannes and Colombia's submission to the Oscars in the Best Foreign Film category, Ciro Guerra's ("The Wind Journeys") Embrace of the Serpent (El abrazo de la serpiente) provides a powerful insight into the effects of colonialism on an indigenous population.The film, in which nine different languages are spoken, follows two interconnected stories based on the travel journals of two Amazonian explorers thirty years apart, German scientist Theodor Koch-Grunberg (Jan Bijvoet, "Borgman") and American plant enthusiast Richard Evans Schultes (Brionne Davis, "Avenged").
The two explorers are accompanied by the Amazonian shaman Karamakate (Niblio Torres as a young man and Antonio Bolivar as the elder) not only to find the sacred plant for research purposes but to learn deeper truths about themselves and the nature of reality.
Karamakate, the last surviving member of his tribe, guards the secrets of Yakruna, a last symbol of independence for his people.Filmed in black and white by cinematographer David Gallego ("Cecilia"), it is the first film to be shot on location in the Amazon in thirty years and its gorgeous kaleidoscope of rivers and forests, and the blending of time creates a surreal, dreamlike atmosphere, fortified by native songs and chants.
When Theo tells him, however, that he has seen survivors of his people and will take him to them, the young shaman agrees as long as the white man follows his "prohibitions" about disturbing the natural flow of the jungle.
Though its loosely based on the diaries of the 2 scientist, the movie gives a collective account of what it would have been to witness those times and see the true dark side of the Colonial enforcements and the resulting destruction of culture, people, nature on a wide range of a scale.
This compelling and radiant black and white film takes viewers on an ethno-botanical journey to a faraway place, deep into the Colombian Amazon.
Yes, someone mentioned "2001: A Space Odyssey," but, considering the gorgeous black & white cinematography, and the theme of white men being guided to heightened consciousness by a shamanic character, I have to cite Jim Jarmusch's wonderful "Dead Man" in the American West.The two actors playing the young and older shaman were phenomenal.I don't think the scene of religious madness is out of place, because it contrasts effectively with the predominant theme of naturalistic and cultural spiritualism.Visually, it is spectacular.We need more movies like this.
Two delicately intertwined story lines, both inspired by travel journals authored three decades apart by two Amazonian explorers; German scientist Theodor Koch-Grunberg (Jan Bijvoet, "Borgman"), in 1909, and by American amateur botanist Richard Evans Schultes (Brionne Davis, "Avenged"), thirty years later.
Shaman Karamakate, the last survivor of his tribe (Nibio Torres-young/Antonio Bolivar-old) who has been chewed up and spit out as a lifelong victim of culture clash, and, as a result, defines himself as "chullachaqui", a walking empty shell zombie of a man.EMBRACE is light years from being a feel-good movie, yet, there is a "spirituality and focus which can help you transcend even a worst- case scenario of mistreatment and misfortune in life", that is transformational and which provides ground swelling inspiration!
This unique film would probably appeal to those who crave unusual true stories, those of you who enjoy Drama focused on a Clash of Cultures, and movies set in exotic locations!
Interesting look at the lifestyle of the Amazon people in the vanishing jungle where a shaman deals with two diverse characters , being first Colombian film nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Film .
The amazing story of the relationship between Karamakate (Nilbio Torres -Young Karamakate-, Antonio Bolívar -Old Karamakate- and all the natives of the film are natural actors) and two scientists who seek a magic plant , Theo (Jan Bijvoet) and Evan (Brionne Davis) .
As decades apart , an Amazonian shaman and last survivor of his people , and two scientists who work together over the course of 40 years to search the Amazon for a sacred healing flower .
Ecological thriller that has in highlighting the destruction of the South American rain woods by the rubbers ; being based upon a real story , on diaries by scientists Theodor Koch-Grunberg and Richard Evan Schultes , both of whom delve into the Amazonian rainforest in search of a rare plant with medicinal and hallucinatory qualities, with the assistance of a local shaman on opposite ends of his own life journey .
Nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at Academy Awards this year, Embrace of the Serpent is an art-house feature that offers its viewers a journey back in time into the very heart of the Amazon rainforest while painting an absorbing portrait of the indigenous culture that was destroyed by colonial invaders.The story of Embrace of the Serpent covers two sets of events, one taking place in 1909 while the other occurs in 1940.
Both segments concern an Amazonian shaman who happens to be the last of his tribe, and covers his relationship with two scientists who are determined to find a rare sacred plant that has healing properties.Directed by Ciro Guerra, the film carves a fictional but highly original tale from the real-life accounts of the two scientists whose works have made a valuable contribution to the study of indigenous people of South America.
The performances from its cast carry no complaints as everyone chips in with fine contribution in their given roles, but the best input comes from the two actors who play the same character in different segments.On an overall scale, Embrace of the Serpent is deeply meditative in content but it isn't a film for all.
Breathtaking black & white photography takes us on parallel scientific expeditions down the Amazon River, with stories inspired by the travel journals of Theodor Koch Grunberg (1872-1924) and Richard Evans Schultes (1915-2001).
It's the first ever Oscar nomination (Best Foreign Language Film) for Columbia, and director Ciro Guerra's film certainly deserves any and all acclaim.The common link between the two expeditions is an Amazon Shaman named Karamakate.
The lost/forgotten cultures are reason enough for the natives to distrust white men, yet the mysticism and pride of the indigenous tribes are fascinating.The character of Karamakate is a pleasure to get to know, and the film has a great deal to say
and does so while being a visual stunning experience..
Embrace Of The Serpent is a film about an amazonian shaman played by Nilbio Torres and two scientist looking for a plant that could supposedly heal people and they have to work with the shaman to try and find it.lets get this out of the way first, this movie is so gorgeously shot, there is this one tracking shot that transitions the two scientist together and it stunning.
it was also so well acted, i actually did not see actors, i saw real men talking to each other and real men arguing and i forgot i was watching a movie, the best performance in this film was the older shaman played excellently by Antonio Bolivar.this movie has a non linear story line and i got so involved with these characters and the world they are in witch made this film perfect for me.A+.
'...the only way he could heal was to learn how to dream,'..the film is a journey encompassing 300+years of strife & conflict of two cultures,the Spanish colonial rule decimating the indigenous Indian cultures of South America to the point of extinction,compressed into a 2-hr.hallucinogenic movie;the jungle habitat where the Mayan civilization was born & thrived under the life giving waters of the .
In essence, this is a movie about how whites and native people interacted in the Amazon during the good old days, and the portrayal of those interactions has two modes for each race that we have seen many times before in countless films.
The way the movie flows between these two timelines, which run in parallel during the film, is intriguing and well handled, particularly from the photographic point of view.If you like glorious black and white photography featuring exotic scenes you'll appreciate the visuals; if you like predictable stories about whites exploiting "natives" and the pernicious, long-lasting effects of the exploitation you'll appreciate the plot.
A gorgeous-looking film set in the Amazon jungle."Embrace of the Serpent" tells two stories straddling two periods of time, linked by one character who appears as a young man in the first and an old man in the second.
Colombian director Ciro Guerra's third feature, a stunning-looking black-and-white adventurer recounts a shaman Karamakate's two quests of a sacred plant "yakruna" in the Amazonian jungle, on the request of two white scientists.The first one takes place around 1909, a young Karamakate (Torres) is approached by an afflicted German ethnologist Theodor Koch-Grunberg (Bijvoet, blistering with crazed assurance against his sickly incarnation) and his indigenous travel companion Manduca (Migue), to help them to find the plant to cure Theodor; and the second time happens in 1940s, a senile Karamakate (Bolivar) accompanies Richard Evans Schultes (Davis), an American biologist, to locate the last extant yakruna in the world.The two paralleled narratives sail shoulder by shoulder with sublime transitions from one to another, Karamakate, is the last survivor of his tribe, adheres to the wisdom and traditions which have passed on for generations among his people, only soon will die with him - respect the jungle and revere the nature.
The dissonance between him and his travel companions has never ceased to exist, it is not just as simple as the conflicting battle between the invading colonists and the aboriginal, Karamakate also deems Migue as a "betrayer" of his own kind, a former rubber slave has regained his freedom thanks to Theodor, adopts western attire and offers Theodor his utmost loyalty.En route, there are encounters with other dwellers of the jungle, a native tribe offers them hospitality but also has no qualm to steal Theodor's compass just because; a rubber slave pleads for death when Manduca upsets his rubber cans since it is nothing but demise awaits him if he fails to collect enough rubber; a puritan friar (Sciamanna), wantonly flogging local orphan boys by taking them under the wings of Christianity; more idiosyncratically, a self-claimed white-skin Messiah (Cancino), abuses his despotic reign over his ignorant followers, at the same place where the friar was almost 40-years later, its bacchanalian idiocy slyly signifies that idolatry and cannibalism are just one step away from each other.In these two journeys' final destinations, Kaiamakate takes on two polarising roles, one is the destroyer and another is the saviour, from a hotheaded stud orphaned and disoriented by rapacious intruders, and is desperate to preserve whatever has left in his knowledge vis-à-vis his people's heritage and erudition, to a sage old shaman can preach his philosophy with an even- tempered other-worldliness, the film surpasses its default vocation as an ethnographic curio and a shrewd moral tale pressurising on cultural diversity, reaches the stratosphere of spiritual equanimity, in its sole coloured images, a transcendental pattern of anacondas offers an abstruse glimpse of the origin of the universe, and bookends the mythical realm with elucidating symbolism.
That theme of taking from the bowels of the land has been played in the work of Werner Herzog (Aguirre the Wrath of God) and Francis Ford Coppola (Apocalypse Now), with the emphasis on compromising cultures more than being like "sordid buccaneers." Karamakate (Nilbio Torres and Antonio Bolivar), a shaman who is the last of his Cohiuano tribe, accompanies scientist Theo (Jan Bijvoet) into the Amazon to search for a sacred healing plant and maybe a new rubber strain.
One such adventurer, Priest Gaspar, has taken the Christ motif and made it his crazy own, right down to its cannibalistic undertones.Based on Theo's diary about his 1909 adventure and that of his successor, Richard Evans Schultes (Brionne Davis), 40 years later, Embrace of the Serpent continually shows the white man exploiting the natives and facing madness while doing it.
I like snakes but realize a significant number of folks don't...though the word 'serpent' is in the title!The story is told in an unusual manner--with the same native man being shown decades apart assisting two different white scientists as they go in search of some plant that supposedly has curative powers.
! Great movie, with very good performances,beautiful scenery, very well done!Without being an expert or a bold critic connoisseur film world and beyond being a simple,moviegoer common, I consider my humble opinion,the film is overrated, the use of white and black played down majesty to such loftylandscapes and still believing that he lacked "something" to the movie,I can say that it is very interesting to show vestiges of our ancient history, giving lessons to our Current and Modern society ....
'EMBRACE OF THE SERPENT': Four Stars (Out of Five) The critically acclaimed Colombian historical drama flick; about the relationships between an Amazonian shaman (who's the last survivor of his people) and two different scientists (in the 1909 and 1940 Amazon).
40-years later he's approached by an American scientist, named Evan (Brionne Davis), who's looking for the same thing.The film was beautifully shot in the Amazonia region of Columbia, and it's gloriously presented in black-and-white visuals.
The film was loosely based on the real occurrence that was written in the diaries of two scientists on their expedition into the Amazon's deep in search of something what intrigued the conflict between the two worlds.It portrayed the beautiful Amazon in the black and white pictures and I loved it because, it recreated the world that was over 100 years ago.
In the first, where a German scientist Theo, looks for a help from the last surviving young man from his tribe, Karamakate, to explore the jungle for the scientific research.
Although the decision to film in black-and-white might put off some viewers at first, the movie's cinematography doesn't lack impressive exterior shots and draws the viewer's attention more towards the characters.
Set in the early to mid-twentieth century in the Colombian Amazon, a shaman, who is the lone survivor of his tribe after it has been wiped out by the white man, guides two explorers on expeditions, forty years apart.
This is the story of the relationship between Karamakate, a nearly naked very muscular Amazonian shaman, the last survivor of his people, and two German botanists who work together overthe course of 40 years to search the Amazon for a sacred healing plant.
He meets Theo in 1909 who needs the drug from a rare plant to cure his illness and Karamakate is the only person alive who knows where it grows.We have the parallel story some 30 odd years later when another 'scientist' turns up seeking the same drug – from the same man.
The story of native people and shamanic traditions clashing with European world views, the exploitation of natural resources, and Catholic religious domination and extermination of native culture and language make for a compelling film all around.
The film shows how this is oppression happened at different levels, even from mestizos to natives.Karamakate is an Amazonian Shaman, last survivor of his tribe which was attacked by white-men who he resents.
Manduca is a native dressed in white-men clothes who plays the role of conciliator between cultures and to whom Theo freed from the bondage of rubber barons.During the trip, Karamakate teaches Theo lessons on how to respect indigenous people and nature, and to detach himself from material things, Theo sometimes accept these lessons and sometimes rebels against them.
One night they drink caapi a sacred plant (ayahuasca) and the next day Karamakate says a snake told him to kill Theo and a jaguar told him to protect him.At the first stop during their Amazon boat trip, we see how members of both cultures learned from each other, though sometimes reluctantly.At the second stop we see rubber exploitation and abuse that white-men have done and is still doing over the natives.On the third stop we find a community of children led by a Spanish monk who teaches them a form of Christianity based on fear of God, and rejection of their language and indigenous culture.
With Evan he finds a second chance to reconcile with white men.Evan is a scientist specialized in plants that guided by Theo's writings, arrives 40 years later seeking Karamakate's help to find the yakruna.
Later, when the Older Karamakate takes Evan on his journey, they encounter a cult run by a Jim Jones-like character who believes he's the Son of God. Karamakate heals the crazed man's wife who then invites his followers to consume his flesh.Shot in exquisite black and white, Embrace of the Serpent reminds us of the destructive power of "civilization" and its deleterious effect on indigenous cultures.
This is a decent story of one of the last of a certain Amazonian people leading two separate white men to a healing plant over a long period of time.
Basically it tells two stories, thirty years apart, both featuring the character Karamakate, an Amazonian shaman and last surviving member of his tribe, and both times travelling on a journey with a scientist to find the rare yakruna, a sacred plant.
Both stories playing together are interesting as the characters travel upriver on the same mission, the black-and-white colouring for the film works well, there are good themes of religion, language and culture, and the cinematography is fantastic, all together it is a most watchable foreign language adventure drama.
What makes the story so intriguing is the fact that the shaman Karamatake is helping two white scientists who try to reach the same thing, just at a different time.
The black-and-white Cinematography is providing the film with a strong sense of realism, even though the journey as a whole feels like a dreamlike exploration which reminded me of Apocalypse Now and The "Heart of Darkness".
|
tt1013860
|
Dylan Dog: Dead of Night
|
In New Orleans, Dylan Dog, an ace detective whose specialty is paranormal cases, narrates how he helped people with their cases until his wife, Cassandra, was killed by vampires. Since then he has been doing regular cases with his "partner", Marcus Deckler.
One night, when teenager Elizabeth Ryan calls her father, without getting an answer, she goes to her father's room and finds him dead on the floor. She is then surprised, and almost attacked, by a strange, hairy, creature. The next day, Dylan is informed, by Marcus, that Elizabeth asked for (and later hires) him. When Dylan interrogates her, she explains that he is the only one that can help her and shows to him a card (that is his old detective card) that says "No pulse?, No problem". Dylan sees it, stands up and goes out, stating that he doesn't "do that" any more, followed by Marcus.
That night Marcus is attacked and killed by an unknown creature (who Dylan thinks is the same creature that killed Elizabeth's father). Dylan decides to officially help Elizabeth with her case. He takes his old, but helpful, case and rides to Elizabeth's house. After taking and analyzing a hair sample, he tells Elizabeth that the creature that killed her father is a female, eighteen- to nineteen-year-old werewolf, who is a member of the Cysnos werewolf family. Dylan visits the Cysnos family leader, Gabriel, who has a past related to Dylan's activities, and realizes that Gabriel's 19-year-old daughter Mara might be his main suspect, an idea that Gabriel hates. After he is told off by Gabriel, Dylan is attacked by Gabriel's older son Wolfgang who is then knocked unconscious by Dylan (who was using a silver gauntlet).
Dylan then finds Mara dead in a warehouse and is briefly attacked by an unknown vampire. He then goes to Elizabeth in order to determine what connections may exist between those involved. She shows him a book of artifacts her father imported and indicates that one of the items pictured is now missing after having been smuggled into the country. The same vampire from earlier attacks Dylan and Elizabeth at her home along with two others demanding "The Heart." Dylan fends them off long enough for them to make an escape and continue the investigation.
Dylan then goes to the morgue (which is run by zombies) to see Marcus's wound and discovers that Marcus has been turned into a zombie (and he also has a missing arm). Marcus is shocked and surprised but he accepts his condition. When they go for a new arm, Dylan talks with the owner and is informed that the vampires, led by Vargas, are after an artifact known as "The heart". Dylan then goes to the Corpus House, a nightclub owned by Vargas. He talks to Vargas, who denies being involved with the murders and tells Dylan to go while he still lets him to do so.
Dylan then visits his old vampire friend, Borelli. Borelli tells Dylan that the artifact known as "The heart" is called "The heart of Belial", a cross-like relic that holds the blood of Belial, an ancient monster who cannot be killed unless his/her master is destroyed. After he finds the heart in the tomb of vampire elder known as Sclavi, Dylan is ambushed by Vargas' men. After he awakens, Vargas traps him and Marcus inside the crypt, and takes the Heart. After Marcus digs himself out and releases Dylan, the duo goes after Vargas who has taken Elizabeth to the Corpus House. Vargas reveals to Elizabeth that he intends to turn her into a vampire and inject the blood of Belial into her. Dylan enters the Corpus House and finds that both Vargas and Elizabeth are gone.
On his way to find Elizabeth and Vargas, Dylan realizes that Elizabeth is the real enemy and wants to turn Vargas into Belial as a revenge for her father's murder. She tells him that the reason is not revenge, instead she says that they are the "good guys" and the undead (vampires, werewolves, zombies, etc.) must pay. Dylan says that she is wrong and that she is the monster. She injects the blood into Vargas's body and escapes, but before she can do so she is attacked by Marcus who is knocked down by her. Dylan fights off Belial (who is slowly taking over Vargas's body) when Elizabeth tries to stop Belial from killing Dylan, claiming he should do as she says because she is its master. Belial states the anyone who stops him, including his master, is his enemy. After knocking her away, Belial continues after Dylan while Elizabeth escapes while Wolfgang (who was called by Dylan before the battle) and his werewolf allies attack Elizabeth. They manage to subdue and kill Elizabeth, and at the same time Belial dies in front of Dylan leaving Vargas's unconscious body. Dylan gives the heart to Wolfgang, the only one that Dylan can trust to protect it, and goes with Marcus.
Finally, Dylan decides to revive his paranormal detective agency. Using copies of the same card that Elizabeth gave him earlier, calling Marcus "partner"; something that Marcus had wanted for a long time.
|
comedy, mystery, gothic, murder, neo noir, paranormal, violence, alternate reality, flashback, good versus evil, absurd, humor, psychedelic, revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0116277
|
The Fan
|
Gaurav Chandana (Shah Rukh Khan) is a Delhi-based die-hard and obsessive fan of Bollywood superstar Aryan Khanna (also Shah Rukh Khan); Aryan is Gaurav's whole life. Gaurav's face bears an uncanny similarity to Aryan's, which helps him win the local talent show competition impersonating Aryan. He then embarks on a journey to meet Aryan in person.
When Sid Kapoor (Taher Shabbir Mithaiwala), a fellow actor, expresses harsh sentiments about Aryan to the press, Gaurav gets furious and invades Sid's cabin. He holds him hostage, beats him, and makes him apologise to Aryan while he records it. The video is uploaded to the internet, where Aryan sees it. He considers Gaurav's actions a crime and gets Gaurav arrested. In jail, Gaurav is mercilessly beaten, and Aryan comes to meet him. Gaurav is delighted, but Aryan angrily reprimands him and declares that Gaurav is not his fan. He reveals that he was the one who got Gaurav arrested, and tells him to forget they ever met. Shattered and disillusioned, Gaurav returns home and burns all of his Aryan memorabilia, vowing to get revenge against Aryan for turning his fan away.
One year later in London, Gaurav heads to Madame Tussauds wax museum, impersonating Aryan and purposely creating a havoc situation in which he triggers the police. The real Aryan is then arrested despite declaring that he is innocent. Aryan is bailed out and departs to Dubrovnik for a show. He gets a call from Gaurav, who warns him to apologise or he will destroy Aryan's stardom. Gaurav disguises himself as a crew-member to get into Aryan's show; though Aryan instructs his personnel to look out for him, they fail to catch him.
Aryan is next scheduled to perform at a billionaire’s wedding. Gaurav poses as Aryan and molests the billionaire's daughter. The billionaire berates the real Aryan and makes him leave the event. Outside, Aryan spots Gaurav and gives chase, though Gaurav escapes. The molestation incident gets all over the news, resulting in a tarnished reputation and fans boycotting Aryan's shows. In a press conference, Aryan explains that someone else is impersonating him and asks for time so he can prove his innocence.
Back in India, Gaurav invades Aryan’s home and vandalises his trophy collection. Aryan visits Gaurav's parents and meets Neha, Gaurav's crush. He then devises a plan to impersonate Gaurav and declare his love to Neha at the local talent show. This provokes Gaurav, who shoots at Aryan with a gun. Aryan chases him and subdues Gaurav after a bloody fight. He asks Gaurav to stop this and live his own life. Gaurav says that his life is nothing without Aryan and flings himself off the roof, dying with a smile. A horrified Aryan watches him fall.
Aryan’s name is cleared from all the controversies, but the ordeal still haunts him. On his next birthday, when he goes out to the roof to greet his fans, Aryan sees a hallucination of Gaurav smiling up at him.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
`The Fan,' directed by Tony Scott and starring Robert De Niro and Wesley Snipes, is an intense and disturbing motion picture that examines that moment and the effects it can have on the lives of those either directly or indirectly involved.
Here, the focus is on one Gil Renard (De Niro), a knife salesman in San Francisco and a die-hard Giants fan who is pumped about the acquisition during the off-season of superstar centerfielder Bobby Rayburn (Snipes), whom he believes will bring a pennant to the team.
It's the dual story of a fan obsessed with baseball and his favorite player and that same player and his performance anxiety living up to the huge amount of money the Giants are paying him.The title role is played by Robert DeNiro and a lot of his character is taken from what Michael Douglas had earlier did in Falling Down.
DeNiro is not cutting it as a salesman of hunting knives (no pun intended) and he's having problems with his former wife Patty D'Arbanville-Quinn over visitation with his son.At the same time multi-million dollar acquisition Wesley Snipes is having problems living up to the hype and he's looking like a big old bust.
The problem is that there are too many out there, fans like DeNiro in sports and in show business who get way too caught up in it.Look also for nice performances by Ellen Barkin who has a sports phone-in show and John Leguizamo as Snipes's agent and the wisest guy he has around him..
This movie did a great job of portraying how Gil's volatile personality, his obsession with the baseball and with Bobby (Snipes) in particular, and his loss of everything else that mattered to him, ultimately led him to do what he did..
The film centres around Gil (De Niro), an obsessive baseball fan who puts his beloved New York Giants and particularly their new star player Bobby Rayburn (Snipes) above everything else in life.
When Rayburn's below par performances have fans and pundits calling for him to be dropped however in favour of rival Juan Primo (Benicio Del Toro) , his number one fan is determined to do whatever it takes to get him back on top....De Niro shows just why he is one of the best actors around (despite his latest chequebook acting efforts) with this performance as the single minded, baseball obsessive Gill.
Snipes puts in a solid performance as the luckless Baseball player with the burden of a huge transfer fee and season of glory resting on his shoulders along with Benicio del Toro as his cocky rival hitter but this is De Niro's film and he does the bad-guy-you-side-with down to a tee!
A flawed movie, but worth seeing for De Niro's performance as Gil Renard, an increasingly crazed fan/stalker.
Certainly, there's some of Max Cady, the Cape Fear psychotic, in his portrayal; but there's also a lot of Rupert Pupkin, the confused kidnapper and would-be comic from King of Comedy - both films, of course, directed by Martin Scorsese.Where the film fails is in being too repetitive and, consequently, a bit too long; one or two of the scenes where Gil is trying to sell his knives are superfluous; and, when Gil is at the game with his son, why does the camera have to keep cutting to the woman in the crowd - once or twice would have been sufficient.
A major unconvincing aspect is that surely a $40m signing, like Bobby Raybourn (Wesley Snipes), would be surrounded by a lot more razzmatazz than simply one not-too-effective agent (John Leguizamo).But, on the whole, one to rent or watch on TV (as I've just done) if nothing more compelling is available..
Robert DeNiro delivers superbly in his role as an extremely obsessive baseball fan, and as all DeNiro fans love and know that in many of his movies he delivers great lines with his powerful facial expressions that makes you intense with anticipation.
The film got a lot of the much more important stuff right, which is good performances from the actors and good, no great, character development and insight into these characters.The film took us into deep the mind of the obsessed fan (De Niro) and that obsession grows in a logical fashion as the movie progresses.
His passion and intensity were on the front burner all movie long and made his character truly believeable and consistent.The film takes us into the baseball player culture in the lockeroom, and into the workings of player and agent (which is what I really found interesting), as well as player and radio station personality.
***SPOILERS*** Robert De Niro is at his deranged and psychotic best as the crazed baseball fanatic or fan for short Gil Renard a man completely whacked out of his skull.
It's Gil who takes matters into his own hands when his hero the just traded to the San Francisco Giants, from the Atlanta Braves, Bobby Rayburn, Wesley Snipes, gets the short end of the stick by the teams management.
That's by Bobby not being able to retain his number #11 on his Giants jersey that he feels made him a,.314 lifetime hitter, his supernatural powers in both hitting and catching a baseball.Gil has his own problems at work and at home with his job as a sport supply executive specializing in hunting knives on the line and his old lady Ellen, Patti D'Arbanville, about to get complete custody of their seven year old son Richie,Andrew J.
Bobby the 40 million dollar man, that's what the Giants higher ups were paying him, who was in a king size slump all season now, with Primo gone and his famed #11 back, started hitting up to expectations.It's later on when Gil just happened to be around to save Bobby's eight year old son Sean, Brandon Hammond, from almost drowning in the Pacific Ocean that his high opinions about Bobby drastically changed.
And with that and outraged and dejected Gil plans to make Bobby's life both personal and professional into a living hell on earth!***SPOILERS*** The movie "The Fan" is really a one man show with Robert De Niro at center stage doing his thing, being off the wall crazy, that he and only he can do best.
Gil's craziness goes so far as kidnapping Bobby's son Sean and even going farther in murdering his little league hero, his battery mate, Coop, Charles Hallahan, when he himself realized just how crazy Gil his one time best friend really was.The ending of the movie was a bit too much to take with Gil going all out to get Bobby to publicly acknowledge what he did for him in front of a sold out crowd at Candlestick Park and on top of all that hit a home run for him!
As psychopathic baseball fan Gil Renard, Robert De Niro does his best acting in years.
Once again Wesley Snipes was in a tough spot but this time as a Baseball player.John Leguizamo was good as always and Benicio Del Toro played his part well but Kurt Fuller and Chris Mulkey in My opinion was`t given a lot of time to act their best.The Fan is a fast paces movie and some times it gets really hyper.The Baseball scenes are good and realistic especially when you see the Stadiums.The film delivers a lot and I think most Robert De Niro and Wesley Snipes fans will like The Fan!Note: As a very big Baseball fan the arguments and incidents that happened between Bobby Rayburn (Wesley Snipes) and Juan Primo (Benicio Del Toro) reminded Me a lot of the real life Baseball feud between homerun king Barry Bonds and slugger Jeff Kent.In My opinion it is really ashame two great people like them have to dislike each other but that`s how people are..
I found it slightly difficult to believe that Renard would have started out as a frustrated obsessive sports fan into being an out and out psychoThe character arc isn't the only problem with this script - It also lacks a character focus ( A problem I had with THE UNTOUCHABLES where De Niro should have been superb but ended up slightly flat ) , for several stretches of the movie I kept thinking that Bobby Rayburn was the main character then the story switches back to Renard .
I'm not sure if this was meant to appeal to baseball fans originally but again there are elements which hint it might have if the producers had made up their minds has to who and what the story should focus upon I will admit I was entertained by THE FAN ( Especially by the soundtrack ) but it is a very flawed film and it should be remembered that by the mid 1990s characters being stalked by nutters as in SINGLE WHITE FEMALE , UNLAWFUL ENTRY etc had run out of steam a long time ago.
Robert De Niro teams up with director Tony Scott and Wesley Snipes to make one good thriller.
The violence is limited and that's is a good thing but language is high.(MAY CONTAIN SOME SPOILERS!!!)Number one fan Gil Renard whose obsession is focused on a San Francisco Giants all-star outfielder Booby Rayburn.
When Primo brushes off the fan's concerns, Gil proceeds to murder the left fielder with one of his makeshift knives!Wesley Snipes finally gives a exceptional performance and he plays his sport role, Bobby Rayburne, very well and he shows emotion along with many other good feelings.
Robert De Niro plays the die-hard baseball fan who will do anything to impress his favorite baseball player, Bobby Rayburne (Wesley Snipes, and which results in him turning into something sinister and evil.
Gil Renard, the man at the center of The Fan, is this kind of guy, and then some.On the surface, the movie can be seen as a two-dimensional thriller about a psychotic baseball nut.
And when the superstar enters a slump and loses his $40 million worth, Gil takes it upon himself to get his favorite player hitting again, whatever it takes.For Tony Scott, The Fan marks his first foray into character study, but is only an addition to thrillers on his filmography.
The movie revolves around Robert DeNiro's character, Gil, an over obsessed sports fan who decides he wants to play an active role in the career of Bobby (Wesley Snipes), in a performance that will be mentioned in the same sentence as "Passenger 57".
See it to find out.Pretty disappointed with this movie, although it features one of my favourite scenes ever when Gil and Bobby have a little game of baseball near the end..
De Niro plays Gil, an obsessive baseball fan who takes a liking to newly recruited Giants player Bobby (Wesley Snipes), whose contract was some $40 million for the team.
Others are skeptics, but Gil believes in Bobby, even after an injury lowers his batting average and fans everywhere cry bloody outrage.Gil decides to take matters into his own hands by "helping" Bobby -- until the baseball player turns on his fans and Gil feels betrayed and works up a revenge scheme.The plot summary for this may sound stupid, but I like it because of the depth added to the characters.
The film really builds up insight into Gil, a failing knife salesman who has a strange obsession with the Rolling Stones, baseball and violence.In fact the subtleties are what make this movie succeed past others of its genre.
It's the story of Gil Renard (Robert De Niro) - a former little league star who never made the majors but who's become a fanatical fan of the San Francisco Giants.
He wants Rayburn to succeed - and he becomes obsessed with Rayburn, to the point at which he goes to great lengths to "help" him (watch the movie), and then, when Rayburn won't thank him for what he did, he kidnaps the star's son and threatens to kill him unless Rayburn hits a home run in the next game and publicly dedicates it to Gil. That's the story in a nutshell.Overall, the story isn't that compelling to be honest.
Bobby Rayburn (Wesley Snipes), an all-star baseball player who has signed a 40 million dollar deal with the Giants, thinks his life is perfect.
What he doesn't know is that he has an overly obsessed fan named Gil Renard (Robert De Niro) who will make his life a living hell.
Robert De Niro plays a great crazy guy, and Wesley Snipes does a great job playing a baseball player who deals with a crazy fan.
but we were straight out lucky to have the greatest actor on the planet (that's Robert De Niro) playing the role of Gil Renard, a baseball freak fixated on centre fielder Bobby Rayburn (Wesley Snipes), who has traded up from Milwaukee to the San Francisco Giants with a wow $40 million contract.
You sit down to watch The Fan and wonder how De Niro is going to come up with something new after firing on presidential candidate Leonard Harris in Taxi Driver, kidnapping TV star Jerry Lewis in The King of Comedy, torturing lawyer Nick Nolte in Cape Fear and abusing stepson Leonardo DiCaprio in This Boy's Life, to name just a few of the victims De Niro has memorably stalked.Up till this point, "The Fan" is badly rated because of Tony Scott's miss-direction, not crappy performances by the cast or anything like a bad plot line.
De Niro plays Gil, a die hard baseball fan and devout follower of Bobby Rayburn (Wesley Snipes), star player for his favourite team.
He's a dedicated fan of his San Francisco Giants and now that prized player Bobby Rayburn (Snipes) has been added to the team, Gil is all the more into the sport.
Robert De Niro as yet another crack-pot: this time, he's a baseball-obsessed knife salesman fixated on Wesley Snipes, the new $40 million pitcher for the San Francisco Giants.
You have Robert De Niro, Wesley Snipes, Ellen Barkin and John Legusimo all talking like pigs right from the first sentence of the movie.You know, it might have been a good movie about greedy baseball players and an obsessed fan, but come on - in the first 10 minutes alone I heard 20- f-words and 10 usages of the Lord's name in vain!
can only watch.Such is the case with Gil Renard (Robert DeNiro) a divorced, unstable knife salesman, who has only one light left in his life: Baseball.And only one person he admires:Bobby Rayburn.Bobby Rayburn, by sharp contrast, is the most preeminent baseball player for the San Francisco Giants.As the movie progresses, we watch both men's lives unravel.And while Renard loses his job, and custody of his son; Rayburn (played by Wesley Snipes) suffers a chest injury, and gets upstaged by an ambitious young player, Juan Primo (Benicio Del Toro).It is at this point in the story when Renard decides to take matters into his own hands:He murders Primo, thus restoring Rayburn to his former greatness, but this is not enough.Firmly believing that he has done a good thing (for the Giants, and his idol), Renard decides to reach out to Rayburn, it being his opinion that the baseball star doesn't acknowledge his fans enough.This sets off a series of events which lead the increasingly more unhinged Renard to kidnap Rayburn's son...and demand a home run in exchange for his return.This is a very familiar theme of obsession and murder.You've seen this movie before, with different actors, different storylines, and different titles.What makes this one worth watching however, is a decent script (take for instance, the last scene of the movie), an excellent cast, and a powerful director.Tony Scott does a terrific job with this movie, giving it a dimension most directors could never have achieved.The actors are right on target, bringing out the complexities of their characters.Bobby Rayburn is very well played by Snipes:He's confident, and self-assured without being arrogant.Robert DeNiro is spectacular as Renard:He's clearly psychotic, and, although you can't root for him, you can understand what's causing his breakdown.He's a failure at his degrading job.
Scott's trademark flashy visuals, breathless camera work and hyperactive editing are there from the outset as die-hard San Francisco Giants fan Gil (Robert De Niro), speeds across town in his van while engaging in a somewhat bizarre radio phone-in about the Giants' new $40 million star signing Bobby Rayburn (Wesley Snipes).Once things calm down a little, we learn that Gil is a hunting supplies salesman who's having a tough time meeting his targets and is under threat of losing his job.
Snipes does well too it's about Gill a knife salesman who loves baseball and Rayburn is a baseball player,Gil starts to stalk Rayburn and is psychotic I don't want to give anything away so just watch it and I think you will agree I loved it and have saw it many times I strongly recommend x I love all Roberts films he's a superb actor and director.
Sometimes baseball can be more important than life itself.Starring Robert De Niro and Wesley Snipes.Written by Peter Abrahams ( Book ) and Phoef Sutton ( Screenplay).Directed by Tony Scott.Sometimes a very average movie can be carried by one great acting performance.It's never been truer said than in this one.
Unemployed knife salesman and San Francisco Giants fan Gil Renard (Robert DeNiro) is obsessed with his favorite player, $40 million acquisition Bobby Rayburn (Wesley Snipes).
Obsessive, compulsive behavior best describes Robert De Niro's fine performance in this film.As a San Francisco Giant fan, he attends all games and proceeds to lose his salesman's job.
De Niro Is The Man. Knife salesman Gil Renard is a die-hard baseball fan and is looking forward to Opening Day more than normal as his team, the San Fransisco Giants, have acquired Bobby Rayburn - a 3-time MVP - from the Atlanta Braves.
The Fan is an excellent thriller directed by British director Tony Scott (True Romance, Top Gun) and stars Robert De Niro and Wesley Snipes.
As Gil Renard, De Niro plays a Willie Loman-like knife salesman whose obsession with baseball in general and the San Francisco Giants in particular takes him over the edge.
|
tt0123371
|
Aberration
|
An oddball animal biologist/local field researcher named Marshall Clarke (Simon Bossell) is investigating the disappearance of local wildlife, and finds slimy residue on a fence post. Meanwhile, a woman named Amy Harding (Pamela Gidley) moves into her old cabin in the woods of Langdon, where she spent her family holidays as a child, along with her cat, Frankie, and two goldfishes. In the morning, Amy cleans, and fixes up her cabin. She goes to eat some cake, and discovers that something has been in it. Outside, she meets Mr. Peterson (Norman Forsey), looking for his dog Florence, which was killed by an unseen creature, he tells her to get out of Langdon.
She goes to the general store owned by Mrs. Miller (Helen Moulder), Amy asks her for some mouse traps, but she says that they're out of stock. She buys some groceries, and insect spray. Back at the cabin, she discovers that Frankie's bowl is empty, and she gives him canned food. As she takes a bath, the lights goes out and she goes to her shed to check the generator. While there, slimy residue falls into her hair and she goes to wash it out. She tells Frankie to guard the cabin, as she goes to the general store again. She buys all the mouse traps for $22.00, and a poison sprayer that Mrs. Miller loans to her. She meets Marshall, who drives her to her cabin when her car breaks down. As they get back to the cabin, they search the kitchen and something bites Amy's hand. Marshall discovers the remains of Amy's cat Frankie on the bathroom floor during the search. He discovers foot prints on the fish tank, and he shows Amy that he caught one of the creatures what appears to be a lizard. As Marshall and Amy talk, she sees a lizard crawling around. Marshall tries to catch it but Amy sprays it with the poison sprayer, and kills it. Marshall says the creature is a mutant gecko that can spit blinding venom to paralyze its prey. He and Amy go outside, where it has begun snowing and drive away but crash.
Amy tells Marshall that Mr. Peterson lives down the road. When they arrive at Mr. Peterson's cabin, they find his dead body being eaten by the lizards. Amy lights some matches, throws them into an oven, and blows the cabin up. Amy and Marshall see Mr. Peterson's truck blow up as well. They make it back to the cabin, and a rest on the couch in the living room. Marshall looks into his backpack, and discovers that the lizard has escaped. Amy goes to fetch her rifle from her bedroom and hands it to Marshall. Suddenly, a tree branch breaks through the window and Marshall shoots it multiple times. Amy hammers a table onto the window to prevent the cold from getting in. She smells something burning and finds a lizard underneath the heater. Marshall picks it up, and takes into the kitchen to examine it. He discovers that the creature has been eating the local wildlife and was pregnant. They start looking for the eggs, and Marshall accidentally breaks the handle on the poison sprayer. Amy fetches a water gun from her bedroom and attaches the sprayer's hose to it. They go into the bedroom and discover tracks under the bed. A lizard leaps out of the closet with Marshall chasing it into the living room, firing multiple rounds at it. Amy grabs the gun from him and wait for the lizard to come out from underneath the couch, shooting it in the head. They go to bedroom again and find an egg. Amy throws it on the floor and stomps on it. Marshall says that there are two lizards left. They wait in the living room, where they notice the lizards are up in the attic. Marshall uses a ladder and water hose to lure the lizards out. Amy hears the lizards moving in the walls. Marshall grabs the gun and puts three holes in the wall with the butt of the gun. He uses the water hose to flush them out, causing a lizard to break out and Amy fires three rounds at it to no effect. The lizard charges at them, leaping onto Marshall, causing him to fall to the floor, with the lizard biting and scratching him. Amy grabs the water hose and blasts it off him. Marshall grabs a chair and the lizard spits venom in his eyes, but he manages to crush it multiple times. Amy takes Marshall into the kitchen and bandages his wounds, putting gauze over his eyes. She uses a piece of chicken as bait for the last lizard with a piece of string tied to it. The lizard takes the chicken, but the string breaks. Amy runs out of the closet, grabs it, and throws it into the fish tank where it eats the fishes. Its tail starts to attack her and she stomps on it. When the lizard starts to grow gills, Amy throws a lamp into the tank and electrocutes it. She goes up into the attic and, finding more eggs, smashes them with a hammer. Amy and Marshall, believing they've won, fall asleep.
In the morning, Marshall wakes up to music coming from a car and meets Amy's ex-boyfriend Uri Romanov (Valery Nikolaev) outside. Uri grabs Marshall by the nose and orders him to leave. Marshall tries to stop him, but Uri leaves him unconscious on the ground. When Amy wakes up, she sees lizards hatching inside the closet and crushes them with a shoe. When she runs out of the bedroom, she finds Uri and grabs a kitchen knife, attempting to kill him. Uri grabs her, and forces her down on the kitchen counter, asking where his money is. Suddenly Marshall shows up with the rifle in his hands. Uri pulls out a pistol and tells him Amy's real name is Alex Langdon. Amy tells Uri that the money is in the bedroom closet, but when he goes into bedroom, he discovers that she tricked him. He forces them to the bed, and prevents them from leaving. Suddenly, lizards attack but Uri kills them with his guns. He again asks Amy where the money is, to which she replies it is in the attic. Marshall goes up to fetch the money belt and throws it down to the floor. Uri picks it up, complaining it's wet and a bit light. Amy sprays him in the face with insect spray in response. They shove him into the fireplace and eggs fall on his head. A lizard breaks out of his mouth, and Amy shoots him in the face repeatedly. She gives Marshall the pistol for protection while he goes pours gas in the bedroom and kitchen, where more lizards appear. When Amy looks in the money belt, a lizard pops out and she screams. Marshall throws the gas can into the oven and, failing to shoot it twice, he manages to catch it with the third shot. His clothes catch on fire doing this and Amy puts him out, but the money also burns. They both escape in Uri's car as the cabin burns. The car starts to breaks down and Marshall goes to look under the hood, where he finds eggs hatching in it. Suddenly, lizards start pop out of various places inside the car, attacking Amy. Marshall tells her to unlock the door after she accidentally locked it in her panic. He takes the cigar she had lit while he was looking under the hood and throws it into the gas tank, blowing up the car while simultaneously killing the lizards.
Marshall carries an unconscious Amy through the snow to the general store and meet up with Mrs. Miller. While trying to warm Amy with electric blankets, he finds a lizards' tail sticking out of her leg. He grabs a pair of scissors, and uses matches to heat them up. He sticks the scissors into her leg, creating a larger opening. He tells Mrs. Miller to put out the scissors and as she does so, Marshall pulls the lizard out of Amy's leg causing Amy to scream. He looks around the store with a shovel (since Mrs. Miller does not sell guns in her store) and accidentally knocks out the lights. Mrs. Miller goes to fetch a flashlight and is killed by the lizard. Marshall, upset about Mrs. Miller's death, puts on sunglasses and set fire to a lighter fluid-soaked push broom. As he goes looking for the lizard, it again spits venom at him but instead hits the glasses and he takes them off. The lizard tries to jump on him but instead lands on the broom and Marshall pushes it into a corner. He pours more lighter fluid on the lizard as it burns. As he's walking away, the lizard spits more venom and puts the fire out. The lizard starts to come after him again, when he finds a flare gun. Before he can finish loading it, the lizard sends him to the floor, scratching and biting him. Suddenly, Amy shows up and grabs the flare gun, shooting the lizard in the mouth. Sent flying, the lizard hits the wall and explodes. Amy and Marshall collapse on the floor and kiss.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt2667380
|
Kill Command
|
In a technologically advanced near future, Katherine Mills, a cyborg working for Harbinger Corporation, discovers a reprogramming anomaly regarding a warfare A.I. system located at Harbinger I Training Facility, an undisclosed military training island. She meets with Captain Damien Bukes and his team consisting of Drifter, Robinson, Cutbill, Goodwin, Hackett, and Loftus - all of whom have been assigned to a two-day training mission at Harbinger I.
Upon their arrival, the team notices global communications have been disabled, limiting them to local access only. They discover autonomously operating surveillance drones monitoring them. The team begins their mission of eliminating A.I. threats. The first encounter proves easy for the team as they eliminate A.I. drones from a vantage point. During the battle, Mills discovers an advanced S.A.R. (Study Analyze Reprogram) unit, S.A.R.-003, but is unable to access it.
That night, Drifter and Mills discuss their pasts and Bukes' disdain for her. Later that night, Loftus is killed by the S.A.R. unit. The next day, they discover Loftus's body at the location of the first encounter. The drones take the team's original vantage point and kill Hackett. They discover the A.I. is adapting and learning from them. Bukes flanks two drones, which immediately disperse. Later, the S.A.R. unit captures Cutbill and has him shot and killed by another drone. The drones attack the group again and Bukes and Mills are separated from Drifter, Robinson and Goodwin. That night, the S.A.R. unit discovers Bukes and an unconscious Mills; it "connects" with Mills and leaves.
The next day the team attempts to exit the training area, but they are attacked by smoke and gunfire. Drifter is shot and pinned down by the S.A.R. unit. Bukes kills Drifter as a coup de grace before the S.A.R. unit is able to. The team escapes into the barrier complex and discovers that the A.I. has killed all of the employees. Mills activates another S.A.R. unit to learn that S.A.R-003 reprogrammed the A.I. to use lethal force in order to improve soldier motivation and has ordered the soldiers to Harbinger I on its own. S.A.R-003 and other units break through the barrier door as the remaining team escapes through the back. Mills discovers an EMP device which can be used to stop the original S.A.R. unit but could also kill her or wipe her mind clean.
Bukes, Mills, Robinson, and Goodwin place explosives to prepare for a siege. The following day, A.I. drones attack the facility. The team wipes out more than half of the drones, but Robinson is killed in the ensuing gunfight. As S.A.R-003 approaches the team, Mills detonates the EMP, incapacitating herself and the drone. The S.A.R. unit reawakens and attacks Bukes and Mills. Mills controls a drone gun in the building to destroy the S.A.R. unit; S.A.R. however uploads its program into Mills before it shuts down and Mills loses consciousness. Hours later, a tiltrotor arrives to rescue the survivors. As Bukes and Goodwin approaches the aircraft, Mills reawakens with S.A.R-003's mission protocol.
|
comedy, murder, violence, psychedelic, suspenseful, sci-fi
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Putting aside the awful script, the movie looks very professional and the acting, although a bit stiff in places, is decent.
If you're like me, you are very leery of low budget sci-fi and horror films that are written and directed by the same person who is relatively unknown and not yet an established filmmaker.
If you are a fan of movies like Skyline, Predator, and Terminator, you will probably enjoy this film..
Kill Command is a relatively straight-laced sci-fi that takes itself seriously - and is the better for it.A military team are sent to training, when they are attacked by robots.
you know the feeling when you tired and have nothing to do and already watched all the recent movies up there so you pick any not-very- promising film to be as a visual background to relax with?
i expected to watch a low budget-shitty effects movie with a bad story and line.
you wont expect to get a SHASHANK REDEMPTION story in an action film,yet the story was good very nicely done guys, it was a great job.
There is the usual bunch: the mean guy, the nice guy, the cold robot like girl, the cowardly guy, the big muscle guy who says five words and there are the cannon fodder guys (all the best sci-fi movies rely this team format).The script is no Oscar winner, but imagine if they only had a million dollars to make Predator and there was no Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Now imagine the same for Aliens, add a few really talented VFX guys, some really great concept art people, a half decent script and this is probably the movie you would have got.
It's low-budget, yet the actors, the scenery, the CGI, the costumes, the effects, the music, the sound they are all top quality.The direction could have been a bit less cliché at times, in how it handled scenes with "he's watching you" tension.
Kill Command is a solid Sci-fi low budget movie, it's the first credit for Steven Gomez who wrote and directed the movie that makes me curious what is next from him, from the begging of the movie you know that you are going to watch a well-made movie.The plot of the movie is very simple, right to the point from the beginning of the movie, there are no useless points to fill the movie with it as we see in many movies these days, a group of trainees going for their regular training but something will happen will make them never to forget this training, the script really supports the movie because it is very well written and performed, IN THE OTHER HAND there are of course some plot holes and staff but personally i didn't focus on them that much, also it could have been better if they gave us more details, also the ending was very mysterious which was a little disappointed for me but i think it worked too.The cinematography in the movie was great, the CGI looks awesome, even with a low budget, flawless CGI and visual effects which looks even better than a lot of high budget movies, I think that the fact that Steven Gomez works a lot in the visual effects department could have helped him,right?, IN THE OTHER HAND sometimes the robots looks a little weird but that happened just a few times.The acting as everything in the movie is very solid, a group of mid- known actors each one of them played his role as it should be played and again it was very controlled by the director, awesome performance by the group leader Thure Lindhardt...Captain Bukes and Vanessa Kirby...Mills which added a lot to the movie, IN THE OTHER HAND there are moments when they were fighting with the robots i felt something weird and could have been better but maybe this isn't the actors fault i think there is a fight scenes designers or something like that, i just think it could have been more realistic.The sound effects in the movie as well played a great role like how the robots speak and interact, the gun shots, etc .., all were good nothing over the top or abnormal.Finally, everyone who is interested in the Sci-fi genre should watch this i pretty sure it will entertain you, I think Gamers will have a bit of deja vu watching this lol.7.5/10.
It is still very watchable when acting, camera work, and special effects are good.Music is passable, nothing special, but they do avoid turning up volume for cheap scares.Frankly, this movie can be compared to a novel which had to compete against the best of 19th century writing and came somewhere in the lower middle..
im a big sci fi fan, but i don't settle for any kind of sci fi, big blockbuster sci fi in the last few years is terrible, there still hasn't been anything that has beaten the original sci fi movies, alien, predator, blade runner etc but this was a breath of fresh air, the cgi is amazing for low budget movie, not too much character development which i think is good, a lot of movies today focus on this too much and we miss out.
The movie looks good even though the narrative might feel stale as it progresses sluggishly.Its most valuable asset is certainly its graphic, the effects are riveting and it brings out the sci-fi aspect really well.
I was so surprised that the team could come up with such an overused story line and execute it in a very different way.The CGI or special effects or robots used were very convincing and well edited and directed by Steven Gomez, to show the world a much better view of a well known script.I would advise anyone, who wants to see something new, refreshing, simple Sci-Fi based subject, this is the one for you.
Although most of the times ratings in IMDb do give a nice warning on what you are about to watch, this time , this 5.9 rating is probably a rating that does injustice to the movie.There are a lot of special effects with CGI and carefully designed for friends of sci-fi movies and the scenario is quite interesting.
Certain details regarding tech on this movie are not fictional and have a base on what DARPA has produced recently along with battle equipment that already exist, on a different form.All in all, i think that this movie is totally worth watching and it is certainly something that would trigger some wondering afterwards on what is about to come on battlefields, regarding technology and human-troops..
I think the one thing that stands out for me in this was both the tension and the the part played by Mills (Vanessa Kirby) with her having a link to the robots just gave it another dimension for me and even her just looking around the woods built up a great foreboding feeling.This is well worth a watch and its a shame it did not get more publicity when first released as it deserves to be watched and enjoyed.
That boss robot is the creepiest design I've seen since the original Terminator.The acting is surprisingly good, if a tad bit on the low-key side.
I can definitely see everyone involved, from the actors and director, to the cameramen and VFX people moving up to the A-list if they got the chance to work with a bigger budget.The camera work is really nice, with very competent focus while working with a beautifully short depth-of-field, which is far too often left out of B-movies or otherwise botched.
"Take a B Sci-Fi movie theme and recycle it with something added and stay within the budget we gave you" - that seems to be the specification the director and the producer of the film received from the Studio.
What you will find if you are accustomed with the genre is that the theme is way too washed out to be recycled (those bloody AI military machines that turn rogue and start killing people, variation of the HAL 9000 from 2001 - Space Odyssey)) and the one added element (an AI augmented human in the center of the plot) is not enough to make the reshuffle interesting.
I give it 3/10 simply because the camera and special effects along with a couple actors I was familiar with wasn't the worse thing I've seen on screen but boy it was definitely no where near good.
The plot wears a little thin and could probably have done with a stricter edit as it does feel like it goes on a bit.The characters are all good.
It may not be particularly original, and as others have stated, the script is a bit ropey but for a film with a budget of only a million dollars it's got some high production values.
Its CGI production quality for today's standards is somewhere between very good as you would expect and a little B movie ish.Honestly though I'm quite surprised how much I enjoyed this.
A sci-fi film with a low budget but the acting is good, the setting well thought out, and the SFX extremely good.
The script is the only thing that lets this movie down, but really, compared to other films in this category, it's a masterpiece.I found it enjoyable - and that is, after all, the main point of watching a film like this..
Kill Command is a really well done budget sci-fi film.
Solid action scenes, great actor (for not knowing any of them), solid story.....low budget yes but hey its really good.
Anywhoo watch this movie if your a military,sci fi, action fan..
We learn about what is going on in Kill Command slowly, and that suits the film well.It's a clever premise, and if you watch the film a second time some of the dialog makes a lot more sense.
The soldiers rely too much on the high powered sniper rifles to kill the robots, but I guess that's realistic.There are a few scenes that remind me of Doom and The Terminator, so if you liked those films you will like this..
When I was watching this film, I was totally blown away by the CGI effects of the robots.
It was so detailed, the movements were so 'realistic', and given this film had a distinct B-movie feel, I was extremely surprised that those effects were done with a budget of $1m.
As such, one would judge this movie based on how you felt watching it, rather than analysing on how good the story is.
You progress with the character, you root for them, you feel like you're part of the action.It's a run of the mill story, but with tremendous sci-fi graphics and fairly decent acting.
I enjoyed her slightly detached from humanity portrayal.The effects are great, outdoing some high budget movies easily.
Simple plot with a few holes in it, good action, and special effects worthy of bigger budget movies.
That night the SAR kills a Marine, using his body to lure the unit into an ambush where they are attacked by advanced battle robots controlled by the SAR.The Rogue AI story has been done many times before but this is an interesting SF/Action film.
A pretty decent low budget sci-fi movie.
Think fairly generic 'Machines turn on their creator' type stuff but with a lot of ammo, some pretty cool robot designs and some quite well written interpersonal relationships.This movie mainly is a spectacle movie, but it's a bit low budget, so built sets are kept to a minimum, larger locations are office buildings, forests, abandoned buildings, muddy fields, etc.
they stop short of an actual quarry but there's nothing terribly spectacular there, it's all about the digital augmentation.If you've seen fan made Star Trek movies that rely on green screen, CGI sets, movement tracking, key frame animation and an awful lot of atmospheric plug-ins, this movie is like a slightly higher budget more professional version of one of those.It mostly holds up well, the animation can be a bit stiff at times, the robots walk, interact and shoot well, but don't pull or push people about nor fall well, and occasionally something doesn't quite look right at all, but it's mostly all pretty convincing.
The actors do just fine at selling this augmented reality to the audience considering they themselves presumably cannot see it, and you're seldom distracted by the weird eye-lines or odd framing that sometimes plague this style of film making.The pacing is good, there's some decent characters, plenty of action, lots of cool stuff to look at and it's reasonably entertaining.Good for a wet Wednesday, give it a go..
Nothing new here unfortunately, but was surprisingly better than expected for your standard low budget futuristic science fiction action/horror film.
Decent Acting, great special effects, good character development, and a fairly believable story line (As far as sci-fi goes), I would highly recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys a good Action film..
I was expecting to see a low budget film with mediocre acting and poor effects but from the first minutes, the movie proved me wrong.
Kill Command is basically Dog Soldiers with robots instead of werewolves (but not nearly as good).
Sure, I wasn't expecting a moral dissertation about the relationship between robots and humans either (we have the work from authors such as Karel Capek and Isaac Asimov for that), but I would have liked to see at least a bit of reflection to bring substance to the shootouts, explosions and magnificent special effects displayed by the film...
However, the main pro of Kill Command are the brilliant special effects, whose design, execution and integration to the filmed material surpass the expectations of a modest B-Movie.
I wish Kill Command had shown the narrative ambition of, for example, Ex Machina; but as a hollow action spectacle, it offers tense sequences of combat, moderate but functional drama and impressive special effects which will delight the fans of robots (like me) with their realism and creative ingenuity.
Okay, so being honest, the story line is far too predictable, but where the plot itself is a little boring, the premise of the movie is based on factual future projects such as AI and Robotics that we are already seeing with Google/Boston Dynamics/VR and so on, rather than basing it on fictional Terminators.
But by and far the absolute best part of this film, the star of the show, is the CGI team and set designers who have made future technology, robotics, and warfare so realistic and believable that within 10 minutes I forgot I wasn't watching the next Hollywood Blockbuster.
The robots are not the only stars though, but also the weapons which although are heavily converted real world weapons, pack so much punch and delivery that you end up enjoying the warfare scenes the most and again, excites you that they are based on current real- world warfare projects that may see the light of day in 10-20 years time.The entire film is a sort of attempt to cross a Predator movie with a Halo video game, and it works well indeed.
But that's just it, it's good, easy watching entertainment I can see a lot of hardcore Sci-fi action fans will enjoy.
As this is 1 budget film that looks good enough to deserve a sequel.All in all a very solid production..
Set in the near future and in the US Army we meet an elite team of soldiers who have been designated to do a test on a remote island for an arms company that have developed Artificial Intelligence (AI) robots to take the place of real soldiers on the battlefields of the future.They are assigned a chipped human called 'Mills' (Vanessa Kirby) who has electronic capabilities and is like walking search engine – only better.
About the only good thing about this film was how great the tech looked.
If you remember your feeling from watching the Predator for the first time - you will certainly enjoy Kill Command.
While Kill Command can borrow from the best - without so many of the trappings, it feels like a cheaper version of a much better suit.Dog Soldiers 2002 - Now were getting closer!
For a low budget movie with almost no marketing Kill Command is a cool film.
The CGI special effects are exceptional in places, moreso for what is a clearly low budget film - the main antagonist (the big bad boy killing machine robot with caterpillar tracks) is truly awesome.
I would watch this again and I'm sure it would be even better second time around.Low budget film makers take note of this.
Don't get me wrong the movie is quite decent, way better than most of the other "low budget" sci-fi creations.Anyhow here are a few things I didn't like about the movie.
What makes this film fun to watch is the Action scenes with the robots.
I thought all of those scenes were very well done.also The Guns the soldiers used were very cool looking.The film takes place in the near future when technology reliant society has created killing machines.
I thought Vanessa Kirby gave a good performance, she was good as the Half human half Robot.I also liked her special ability to shut down machines and hack machines by using her eyes, I thought that was very cool.I thought the acting was Okay from everyone and I thought the Actor that played Captain Bukes was good in his role, I liked him and found his character believable.I thought he kicked Ass at the end of the film when he Fights the Leader Robot.
The Robot lady also put up a good fight and she has a cool moment at the end of the film.
I wasn't expecting too much from "Kill Command" when I stumbled upon it on Netflix, expecting it to be your typical run of the mill low budget sci fi actioner.
|
tt3149038
|
X+Y
|
Nathan Ellis, a 9-year-old math prodigy, has just lost his father in a car accident. Nathan is diagnosed as autistic early in the film, but strangely, his father was the only one who was able to connect normally with him. Although Nathan values his mother, Julie, he shuns any physical contact with her and treats her as more of a caretaker than a parent. Wanting to make sure Nathan isn’t distracted from his studies, Julie enrolls him in advanced classes at a new school. There, he comes under the tutelage of teacher Martin, also a math genius, who now suffers from multiple sclerosis. Martin sees himself in Nathan, once a promising young mind in the field of mathematics, who gave it all up once he was diagnosed with his illness.
Seven years later, Martin is preparing Nathan to compete for a place in the International Mathematical Olympiad, a prestigious high school competition consisting of the world’s best young mathematicians. This year, it is to be held at Cambridge, after a two-week math camp in Taiwan where the students will study for the test that determines the winners. Nathan fears he’s not good enough to qualify but ends up doing well enough to accompany 15 other British teenagers to Taiwan.
Suddenly thrust out of his comfort zone, Nathan finds himself no longer the smartest math whiz in the room, and his social anxieties nearly paralyze his performance. He has trouble reading the social cues of others and flinches at the slightest physical contact with another person. Nathan is paired with a female Chinese student, Zhang Mei, who slowly helps him adjust to his new surroundings and helps him fight through his fears. By the skin of their teeth, Nathan and Zhang make the cut to compete in Cambridge.
Back in England, Zhang stays with Nathan and his mum, who’s shocked to find that his behavior has transformed into something more normal. She becomes aware that he may have feelings for Zhang, which she asks him. Not fully understanding the concept of love, Nathan is unsure how to express his feelings. He keeps his emotions bottled up as they all travel to Cambridge and settle in for the Olympiad.
Things quickly unravel when Zhang’s uncle catches her in Nathan’s room one morning and mistakenly accuses them of being in an intimate relationship. This causes Zhang to withdraw from the competition and leave. Nathan, who now believes he loves Zhang, is torn between her and the Olympiad. When he sits down among hundreds of other students around the world for the exam, the first question triggers memories of his dead father, which combined with his newly lost love, creates an emotional overload. At the pinnacle moment of his mathematical career, Nathan must make a decision whether to stay and pursue his dream, or give into the pain that’s haunted him for most of his life.
|
romantic, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The characters were beautifully written and performed by the stellar cast, but I feel a special mention has to be given to three of the actors in particular: Asa Butterfield, who portrays Nathan with such grace and skill, and captures the mannerisms and inner struggles of those on the spectrum brilliantly.
This ended up being one of my favorite movies of this year, but I feel like many people will not give it a chance for several reasons, but mainly the subject matter."It" is a delicate petal to step around to a lot of people.
Technically perfect, with a script so polished it gleams, and acting so sharp that even the secondary roles stay in your head long after the credits roll.Butterfield's character is a young boy with Autism who, as a result, may or may not be a world class math prodigy.
The point of the story however is not whether his character will win a math Olympics but rather if he will ever become a functioning human being.Butterfield, in a cast of greats, stands out.
Hawkins does not allow this.It is an excellent film, more a journey than a destination, and therefore not for everyone.My favourite scene -- the one I will remember for a very long time -- is Butterfield with his (almost) Chinese girlfriend, eating some take-out.The container is opened and the number of comestibles inside is NOT a prime number.
Heading into early stages of MS, Hutchinson explains to Nathan a competition that he did in his youth and recommends he should enter it - the International Mathematics Olympiad, a world- wide competition similar to sporting, but rather than strong muscles, strong brains.Chosen as one of the sixteen entries from the UK, he then joins a worldly-mix of other competitors in what is probably the most difficult children's test in the world.At this point you realize how the story is going to end, along with the regular clichés.
Put into cheesy maths terms X+Y is: Great casting + dramatic story + comedy - clichés = success.Taking the on the central lead, Asa Butterfield (Ender's Game) stuns in the portrayal and authentically attaches us with emotion to his story.
The film manages to be a family drama, a coming of age movie with a dash of romance, and a comedy at the same time.
X+Y is a mild but powerful movie in the sense that it tells Nathan's story with no big emotions but always making us relate to him somehow, which is the best thing it could do.
However, this movies brings us a new perspective, not only on how gifted people deal with their emotional side, but especially on how the mathematics of life are unachievable to every human mind.
In the end the main character shows a little emotion and violin music plays and I'm supposed to give this movie 10 stars?
There's no tension to any of the scenes, despite the theatrical music that plays throughout, because the only thing that can/does happen in this movie is the main character not understanding or being able to function in social situations.
I'd like to say Asa Butterfield is the highlight, but Rafe Spall steals the show in a gruff sharp performance that channels his dad in a way that makes me look forward to what he's going to do next.
'A Brilliant Young Mind' is a very charming film which tells the story of a unique and gifted boy named Nathan, who was diagnosed with autism at an early age.
This theme is not just applicable for Nathan in the film, it transcends to other characters too like his mother Julie and his teacher Humphries.
You can feel that the director loves and understands his characters.The acting is the strongest aspect of the film for me.
The predictability and the slightly overused melodrama in the 2nd half of the film did take me out of the film to some extent and prevented me from liking the film as much as I would have wanted to.As a whole the film does work due to the brilliant performances from all actors concerned and due to the affectionate manner in which Matthews treats his characters.
The person that this movie was based on I am sure had a really hard time losing his dad and dealing with his autism, however in the movie the performance given by Asa Butterfield is as one dimensional as you can get.
FYI, please don't start criticizing me for this comment, I completely understand that he is portraying someone with autism and that they have a difficult time relating socially with people, what I am saying is that his portrayal just doesn't make for an interesting character in a film.
Even with his autism the portrayal of him in the movie was of a shy socially awkward teenager who says mean things to his mom and isn't as "clever" as other boys.
It's appropriate to pause and think about the world that not understand You, but you can express within a beautiful language and demonstrate anybody it's a perfectly gifted person.On the subject of acting Asa Butterfield make a good interpretation he could transmitted a desperate of a person who want to communicate but the world doesn't see him.
People who like the film since they feel it accurately portrays autism.
Your average movie-goer could be excused for thinking autistic people are all super-intelligent with a prodigious memory and especially brilliant at maths, and that mathematicians are all weird nerdy socially inept people.
Examples of these are Little Man Tate, Searching for Bobby Fischer, and Akeelah and the Bee. However, it's this film from director Morgan Matthews that is the first I can recall to combine all three elements.Mr. Matthews' directorial resume is filled with documentaries and he brings that no-nonsense approach to this story based on the life of David Lightwing, a young math genius with Asbergers.
Asa Butterfield plays Nathan, a boy whose only love is mathematics.
He lost his beloved father at an early age, and has since not connected with anyone
even his most devoted and long-suffering mother, played by Sally Hawkins.Nathan begins studying under Rafe Spall's Martin, himself a former child math prodigy, whose struggles with Multiple Sclerosis act as a defense mechanism that prevents him from having any semblance of a well-rounded life.
Martin has his own personal history with both the event and the team's coach, played by Eddie Marsan.The film does a really nice job of illuminating the pressures on both loved ones (parents, teachers, etc) and the prodigies themselves.
Young Butterfield, around 16 or 17 during filming, does a remarkable job playing a complex teenager.The subject is nominally a maths prodigy who gets the opportunity to be a member of a team representing England for the maths olympics.
All he enjoys doing is mathematics.Asa Butterfield is remarkably good as the boy, Nathan Ellis.
But when he gets to the far east where they will train with a Chinese team he is immediately a fish out of water with no idea how to fit in, but he gets help from a young Chinese girl, English actress Jo Yang as Zhang Mei, who likes Nathan and gives him a way to learn to be a better adjusted person.A really good movie.
I can say that Asa Butterfield did a great job acting as an autistic child but I don't think I can say the same for Rafe Spalls who is his teacher.
It's a film about a teenage boy who's not quite like everyone else, I believe autism was the diagnosis he was given.He does not communicate very well but is beyond smart, I am not a very good communicator myself so I can most definitely relate to that and there are some scenes that get genuinely emotional for me (and anyone else I imagine with half a heart).Perhaps I'd wish for a more complete ending but maybe that would been a little too Hollywoodesque and this is after all a movie that is very much rooted in reality so it made sense I suppose to end it the way they did.7.5/10..
This film tells the story of a autistic young man who is particularly gifted in mathematics.
X + Y is a small intimate film that is sporadically amusing but suffers from a lightness of plot and an ending which to me smacks of 'we could not of think of how to end this film so this is how we leave things.'Nathan (Asa Butterfield) is a high functioning autistic boy who excels in mathematics but cannot lacks displaying emotion to his mother (Sally Hawkins.) He lives an ordered life where he has his own rituals such as having certain types of food but he certainly not the touchy, feely kind of ladAs a young boy he was involved in a car accident that left his father dead.
Over the course of the film we find out that the younger Nathan had a connection with his father and his death has left with some unresolved emotions.Nathan gets extra maths tuition from his gruff school teacher (Rafe Spall) himself a child maths prodigy now struggling with Multiple Sclerosis.
The film takes a turn when Nathan is selected to go to Taiwan to be in with a chance of joining the British team competing to at the International Mathematics Olympiad to be held at Cambridge.
The team coach is played by Eddie Marsan who has to handle these various maths prodigies, a lot of them seem to nerds, geeks and high functioning autistic.Here he meets a girl who is part of the Chinese team which makes him look differently at the world and give him a chance to emotionally connect.I like the way film had some biting humour thanks to Marsan and Spall.
I could never understand how Nathan went from a maths prodigy to suddenly be able to learn Chinese or play the piano and there was a love triangle set up which went nowhere.However the ending felt too left field and left me dissatisfied..
Nathan (Asa Butterfield) hits the "based on a true story" trifecta as a math prodigy who's solidly on the spectrum and suffers from PTSD.
Directed by a documentary filmmaker who was inspired by one of his films based on the same theme involving the original main character from this movie.It's not a biography or a completely based on the real, it just inspired and changed entirely for the cinematic presentation.
First Asa "The boy in the striped pajamas" Butterfield who succeeded in playing the difficult character of Nathan in an admirable way.
When you're looking for one of the feel good movies of the year a film centred around the cut throat world of competitive mathematics and the mind of an autistic boy who lost his beloved father in a fatal car crash doesn't exactly scream out as a candidate but low and behold documentarian turned feature film director Morgan Matthews X + Y (also known as A Brilliant Young Mind) could well be the feel good film of the year.Creating a coming of age love story and trial against adversity narrative from his experiences documenting those with autism attending the International Mathematics Olympiad (title of that documentary is Beautiful Young Minds), the nerds version of the Olympics that is really one giant exam, fun right?
Matthews handles the films myriad clichés (you're never in too much doubt about where the story is headed, although the ending subverts expectations) with a deft touch so that the film never feels overly manipulative or even familiar despite its feel good playbook ticking's off and with a winning case X + Y delivers equal amounts of smarts, laughs and emotional punches.Last seen making a mark in Martin Scorsese's Hugo and long rumoured to be in the final runnings for the newest Spider-Man gig, Asa Butterfield delivers a considered and well put together turn as the "different" Nathan Ellis.
It's not at all an easy role and one that had it been overplayed or underplayed would've ruined the picture but Butterfield succeeds with flying colours and his interplay with the films experienced elder statesman in the form of Sally Hawkins, Eddie Marsan and in particular Rafe Spall create a winning case all round with any scene between Butterfield and Spall either outright hilarious or heart-warmingly sincere.I know I don't find maths in any way shape or form exciting but no matter how you feel about the beautiful world of numbers and problem solving X + Y will be a winner for the whole family.
Asa Butterfield played his role as a functionally autistic kid really well and it is the only reason why I enjoyed the movie.
Weird little kid: check, emotional trauma during childhood: check, well intentioned mother that struggles with life and motherhood: check, kind father figure with his own problems: check, young love: check, and so on and so on.Even if the script wouldn't have been specifically written in such a clumsy heavy handed manner, the story itself wasn't much to begin with.
But each situation was described as clumsily as the script was conceived: details that don't drive the story, like him learning Chinese or how to play the piano or meeting people that just disappear from the plot when they were becoming interesting or texts of mathematical problems, but lack of details where it mattered, the sense of competition, the way he felt about the little Chinese girl.I wanted to like the film, but it was impossible.
Lovely film and so many stunning performances, not just the main characters but all of the supporting cast.
Sally Hawkins was brilliant as the mother and Asa Butterfield is a star, his ability to convey so much through his eyes and facial expression (or lack of it) was brilliant for the character.Liked the scenes in Taiwan and got a good sense of Nathan's alienation and fascination with another culture, particularly its visual impact on him.The ending disappointed as it was almost suggesting Nathan was 'cured', I don't think this played true to the extent of his condition.
By the end I felt that the demand on my reserves of sympathy had been exceeded.Asa Butterfield, as Nathan, is good, but I am never sure how much talent is required to play a person with a limited emotional range.
Last week I went to the cinema to watch x+y, a British film about the journey of a brilliant math student until being part of the British team for the International Mathematics Olympiad.
His mother seems unwilling to understand his mind but thanks to a math teacher and his cleverness, he gets a place to attend at the International Mathematics Olympiad where he will meet several of the most brilliant minds in the world, included a Chinese girl who will completely change his life and his way of understanding the world.
I've given this movie (It was listed as X&Y on the TV subscription channel I was watching it on) a rating of 9; like many reviewers of this beautiful film, it would have been a 10 had the ending not jarred with the original premise of the film, which I took to be Autistic savant teen struggles socially at a Maths Olympiad, with a side story of how Mum copes *spoiler* as a single parent and how Nathan (the teen in question) finds love and tries to explain it logically.Of course, having a nineteen year old Aspergers son who at 15 years old won awards at space school for astrophysics, then sadly felt completely overwhelmed when trying for his A Levels at college, this movie was a real 'look' into my son's world for me.
Asa Butterfield was superb showing that you don't need words to get how you're truly feeling across, and the nervous socially inept struggles Nathan feels, are certainly true for my son, and of course, I couldn't help feeling for Mum, especially after years of little conversation, no real cuddles myself, but I will also say, there is dark humour in the movie; the Chinese prime number takeaway order ringing a 'laugh or you'll cry' moment in our house.There's lot of intricacies to this film which awash over you, but on second/third viewing come into focus; the girl who couldn't bear Nathan having another love interest, the beautiful cinematography that made you realise you were experiencing another country as a tourist would, and many more (the heartbreaking Parrot scene..I won't say anymore here; best experienced first hand).Literally the only reason this amazing film, scored a 9 rating instead of 10, was the complete confusion I experienced with the ending.
*SPOILER* It wasn't clear whether love, his Dad etc caused nearly all his autistic behaviour to disappear, and I felt like I'd watched a film that showed the struggle autistic young people go through, only to feel that 'oh OK, so if my son gets a girl, or gets over a past hurt in his life, all his rigidity will simply disappear'; I don't believe this would be the case, and my son agreed.So just my tuppence worth; and for all I've said, I do adore the film, the sadness, humour, understanding etc, and as it's Autism Week, I love that it's been brought to our attention more..
The acting is incredible from everyone, no matter how much screen time they had, and they all left some sort of lasting effect on the film.I wasn't Asa Butterfield's biggest fan but he's completely changed my mind with this performance; he was perfect.
Hawkins is the true emotional anchor to this film; a mother/widow who's loneliness can be felt with great force as she deals with her Husband's death but also longs for the same sort of affection from Nathan that he had with his Dad. Having difficulty connecting to her son, she turns to his Math teacher, Martin Humphreys (Rafe Spall) hoping he would be that person who could plug that hole of vast emptiness.
At the end it just feels like: Oh what, that's it?But there are still some good things: the cultural exchange portraited in this film is quite interesting.
|
tt3548276
|
Retribution
|
Yoshioka, an experienced detective, investigates the murder of an unknown woman in a red dress. She was drowned on the Tokyo waterfront, but an autopsy reveals that her stomach is full of seawater. Moreover, all the clues he finds relate to himself: A button found at the murder scene matches one that is missing from his own coat, and fingerprints found match his own. Yoshioka realizes that the only viable suspect is himself; but he doesn't remember a thing.
A ghost in a red dress soon starts appearing to him. As these apparitions become more intense and bizarre, similar murders occur with people killing loved ones for small infractions. All the perpetrators are found by Yoshioka as he searches for clues about the original murder. Eventually the drowned woman is identified. Yoshioka visits her parents, only to find she had a boyfriend who was extorting her parents, who happens to visit the house at the same time. He quickly confesses to the crime.
Yoshioka is visited by the ghost again who reveals that she is not the murdered woman, but a ghost of a woman whom he saw in the window of an asylum fifteen years ago who has died. All of the murderers took the ferry past the same asylum. Yoshioka sends his girlfriend away, afraid of what he might do to her. He goes to the asylum, where the woman in red agrees to forgive him for not helping her 15 years ago. He goes home, only to discover that he murdered his girlfriend 6 months ago. Going insane, he tries to forget. He collects the bones, and goes to the asylum to pick up the ghost's bones. His partner arrives at his apartment like the bowl of water, which was used to commit the murder, empty as the ghost menaces him in the background. An earthquake occurs as the bowl is refilled. The ghost suddenly appears and drags him into the bowl. The film ends with Yoshioka walking in the street holding a bag containing his girlfriend's and the ghost's bones, with the ghost repeatedly saying: "I am dead. So please, I want everyone to die too".
|
revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0100266
|
No Retreat, No Surrender 3: Blood Brothers
|
Washington D.C. A bank has been held hostage by terrorists with police surrounding the building. As the lead terrorist, looks over at the hostages, a crippled hostage begins to beg for his life. When the crippled hostage is kicked down, it turns out to be a trick as the hostage's crutches are a projectile and a blade. The "hostage" is revealed to be CIA agent Casey Alexander, who in the process of saving the hostages, was shot in the arm, but is successful. We soon meet Casey's brother Will, who is a martial arts teacher who does a demonstration of using skills in real-life situations. When Will's father John calls him, Will asks what time the party starts and John asks if Will is willing to spend the weekend with him and his father. Will is reluctant, but accepts the offer.
Meanwhile, John, a retired CIA agent, looks up information on a man when he is approached by two men. He manages to tie one up and points his gun at the other. The other man is actually CIA agent Macpherson, John's longtime friend who pays him back for a bet on football. When Macpherson and John speak in his office, Macpherson reveals that John is on the hit list and the man happens to be the face on his computer screen. When John refuses protection, Macpherson accepts and tells John he will see him at the party.
The party is to celebrate John's 65th birthday. Alongside Macpherson is CIA director Jack Atteron, who jokingly makes a bet who will get to sit next to the secretary for cake. Casey arrives with cast in arm from the shooting and talks briefly about the last mission. When Will shows up, he is wearing the Soviet flag on the back of his jean jacket. As Casey tries to show affection towards his brother, Will resists it. Things get worse when Casey tells his father that Will and him got him an around the world flight for his birthday. An angry Will leaves and when Casey follows him to talk to him, Will finally lets his anger out. He is mad that Casey won't admit that he is a spy and to stop acting like a hotshot with all his cash. Casey tells Will that he doesn't like the fact he's wearing "Khrushchev's jacket" in front of the CIA. Will drives off and John promises he will talk to Will. Casey leaves as well to take a friend home.
That night, John hears the door and hopes it is Will. However, when he doesn't get a reply, he is suspicious. He soon becomes attacked by some men dressed in black. John fights them off, even killing one in the process. However, when he opens a door, he is kicked down and two men are revealed. The face John saw earlier on his computer screen is Colombian terrorist Antonio "Franco" Franconi, who wants to get revenge on John for the death of his son in a mission years ago. Alongside Franco is his number one man, Russo, an agile martial artist. When Russo proves to be too powerful, John sees a gun. Franco challenges him to take it. When John reaches for the gun, Franco throws a dart, hitting John in the throat. Russo follows it up with a spinning back kick, sending John into the indoor pool, dead. When Will and Casey discover their father's body, Will has had enough of Casey, who vows to find out who is responsible.
When Atteron refuses to give Casey his father's case, he seeks the means to find out himself by going through an old friend who works in the IT department. Casey learns that Franco is planning something major in Florida. As he heads home, he is confronted by another group of terrorists. Will, who happens to be there, helps Casey fend off the terrorists, but Casey shoots them all down. Casey tells Will to go to his apartment and gives him the file he received at the office on their father. While Casey talks with the police, Will opens the file and learns where Franco is. He decides to head to Florida to find Franco himself. When Casey discovers Will's plan, he heads to Florida as well, pretending to be on vacation.
Will meets up with some old friends at a martial arts school in Tampa and asks for their help in finding Angel, a recruiter for Franco's organization. Meanwhile, Casey, who tries to look for Will, begins to have a hunch that Will may actually find his way into the organization and goes to look for old girlfriend Maria, who is also infiltrating Franco. At a bar that night, Will arrives as does his friends, who challenge and beat up Angel's men. As Angel is about to be beaten down, Will faces off against his friends as part of the plan. Will calls himself "Jessie Roby" and Angel takes him to see Franco. When Franco meets "Jessie", he tests him by saying that Jessie is a spy for the government. Will, as Jessie, faces off against one thug but matches skills with Russo and passes the test. Will is given a major assignment the next day.
Will and two men go to a house where it is revealed that he must kill Casey. However, Will tells Casey that he has met Franco and that they have to make the fight look real. Will tells Casey something major is planned and he will let him know once he gets the word. Will "kills" Casey, who fakes strangulation by curtain. Upon returning to the base, Franco's supervisor wants to meet the man who killed Casey. When Will meets the supervisor, it is revealed to be Atteron, who was also responsible for his father's death. Casey soon finds himself kidnapped and the two are tied up and confronted by Russo and Franco. When Will sees Casey being beaten horrendously, he tells Franco he will not do the job if Casey is dead, prompting him to stop the beating.
The plot is to kidnap the Mozambique Ambassador, who will be arriving at Tampa International Airport, and give a set of demands. However, it is a distraction for the real plan, the assassination of President George H.W. Bush. Will is being hired because of his impeccable martial arts skills. While Will plans the attack at the airport, Casey and a now kidnapped Maria, make their escape from Franco's men and head toward the airport. Casey catches up to Will and the Ambassador, whom they put on a plane with the engine on so they can find Franco and Russo, the latter armed with a rocket launcher aimed at Air Force One. The brothers find them and begin a showdown with them. Maria, who had seen Will as "Jessie", shoots Will in the shoulder and goes after him, only to be stopped by Casey. The two jump on the back of the truck where Franco and Russo are driving and then eventually stop at an airplane hangar.
At the airplane hangar, Casey tells Will they are going on a different sort of hunting trip. As the two search, Will is caught and is getting hit when Casey catches up. Casey takes on Franco and Will takes on Russo. The two duos fight it out when Russo heads on top of a scaffold with Will trailing him. On the scaffold, Will is able to outfight Russo and gives him a roundhouse kick to his face, causing Russo to fall to his death. Franco, who is revealed to be an agile fighter himself, jumps on the scaffold and knocks Will to the ground. Will is rescued by Casey when he lands on the ground, prompting Will to land on his back. Soon, Franco is taking on both Casey and Will. When Franco throws his dart, Will is hit in the shoulder. However, when Franco goes to throw another dart, Casey moves in the way and the dart deflects off his cast, which enables Will to kick it towards Franco, hitting him in the chest. As the brothers are about to go after Franco, they are stopped by Atteron, who shoots Franco in the face, killing him. Atteron admits he has planned to kill Franco after he had killed both Casey and Will. Both Will and Casey are upset by this as Atteron plans to kill them now to cover his tracks. A gunshot is heard, only to find that Atteron has been shot by Maria, who once again goes after "Jessie", until Casey reveals that Will is his brother. Maria is shocked but happy with the outcome. Casey goes as far as offering Will a job with the CIA, but Will laughs it off. As they open the airplane hangar, Macpherson, the CIA, and the Tampa police are all there with an arrested Angel. The brothers and Maria happily walk off towards a relieved Macpherson.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0892899
|
Outpost
|
In a seedy bar in a town ravaged by war, scientist and businessman Hunt (Julian Wadham) hires former Royal Marine turned mercenary D.C. (Ray Stevenson) to assemble a crack team of ex-soldiers – Prior (Richard Brake), Jordan (Paul Blair), Cotter (Enoch Frost), Voytech (Julian Rivett), McKay (Michael Smiley) and Taktarov (Brett Fancy) – to protect him on a dangerous journey into no-man's land. Their mission is to scope out an old military bunker in Eastern Europe.
Once at the outpost, the men make a horrific discovery that changes the dynamics of the entire mission: the scene of a bloody and gruesome series of occultistic Nazi experiments, carried out by the SS during World War II, using reality shifting and reanimation to create invincible soldiers. Amidst the carnage, they find a survivor, Götz (Johnny Meres).
At night, the clearing around the bunker is suddenly lit, and silhouettes of people are seen against the light. Soon after, Taktarov is gruesomely killed by an unseen foe. Later the same night Voyteche is killed by two Nazis. The next morning, Voyteche and Taktarov's dead bodies are found joined at the head, with Taktarov's skull containing a spent round. D.C. demands answers regarding the assignment from Hunt: an unnamed corporation wanted Hunt to find and recover a large generator-like device responsible for the SS's reality-shifting experiments. D.C. orders Cotter to retrieve Hunt from the generator room. While trying to convince Hunt to leave, Cotter is killed by an SS soldier with a pickaxe. It is revealed that Götz is actually a surviving SS brigadier general – a "breather." When Prior kills Götz, the "breather" comes back to life and MacKay is killed. The mercenaries and Hunt attempt to evacuate the outpost, only to be slaughtered by the undead German army.
A second corporate team arrives 72 hours later to carry out the same assignment, only to find a "breather" among the piles of naked corpses. The clearing is lit again, revealing the illuminated soldiers surrounding the bunker. In the distance stands the brigadier general, who gives the SS soldiers a nod, and they begin their assault on the team.
|
cult, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
If you ever played the famous game (PC and console) Wolfenstein, you will love this movies.I like too much stories mixing horror and ominous Nazi scientific experiments.
It's simple, it's plain and it's interesting with a nice mix of suspense, horror and action.I like the way the actors played the characters, they are very realistic.
Production is also very nice, no CGI at all, but only the good old way of creating weird and dark places.If you want to see a cool mystery/horror movies with no fuzzy plot, this is the one.
Us Brits have got reasonably good at producing limited budget scary flicks like this where a group of armed protagonists are stuck in an isolated location and have to fight supernatural forces (Dog Soldiers, The Descent, Deathwatch).
The actors all put in decent performances, there's a couple of good lines, one very iconistic shot with a flag (you'll know when you see it) and some good gruesome deaths.All told this is quite a good movie given it's limitations, but what a shame the story gets silly in the final act.
Although the idea of this movie is not entirely new (similar plot lines can be found in older movies like "Shockwave" from 1976 and computer games like the "Castle Wolfenstein" series) it is still rather original and appealing: Nazi scientists attempt to create indestructible "super soldiers" in order to achieve world domination.The acting is very good.The movie's special effects are also well realised and a certain amount of suspense is undeniable, especially at the beginning of the movie.However, there were some inconsistencies that ruined the movie for me.Firstly, the explanation given in the movie about why the paranormal phenomenons happen is incomprehensible.
I did not get a feeling of urgency and even felt a little bored at some point.This movie disappointed me because I believe a chance has been missed to make something truly creepy and scary.If you are just looking for gore and horror, however, you might still want to watch this movie.
Dog Soldiers come to mind but this film I'm sure had an even smaller budget.Using a smart script, good casting and camera work that provided perfect mood and atmosphere, proves that movie making is still an art and talent IS talent.While not excessive in the gore or the effects department, the film shines as a perfect example of quality story making and a solid little horror film.It actually reminds me of a R rated Twilight Zone episode ;) So if you like a good story, Nazi experiments, or zombies...or all the above, look no farther and find the closest rental store, pop some popcorn, turn the lights out and give The Outpost a look!
all in all its a good supernatural movie but without the gross out and actually with an OK storyline that makes it OK to watch.Anyway this movie wasn't so bad, don't get me wrong its not one i would go pay to see if it were lined up with the biggies "indy, star trek, batman etc", but at the same time i would have paid to see it if it were on par with the off season "a" movies.I think if u like the genre it is definitely worth the time to see.
In recent times there have been such films like 'The Bunker (2001)' and 'Deathwatch (2002)', but 'Outpost' actually does a better job with the context and psychological thrills than both of them put together.
I don't particularly like watching war movies or anything remotely associated with them but this did have a really good strong storyline that threw you between the past and the present; making you want to know exactly what happened.
Did you hear the one about the Englishman,the Irishman and the Scotsman?Or the Eastern European,the token black guy or the cocky American?No,it isn't a gag,just a way of explaining just how clichéd the mercenary soldiers are.This is an OK horror movie but no better than that.The acting is reasonable although there are a couple of dodgy accents.So what is this film about.I'm still not too sure really but it does involve a machine based on some theory of Einstein's(yes really!).There are also several undead Nazi soldiers around.The problem was that I wasn't sure just why the undead soldiers were still hanging around after 60 years or so or why they were still hell bent on killing everyone in their path.OK,so it was the machine that had programmed them to act that way but it was never clearly explained or maybe I just wasn't concentrating enough.Or maybe I just didn't care.There are some scenes that are quite atmospheric and the effects are pretty good.But this film didn't seem to explain itself very well and though it isn't terrible it certainly isn't a classic either..
The storyline is abit tried and tested,seen a few similar,but where this film is better than others is it doesn't try to be over the top in the horror or gore effects (although there are a few gory scenes.)Instead of making the scares action packed or very visual,it relies on trying to make the viewer see what the men see and hear and makes you wonder how you would react in their situation-i can only compare it to the feeling of anticipation got when you saw jaws for the 1st time compared to how sequels of jaws made you feel,i.e. in jaws little was seen of the shark,but the threat of danger seemed real enough to scare,where as in the sequels it relied on the visuals which were good,but had no where near the desired effect.
Strange businessman hires a group of soldiers to go to an abandoned Nazi bunker in the East of Europe.Strange things happen and the soldiers are killed of one by one.Something in the bunker have no plans to let the visitors complete their mission.This is an British Horror-film thats really well made,original plot and has great look and fine set-pieces.Acting is OK and it has some good and gory murders.But to be fair I tough it was a bit boring and not scary at all.Thats just the case ,its not one of the better films I seen recent.Its no new masterpiece like Neil Marshalls The Descent or his excellent Werewolf movie Dog Soldiers.Best thing about the movie is the ending and the scary look of one of the forces that killing the Soldiers.Sorry folks my rating is only 4/10..
Sadly, I think the ending was way generic and overused in the genre.OVERALL 6/10 : Outpost (2008) adds a new entry into the old mix of movies about people digging in on something that should never be seen again, specially if involves being underground.
That is until undead Nazis start appearing and physics gets hijacked by some wacky Second World War experiment...I wasn't naturally expecting Shakespeare with this movie, but I was really hoping for an interesting scare.
In this little action horror film, Ray Stevenson of Rome fame plays the leader of a group of mercenaries sent on a secret mission in Eastern Europe.
Now, I am not a gamer, so the comparisons to Castle Wolfenstein elude me, but tell me that it is a zombie film and that Nazi's are the zombies, and I am in like Flint.A bunker in Eastern Europe and a band of mercs protecting a man (Julian Wadham) who is looking for something in the long forgotten bunker vs the Nazi zombies that are there to protect it.It has a lot of the same terror and suspense as Deathwatch.
I was thinking they were going to have the same kinda of plot but they didn't.Now back this movie Set in war-torn Eastern Europe, a band of battle- worn mercenaries undertake a dangerous mission into a no-man's land at the behest of a mysterious businessman.
Outpost has more of a story, more suspense, and some really good acting but a not lot of Ghost/Zombie action in this movie.Talking about Ghost/Zombies were creepy at the start of the movie, when they come and go out of blue but we don't get see the face until half away into the movie, i think the make up effect was really good.The ending was really disappointing did not like how this movie ended at all.
Hardened mercenaries fight to stay alive when a mission to an old Nazis WWII military bunker but isn't as deserted as it should be.Spectres,'undead' SS soldiers in the vain of small budget films like the The Bunker and Deathwatch, Outpost welcomed, with a talented strong cast of many familiar faces including the excellent Ray Stevenson, Brett Fancy and the diverse Richard Brake it's a good 90 minutes of guns and ghosts.The editing, sound and music are also note worthy.
It's all aided along nicely by the little creaks and moans heard throughout the bunker just off-camera, letting the creepiness get rather overwhelming before it turns into the raging zombie action/horror of the later half which changes the eeriness for a series of fun and highly enjoyable stalking scenes as they run wild in the compound attacking the soldiers inside the different rooms and hallways of the underground bunker which is full of graphic, bloody kills and creepy images showing them coming up from behind taking them out in grand style.
The film's main flaw is the fact that there's just such a long period of time before any kind of action occurs for as good as the setup is where it gets them to the bunker and what happens there, this one still has quite a ways to go before it gets to the actual zombies attacking.
The reality was much better than i expected , decent cast , good acting with a fairly strong story to match most horror/ thriller films .
They get a lot of mileage and suspense out of a near-empty field and some gloomy corridors.The performances are good all-round, and the characters are drawn with enough depth that you care when something happens to them.Apart from that, the plot is silly silly silly - but it's a horror film, I really don't think that's going to put anyone off.
Okay, so 'perfect' is probably not a term that should be used to describe a film about ghost-Nazis stalking a team of mercenaries in the wastelands of Eastern Europe, but, for what it is, 'Outpost' is a pretty damn good film.Hopefully, if you've fully digested my first paragraph about the ghost-Nazis (or zombie-Nazis – take your pick) you won't be expecting a deep and intellectual film, filled with emotional depth and fulfilling character arcs and plot twists.
So, if you're looking for a damn tense (and pretty creepy) little story, with decent action scenes and characters you may actually care about, then try this.Outpost is a B-movie.
It doesn't have much of a budget, but what it does have it uses well.So, if you like your action/war/horror movies short and to the point, you really could do worse than to watch Outpost (just don't get it confused with any of the – very inferior – sequels!http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/.
For viewers expecting a story to move at record speed the beginning might be annoying, but hang in there, it picks up.As I had no expectations at all of this movie due to it's horror genre basis thinking it would be the typical blood and gore of many of this type, I was more than pleasantly surprised with how it turned out.
If you are or were a Twilight Zone fan, you will like this movie quite a bit.Considering it's budget and the dedication of the production team, I believe it is worth 8 out of 10 stars for producing this unexpected likable film.
Undead German troops battling the living is a kick-ass idea that has received a variety of treatments over the years, but as yet, most attempts have failed to unleash the maximum potential possible from this undeniably cool concept (although director Tommy Wirkola came tantalisingly close to success with Dead Snow simply by chucking lots of bright red comic-book gore against a crisp, white backdrop).Outpost's director Steve Barker pits his WWII walking dead against a team of modern-day mercenaries paid to escort a scientist to a deserted East European bunker housing Nazi machinery designed to turn ordinary troops into an indestructible fighting force.
With his bleak, desaturated visuals, measured approach, and notable lack of score, Barker is clearly aiming for a foreboding sense of menace and an unbearably claustrophobic atmosphere, followed by nail-biting tension and, finally, visceral horror; what he achieves, however, is a dull, listless mess full of unlikable characters, dreadful dialogue, indecipherable scientific codswallop, and frustrating lapses in logic.Precious time is wasted on unnecessarily developing the backgrounds of its obnoxious, soon-to-be-dead soldiers-for-hire, and having them bicker amongst themselves whilst scientist Hunt (Julian Wadham) futilely attempts to explain the fanciful physics responsible for the zombies' appearance; further minutes are squandered on a few false scares (zombies appear behind characters, do nothing, and then promptly disappear) and lots of wandering through squalid, poorly lit corridors.The precise nature of the zombies' supernatural abilities are never adequately explained, suffice to say that they can conveniently turn up when and where they want (sometimes unnoticed, sometimes in blinding white light and fog or a howling gale), and are impervious to bullets, all of which leads to a frantic finalé in which the remaining mercs waste round upon round of ammo pointlessly trying to halt the invincible undead army as Hunt desperately tries to reverse the polarity of the dilithium crystals in the flux capacitor (or some such gobbledegook).3.5 out of 10, very generously rounded up to 4 for a few nasty moments of gore (the 'bullet in the eye' scene and a pick-axe death), and for making me laugh with the blatant use of CGI animation in a supposed WWII propaganda movie..
The combination of crazy Nazi experiments and supernatural elements was excellent, but yes, again, like so many films, the ending was a bit lame, and doesn't leave the viewer with any kind of reward or insight for watching...
One particular piece of ingenuity were the special effects and the use of smary, yet stylish shocks (See the chamber scene involving the medic) In conclusion, if you want a decent horror film for a Friday night with a little bit of a background history - (not just killing etc) then this is a good choice..
It is no surprise to hear that the guys behind this film grew up watching 70s & 80s horror flicks on VHS as this shows in their style of film-making and I think does a proud tribute to movies of that era.This film will not bring anything new to the world of cinema, but it does manage to deliver a story that does not take itself too seriously, has some spooky sequences and some really great cinematography.For anyone who, like me, spent much of their teens renting low budget horror flicks from the video store, you should find much to appreciate here!.
Bad things happen.Okay, so Outpost isn't going to win any prizes for originality, but it's a worthy addition to the 'soldiers stumbling across a spooky bunker' horror sub-genre.
Low-budget snooze-fest about a group of unpleasant mercenaries somewhere in "Eastern Europe" who go poking around an old WW2 bunker when they're set upon by undead Nazi soldiers - not as interesting at it sounds.
If you want a good horror film that isn't over the top like saw and actually has a plot then you are in luck with this underrated gem.Most horror films lately just go for the sadist/gore fest cringe shock value without trying to be original these days(except this one that is)Yes it has some graphic bits but it is understandable violence.I loved the the story in this film so much , the science in it made it quite believable for me which is a big selling point .
Maybe it's me, but I always thought invisibility to be an idiotic and cheap trick to create an atmosphere.Next, the script misses opportunities for great horror sequences, with the Nazi experiments on prisoners (they don't actually elaborate on that), or making the zombies able to use guns (they don't), etc.In all, I expected to see a movie where a WW-2 squad enters an abandoned Nazi experiment camp, push some wrong button on an occult machine and Nazi zombies rise all over the place and all hell breaks loose.
So if you like the Alien type of horror and enjoyed The Bunker, then this is something for you.And, yes, the military action for at least 2/3 parts of the movie is rather believable.
The score from James Seymour Brett is one of the better ones for a low-fi British horror, suitably pulse like, and the acting is no-nonsense and befitting the characters within.With a no cop out and suitably bleak ending, Outpost isn't after the popcorn crowd.
That movie got it all.It starts like one of those low budget action movies with a mission and end up with bad acting and no plot...
I Liked "Dog Soldiers(2002)" and that's why I grabbed "The Outpost".For anyone who watched "The Bunker(2001)" or "Below(2002)" and was disappointed, I suggest giving this movie a try.Don't go into "The Outpost" expecting anything or thinking that it's going to be a straight up War flick, because it isn't (obviously from the poster).
Rather than trying to over reach, and thereby just winding up with some atrocious CGI effects that take away from the rest of the movie, like so many other would be horror films do these days with a misguided notion that this alone creates scares, the filmmakers have done it the old fashioned way and used what they had, building atmosphere and tension through lighting, direction, design and performance, which I personally find refreshing to see.
Now comes OUTPOST, a low budget British entry in the genre which also has much in common with recent war/horror efforts like THE BUNKER, THE TRENCH, and DEATHWATCH.The film kicks off with a bunch of hard-ass guys, ex-soldiers all, going on a mercenary mission to Eastern Europe.
|
tt0388245
|
Marking Time
|
An Afghan father and his daughter, Randa (Bojana Novakovic), arrive in Australia to escape the Taliban. At school Randa is teased for her religion and wearing a hijab. The main character who finished secondary school the previous year, Hal (Abe Forsythe) begins to feel sorry for her and over a course falls in love with her. Although her father initially allows them to date, there is a lot of tension with their culture differences (Randa is a practising Muslim, Hal an atheist).
Soon after the September 11th attacks, Randa's father's house is destroyed by an intentionally lit fire. Hal's father (Morrell) offers them shelter in his house. Later that night, Randa, afraid, sneaks into Hal's room seeking comfort. The two sleep together and are later found in bed by her father. Upset by what has happened, he leaves and refuses to let Hal see Randa.
Hal and Randa continue to see each other in secret, Randa admitting she 'did not regret' what she did with Hal. Eventually their refugee status is rejected and they are ordered to return. Hal and his father try valiantly to think of a way to keep them there, but come up empty handed. Finally Hal, decides that he loves Randa and offers to run away from the law with her. He tells his plan to his father who initially disapproves, but after seeing how much they love each other, allows. He also tell Randa's father, who is initially reluctant. Hal promises to take care of her and her father agrees, realising that Randa will be deported with him unless she leaves. Randa is initially reluctant to leave her father, but ultimately agrees.
They leave on the night of Randa's deportation. Stopping off in a hotel room, they make love tenderly one last time. When Hal awakes, Randa is gone. She leaves him a note explaining she can not leave her father or get him or her father into trouble. He returns, but is too late as he sees Randa and her father on a bus for deportation.
Eventually he decides to go overseas to look for her. He uses the money his mother left to him to buy a plane ticket and the series ends with Hal unsure about what will happen in his search for his love.
|
storytelling
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Powerful Stuff.
This is the greatest show ever.
It portrays the real message refugees received from the majority of Australians when they tried to enter the country illegally and yet were sent away or locked up in detention (even the children; in fact, many are STILL there).
The message is not forced in your face, it is subtle and allows room for your own opinion.
Hal, the story's narrator, is like a lot of rural Australians: lazy, indifferent and a "light" user of drugs.
The things he and his acquaintances get up to are another issue facing the youth of now.
There are many messages lying in the story, yet none are overdone and all are very important, prophetic messages.
There is humour at the appropriate times to bring up the mood a bit but by the end, you'll be in tears.It would've taken John Doyle, of all things a popular comedian, a lot of guts to write this because it goes against the common opinion of an entire nation and was actually dismissed by many as mere fiction.
The single problem with Marking Time is there are only four episodes..
John Doyle continues his fine writing form.
John Doyle proves he is one of Australia's best writers with this mini series.
I was excited by the previews and the show lived up to my expectations.
Calling it a Romeo and Juliet set in rural Australia is to simplify a show that is so much more.
The show's greatest strength is that it has a real context.
How many times have a watched a series that is set in a vacuum, giving the audience no insight into the time and place it was produced.
Marking Time portrays what it was like in Australia at the start of the 21st Century.
Our pride in the Olympics, the sense of optimism in 2000, the bewilderment of Tampa and September 11.
The trouble with most Australian TV and movies is they are set in two extremes.
They are either set in the absolute outback (Priscilla Queen of the Desert, Welcome to Woop Woop) or in the inner city of a bustling metropolis (SamplePeople, Dirty Deeds).
A show like Marking Time, or the equally excellent TheDish, is so refreshing because it is about the small cities and country towns where a lot of us live.
If you have ever had to leave Geraldton or Rockhampton or Renmark or Batemans Bay or whatever your hometown for work or study you would understand exactly how Hal (Abe Forsythe) felt.
Ultimately you outgrow your surroundings and it is time to move on.
Of course the show is not without its faults.
The Afghani refugees Hassan (Lech Mackiewicz) and Randa (Bojana Novakovic) look nothing like the ethnic Hazars they are supposed to be playing.
The show would have been better if the producers had the courage to cast genuine refugees.
Also the reasoning behind the detention of Randa and Hassan and the attitudes of the townspeople were oversimplifies.
Not everyone who voted for the coalition in the 2001 election were horrible racists.
These comments aside, Marking Time was both thoughtful and uplifting..
Excellent and realistic.
The portrayal of youth in small town Australia is spot on.
I lived in Manjimup, WA.
I recognised the people.
The main characters Hal's direct to camera talking would normally annoy me but in this production the actor carries it off.
His father conveys the schoolteacher as a loving but serious minded person like so many teachers.
His sharing a joint with his son must be familiar to many baby boomers who are now parents of young adults.
The only criticism is that Randa is not as dark skinned as most Afghanis probably because the actress is of Yugoslavian background.
Anyone who is familiar with small town Australia cannot fail to relate to John Doyle's excellent script..
WOW!
This show is being repeated in Sydney at this time and being from a small country town in Western NSW out near Bourke (about 8-10 hours drive from Sydney out back as we call it) for a lot of my life i can see all the characters in this show in a lot of the kids i went to school with and grew up with.
This show has resonated with me a lot due to this and the fact that my Dad was ex ADF and served with the Army 1953 - 1983.
He always taught me to NEVER judge a person or a subject in a negative way (much like Geoff Morrell does in the show to his own son) except my Dad NEVER played guitar!!)and never to trust what the media feeds to you.
I can remember going to work and seeing on the train in the morning on the papers about it happening (9-11).
I lost a mate in it from the Cronulla area of Sydney but do you know what strikes me the most - even now as i type this tonight.
The Muslim Population was so SCARED of us that not one (2 at where i work called in sick) of them were on the streets of downtown Sydney's main street.
It still sticks with me.
I feel ashamed that people who had every right to feel safe were not able to.
Like the hero in this show i wonder where Terrisom and Racism came from pre 9-11.
But my family left Ireland in the 1920s to escape terrorism so in a way i am a refugee too.
Sorry for the ramble this show just made me think a lot and isn't that what GOOD TV should do!
Make you think, question and wonder as much as entertain you?
I missed this first time round i wish i had'nt.
If it becomes available overseas WATCH IT.
Its a good example of whats good in Australia and also whats not Good.
I would rate this with the BBC Warriors for pure entertainment and also thought provoking.
As warriors made me re evaluate the Bosnia etc debacle it also made me see the racist idiots that beat their chest and wave their flag and say 'were representing Australia'.
Well guess what!
YOUR not representing my dad or me.
And if he was still alive i know he would be mad as hell at whats been going on.
So next time you wave the flag think of this am i doing it for all of my country or just the vocal minority that seem to get on the news when they don't deserve to do so.
Stephen.
Sydney.
Australia PS i have 3 friends that i know of overseas right now from Aust and 1 special person going overseas Andi day now.
i respect them and i respect their job like my Dad said after Vietnam (3 Years) 'we were professional soldiers its our job.
we knew we might have to do it.
its part of the job.
Jist because we fight does NOT mean we agree with why were their'..
An Australian "Romeo and Juliet" for modern times.
We like to think of ourselves as serious movie 'buffs', but this locally-made film blew us away with its excellent script, genuinely moving acting, and believably important storyline.
Important especially in this day of growing suspicion of our Muslim neighbours.
Well done Australia (again) and especially well done to young Abe Forsythe who carried off a difficult role with intermittent asides to the camera, with panache.
Geoff Morrell as the voice of reason is always reliable, (and got the best lines!) and the rest of the cast provided a nice mix of characters recognisable to most Aussies.
The theme is topical yet timeless (in the manner of Shakespeare's original script), but never proselytises or feels weighty.
We viewed this over four episodes, and were looking forward each week to being thoroughly entertained..
Leftist bias and innuendo...
yet another painful "message series" from "our" ABC....
"Our ABC" (aka; the Australian Bolshevik Collective) has done it again in offering yet another shallow "message series" brim-full of leftist political bias and innuendo (oh-so-cleverly masquerading as a modern-day antipodean Romeo and Juliet themed love story).A painful box ticking exercise with all those tired old reoccurring themes covered.White Rural Australians - Racists (tick) Refugees - wronged innocents and vulnerable victims (tick) Coalition (conservative party) supporters - evil or ignorant (tick) Mainstream Australian culture - xenophobic (tick) Ethnic culture - whimsically exotic, tolerant and ethically superior (tick) Promoted as a coming of age tale amid the backdrop of the Sydney Olympics and turbulent domestic politics, the hidden motives of director and producer are easily identifiable.Hal's dad - a former Olympian in the story (who better to play a morally righteous character in sport-living Oz?), Rania - Hal's love interest - played with the dexterity and complexity of a Carmelite nun (she even draws this comparison herself, to make doubly sure we all get the point!) And Hal himself, a bloke so disillusioned at the victory of the morally repugnant Howard government that he up and leaves for Afghanistan at the end of the series (an painfully obvious gesture of support to the convicted Aussie-born terrorist David Hicks), in pursuit of the woman he loves.And on and on it goes.Some of the supporting characters, particularly Hal's friends, are well-written and clearly identifiable, but ultimately remain cartoonish stereotypes.Far from this series serving as a historical source for a particular era in Australian history, I am confident it will be remembered as just another example of the ABC's all to familiar leftist bias, (one which makes "Triumph of the Will" seem balanced in comparison!).So hostile towards the Howard Government back in 2003, in hindsight it's easy to comprehend now how one of it's own (former ABC journalist Maxine McKew) was inspired to defeat John Howard himself in the most recent general election.In no other country (certainly not a developed one) have I seen a more painful display of political bias from a national broadcaster.
AVOID marking time like the plague (unless you enjoy blindingly conspicuous and badly written left-wing propaganda).
|
tt0167456
|
Thunderbirds
|
The Tracy family, led by former astronaut Jeff Tracy, operate International Rescue, a secret organization that aids those in need using the technologically advanced machines called Thunderbirds. The youngest son Alan lives at a boarding school on the mainland dreaming of being a Thunderbird pilot. He and his friend Fermat Hackenbacker, son of the Thunderbirds’ engineer Brains, are picked up by Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward and her butler Aloysius Parker. Lady Penelope is an International Rescue agent, travelling to Tracy Island in the South Pacific in her limo FAB 1. The Thunderbirds return from an oil rig fire, but Alan and Fermat play around in Thunderbird 1, discovering a strange compound splattered on the side. Unbeknownst to them, the compound is a tracking beacon being used by the Hood, a psychic criminal mastermind who has a vendetta against Jeff for not saving him in a collapsing diamond mine while his brother Kyrano was rescued.
The next day, the Hood’s submarine locates Tracy Island and fires a missile at the orbiting Thunderbird 5, sending the Tracys in Thunderbird 3 to rescue John Tracy. The Hood and his minions Mullion and Transom take over the island’s command centre, imprisoning the Tracys in Thunderbird 5 with depleting oxygen. The Hood reveals he plans to use the Thunderbirds to rob the major banks of the world. Alan, Fermat, and their friend Tin-Tin, Kyrano’s daughter, escape in the ventilation to the Thunderbird silos. Fermat removes Thunderbird 2's guidance chip and the teenagers flee into the island’s jungle.
While traversing the jungle to find the island’s remote transmitter, Tin-Tin displays psychic powers like her uncle. Contacting Thunderbird 5, Jeff tells them to wait for Lady Penelope’s arrival. The trio flee from Mullion, but Fermat and Tin-Tin are captured when Alan tries to pilot them to safety on hovercraft. Lady Penelope and Parker arrive, engaging the Hood’s minions in combat, but the Hood defeats them with his powers. Alan appears, the Hood forcing him to hand over the guidance chip, locking him and the others in the island’s freezer. The Hood, Mullion, and Transom pilot Thunderbird 2 to London, using the Mole to drill into the Bank of England’s vaults but sink a monorail. Alan and co. escape confinement and contact the Tracys, who regain control of Thunderbird 5 and head off to stop the Hood, while the teenagers, Lady Penelope, and Parker fly to London in Thunderbird 1.
Arriving in London, Alan and Tin-Tin rescue the monorail using the aquatic Thunderbird 4 before going after the Hood. The Hood locks Jeff and Lady Penelope in a vault, challenging Alan to defeat him. Alan dangles from a catwalk over the Mole, but Tin-Tin appears, using her own powers to turn the tables on the Hood, who is rescued by Alan as per his family’s beliefs. The Hood and his minions are arrested, while the Tracys return to their island home. Alan, Fermat, and Tin-Tin are inducted as official members of International Rescue, and depart for their first mission.
|
good versus evil, revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
But a terrible storyline and bland acting obliterated this opportunity and it was soon apparent all that was destined for this film was a trip to the bargain bin of the kiddies' section.Instead of a film focusing on the five Tracey sons, their father and trusty geek Brain striving to rescue people and protect the world from villains, our hero in this drudge is a malcontent and bratty thirteen-year-old Alan Tracey, fourteen-year-old Tin-tin and ten-year-old brain-box Fermat, son of Brains (yes, Brains' son despite this being a man who could surely never score a woman if he tried; maybe he grew the kid in a petri dish).
The scriptwriter seemed more interested in ripping off 'Spy Kids' (which was at least quirky and original) instead of remaking the show people know and love.Although Sophia Myles and Ron Cook were excellent as Miss Penelope and Parker, they only had about three lines between them so their presence was barely felt.
The Hood, in particular, is not at all threatening or sinister and instead comes across as a campy, two-bit stereotypical villain as limp as a piece of rotting lettuce.Brady Corbet, who plays Alan Tracey, may well be a good young actor but it was hard to see that in a film where he plays a whinging brat who just grates and the same goes for Vanessa Anne Hutchinson as Tin-tin since the most she gets to do is look pretty and be all for 'Girl Power'.
Ironically, it is young Soren Fulton's Fermat who is the only interesting character of the film as Fulton delivers a natural and relaxed performance.'Thunderbirds' the series will be forever remembered as an excellent show that proves puppets can give solid performances!
As an admirer of the original television series and despite the 'mixed' reviews, I decided that I would go and see "Thunderbirds" (I did debate whether to go for some time but knew that I eventually would).I have to say that the film was not as bad as I had feared - unfortunately it wasn't all that good either.
"Thunderbirds" in its 2004 incarnation is incredibly bland and appears to have been made for those with a tiny attention span (key facts about the characters were repeated several times during the course of the movie).No-one comes out of this movie particularly well - Ben Kingsley probably gives the best performance as The Hood.
What they have done is taken a TV show, which was never aimed at young children & given it the George Lucas treatment (i.e. ruined it by kiddifying it to appeal to the younger audience).OK so the Thunderbirds TV show wasn't exactly the most cerebral of shows, in fact it was pretty formulaic, but it was always enjoyable to watch (especially when the models got blown up) and the voice cast wasn't too bad.This suffers from bad casting & bad acting (with the notable exceptions of Sophia Myles as Lady Penelope & Ron Cook as Parker, who seem to be the only cast members to have a clue about how their characters should be played) & after this travesty I wouldn't let Frakes direct traffic.The whole point of Thunderbirds was that it was about the whole Tracy family & how they worked as a team, preventing disasters or coming to the rescue of those involved in disasters.Avoid this rubbish like the plague.I only give it 1 out of 10 because a zero rating is not supported..
The CGI work was what I would have called leading edge - 5 years ago.The Dynamics of the main craft were just wrong; The original series models at least moved as if they had massAnother sore point is that the whole production seemed to be one long set of product placements, from every vehicle being built by Ford to the entire content of the Tracy Freezer being produced by Ben & Jerry's.My son (9) enjoyed the film but this cross between Spy Kids and 'Clockstoppers', aimed squarely at his age group, added nothing to the Thunderbirds legend.
Sophia Miles was, simply, fantastic, as Lady P and Bill Paxton, whilst not exactly who I envisaged Jeff Tracey being, was solid enough...but then the adults were taken out of the equation and we were asked to believe 8 year olds could fly 200 tonne machines.It's not so much the fact that the movie was centred around the children that made me feel like Jonathon Frakes was slapping me with a wet fish and laughing at my hard earned money spent on the film, it was the fact that Alan Tracey was so obnoxious in the film and that he seemed to be as able to fly the machines as well as his brothers...who were at least 19/20.
Being an ardent fan of the original Thunderbirds series, which was imaginative and entertaining (despite the strings!), I bought the DVD of the film for my grandchildren on the premise that they might enjoy it.
The whole moral message and 'goal' is set up in an excruciating way: Jeff Tracy (A new low for Bill Paxton) tells his youngest son Alan he's not yet proved himself to be a Thunderbird after Alan randomly and stupidly decided to go down into Tracy Island's bowels to fire up Thunderbird One. The whole film is then a series of events and miss-fires consisting of Alan trying to prove himself whilst his father and other brothers are trapped in space aboard Thunderbird five.The film relies on kid actors to carry the film: A 16 year old Alan Tracy (Corbet), a 16 year old Tin Tin (Hudgens) and a 14 year old Fermat (Fulton) who is Brains' son.
Also, the whole 'mind control' thing was very tiresome and basically dragged the film down as it was overused and offered a way for our heroes to see a weakness in The Hood forced and incidental.I know that most 'film's for kids' these days try to integrate some sort of material for adults but in Thunderbirds it's done in a way that fetishises Lady Penelope.
Sophia Myles plays Penelope and I think it's no coincidence she's a little older than the rest of the kids at 24 years old, it's almost too good to be true.
Twinned with this, her bright pink costumes that reveal just enough yet cover just enough are particularly outstanding as is the way she moves and talks with that posh, dominant, English accent; sounding like a commanding mistress (Well, she is LADY Penelope after all and you'd better make sure call her that) The whole thing is laughable but the editing is so quick that the kids won't notice but it sure as hell is there.The actual plot of The Hood doing all that he does just to rob a few banks is very bizarre, the characters that are his bodyguards: a geeky looking woman and hard bodied black man who gets agitated a lot.
THUNDERBIRDS comes close to showing how pathetic childhood was (or wasn't).Fresh from the success of his Next Generation STAR TREK films (two of which he directed), Jonathan Frakes is back resting comfortably on his director's chair and at his first shot he really had good intentions...
My main reason for being interested in it is that I'm a Bill Paxton fan; he's a pretty good actor, and has turned in consistently good work over the course of his career.The other thing is that, while never really a fan of the old series, I kinda liked Thunderbirds for the ships and effect work.
I was prepared for a little bit of artistic licence, but the film is so far removed from the original plot lines that I wonder why the production team even bothered to obtain the rights to the "Thumderbirds" brand for the movie?
Thunderbirds is a fantastic franchise potential, in that there is very little evil in the show.I know there's the hood but he doesn't always appear, the only constant is peoples lives being saved in tense and action packed ways that require kid friendly super- machines.
The original was made for kids in as much as it was puppets but all The Century 21 series would have used live action if Gerry Anderson and ITC could have afforded it and the stories did not talk down to or patronise their audience with the result I can still happily watch them today with my little girl.
It doesn't have as much of the dual adult and kids appeal of the original and will probably appeal mostly to the younger children who (if they can get you to take 'em, it's a PG) aren't really going to mind the poor humour, and won't remember what Thunderbird 2 should look like or that Lady P wouldn't be seen dead in a Ford.
Except for the monorail, which for some reason looks more like a model than anything Derek Meddings ever did on the telly, the thunderbirds do pay reasonable lipservice to the original designs and there is still enough here to cling to the hope that it could be rescued by a sequel with a better plot, brains Jr and TinTin sent off to University and Allan doing a decent days work for a decent days pay..
The only time this turkey should be served up is at about 3AM on the day after Thanksgiving or 3am on Boxing Day when everyone is sleeping off their dinners.The characters in this movie are more plastic than the puppets in the original series, despite the actors best efforts.Unfortunately Jonathan Frakes not only missed the boat on this one, he missed the whole fracking ocean!
So not surprising that someone decided it was time to big-screen it.It's a pity that they just though "ah - a big target audience, so lots of moolah" and didn't also take the time out to think "I wonder what makes a show that remains popular for FORTY YEARS." Someone clearly decided to make this a film for *young* kids, and ignore the fact that the TV series was enjoyed by kids of *all* ages (I mean, anyone still breathing!) but I have to wonder, even with that dubious decision, why they had to ignore the obvious.For example.
While some purists may regard this as heresy, probably THUNDERBIRDS is a more nuanced, thoughtful film version than the original movies from the series, which simply tend to be elongated episodes.
Jonathan Frakes, as punishment for subjecting us to this dreadful movie, must be banned from any other director work.The plot is thin to the point of being transparent and ruined by children 'saving the world'.The acting quality provided by real flesh and blood humans was even more 'wooden' than that of the original Anderson puppets.My only conclusion with regard to Ben Kinglsey's appearance in the production, must have been from a desire of his to make some 'quick money' without the need to provide the acting magic that he so ably can provide.Also the Bank of England is not located in the National Gallery as the movie suggests.I'm eternally glad that I paid no money to see this 'tripe'..
They really seemed to 'get' the spirit of their characters.So, advice for the sequels:1) Get some real characters.2) Get a plot that makes a little bit of sense.3) Let the actors *act*!4) Get rid of Tintin-Sue and give the girl some flaws (this could come under point 1, but it was so glaring I felt it deserved an entry of its own)5) Get a director, producer and writer who were fans of the series.
A bit of a rickety plot - OK (hang on a minute though- the original wasn't exactly flawless), but mainly just plain a-z enjoyment including some, shall we say, more sophisticated humour than those with misty eyes may recall - I cringe at the original episodes ending with a cast laugh.Having bought the album, Hans Zimmers treatment of Barry Gray's theme and his specially composed music are rather good, again nice to have new technology enhancing the original themes.The basis is there, the sets and props have been built and the cast are contracted for sequels - call Universal, write to Fellner and Bevan and tell 'em to get cracking, buy the DVD - Alan's grown up - so can the next film - and the critics can grow up and become kids again, if you get my drift..
It's now nearly forty years since Anderson's television series debuted, and we come to find out that Hollywood, which cannot help but ruining anything that was good from the 60's, has now decided to disembowel 'The Thunderbirds.' By all accounts, they have succeeded beyond anyone's wildest expectations.In the movie version of the Thunderbirds, Jeff Tracy (Bill Paxton) and 'Brains' (Anthony Edwards) have teenage children: Alan (Brady Corbet) and Fermat (Soren Fulton).
The heart and sole of the Thunderbirds, Jeff Tracy and his sons, are locked up in the space station for most of the movie, leaving us to be entertained by the boy-band reject Alan and Ben Kingsley's imitation of a puppet.
One thing I didn't like was that now the characters and not just the machines are called the Thunderbirds, but maybe this is a PC thing as there really is now an organisation called International Rescue (inspired by the original series of course) which helps out at various disaster areas around the globe.
Alan (Brady Corbet), who longs to 'be a Thunderbird' i.e., part of the team and not a hulking great lump of flying metal, is not yet taken seriously by either his father Jeff or his brothers and is going through the sulky teen stage we all know so well.Basically the plot is that an evil (yet not very imaginative) villain (Ben Kingsley), who has monikered himself as 'The Hood' (see what I mean?), plans to steal the International Rescue machines and rob the world's major banks (I rest my case).
Maybe these will all be addressed in future.However, it's a great kids movie with a few titbits thrown in for us old 'uns which is exactly how it should be, and if I, as a die-hard fan of the original, can accept it I see no reason why no one else should.One more thing - Regarding the suspension of disbelief I could accept the Thunderbirds flying up the Thames and under Tower Bridge, but all that clear blue sky and sunshine?
But mostly it's harmless enough fun.Things I liked about the movie:The Thunderbirds machines were pretty cool, although the back end of T2 just didn't look right to me.
This kind of affectionate rib-poking made the whole film a lot more enjoyable in my book, and is clearly done as a nod to the debt owed to the series.Things I didn't like about the movie:Too many kids!
The adults roared with laughter at that bit, while the kids all remained stone faced.Lady Penelope, who looks identical to (and may have actually BEEN) the character in the Wonder-Bra adverts, makes constant references to the adverts, which is great fun, because ONLY those of the older generation will get those jokes.
If you can forget that the original series ever existed and that this is an original film, then it is quite enjoyable in a Spy Kids sort of way (although the way everyone refers to the team as the Thunderbirds rather than International Rescue still rankles).The special effects are pretty good (shots of Thunderbird 3 taking off into space are great), Brendan Galvin's photography is appropriately colourful and production designer John Beard's re-imagining of the Thunderbird craft are appropriately respectful to the original.
Instead all we get are some silly and quite frankly stupid shenanigans involving a sadly annoying Alan Tracy running around Tracy Island trying to save the Tracy family from an incredibly over-acting Ben Kingsley as The Hood.Too bad then, that he gets trapped by a tidal wave of terrible dialogue, unfunny moments that would make even the Spy Kids cringe with envy and most importantly a complete lack of respect to the original source material.Even Hans Zimmer's score is nowhere near the excellence of Barry Gray.When even your creator calls it the biggest pile of crap he's ever watched you know your film is completely doomed....
THUNDERBIRDS the film is a cheap and cheesy vehicle of excess that makes SPICE WORLD look like a movie classic.
But even with the effects I have a problem as although they are nice, they are way overused at moments and then put in really silly times, it is as if strategic effects are used to then create some kind of disaster waiting to come.One lasting hateful thing this movie does is ruin the massive legacy of the old puppet and strings TV series of the 1960's and really shows kids of this day the wrong message, one of silly jokes and silly characters(some of which are completely made up for this movie).
To be honest, children of all ages these days can take an adult scenario, they can take dramatic story lines but the story presented here is very poor and the standard of the acting is pathetic for the most part.Paxton and Kingsley worked hard against a paint by numbers script and Sophia Myles was fantastic as Lady Penelope (but did they have to have her fighting with martial arts moves ?) and for the Tracey brothers, they were cast too young and the young actors performances were quite dreadful.
On the plus side, the design of the crafts were pretty good and looked the part but this was only a minor plus amongst what is a disaster of a movie.From the awful cartoon credit sequence to the cringe factor 10 finale the film is painful to watch.It is too childish for adults, only kids around 8 to 10 years may enjoy it and as for lifelong fans ?
|
tt0080408
|
Bad Timing
|
In Cold War Vienna, Milena (Russell), a young American woman in her twenties, is rushed to the emergency room after apparently overdosing. With her is Alex Linden (Garfunkel), an American psychiatrist who lives in the city as a teacher. Through myriad fragmented flashbacks, the narrative depicts the story of their romance, which ultimately amounts to an unhealthy sexual obsession on the part of Alex.
Through these developments, Milena is revealed to suffer from depression while still being married to a much older man, Stefan (Elliott), whom she occasionally crosses the border to see during the course of her affair with Alex. Though Linden initially enjoys her free-spirited ways, he grows tired of, and embittered at, her lifestyle, which includes impulsive promiscuity and heavy drinking. Through spying on Milena, Alex becomes emotionally strained, and eventually tries to control her – leading to horrifying results, due in large part to very bad timing.
Throughout, at the hospital where medics fight to save Milena's life, an investigator, Netusil (Keitel), comes to realise that there may be more to her case than a simple suicide attempt. He probes, and once the truth lies brutally clear, tries to corner Alex into a confession of the possible crimes involved with Milena's accident.
Finally it is revealed that, because of the rage developed due to the promiscuous behaviour of Milena, Alex raped her when she was unconscious. Later, Stefan arrives and reveals that Milena has survived and is out of danger. Alex returns to America where, some time later, he sees Milena getting out of a taxi. He shouts to her but she ignores him.
|
psychological, cult, atmospheric, flashback, psychedelic, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
His movie rates high in production value and acting and has an innovative approach to an old story
The film is basically a character study
Alex (Art Garfunkel) is a depressingly dark and shadowy American psychoanalyst living in Vienna
Theresa Russell plays Milena, a resonant, carefree American girl
They meet by chance at a party and are thrown into a roller-coaster ride of an erotic relationship
He wants to smash her free spirit because he can't understand it, but she won't let him
The result is a near-fatal break-up
Roeg comes close to the story from the middle (obeying Jean-Luc Godard's authoritative saying, a film "must have a beginning, a middle and an end, but not necessarily in that order." We quickly move to the different parts of Alex and Milena's relationship, moving through time as if it were Jell-O.
Their passionate affair has led to a potentially tragic outcome, and it's up to a local police inspector (Harvey Keitel) to sort out what went wrong, why, and whether criminal malice was involved.What makes this relationship drama so compelling is Roeg's structure: the film starts in the middle, jumps ahead to the end, then back to the prologue within the first four minutes and continues in a non-linear fashion until the final shot.
Like Garfunkel, the idea that Milena had other lovers made me crazy...like Theresa Russell, my Milena needed secrets...lies...she couldn't breathe without her lies and secrets.The scene where she sets Garfunkel up with her fake suicide attempt only to loose the full force of her hysterical cruelty on him...check...down to the blows and the broken bottles...and it marked the moment our love died, even if things dribbled on for a while after that.
Not that I expected anything else from people like Harvey Keitel and Theresa Russell, but Art Garfunkel certainly surprised me.
Art Garfunkel in his one great role as an American college psychology professor lusting after student Theresa Russell somewhere in Austria set in the late 70s.
Art Garfunkel joins the line (Jagger, Bowie) of singers who produced career best acting performances for this director - the scene of him smoking while staring over a bridge into the abyss of his life is worth buying the dvd alone - and Theresa Russell is simply incendiary.
Intense work from one of the giants of British and world cinema, now sadly neglected, and one of a string of great films, Performance, Walkabout, Don't Look Now and The Man Who Fell to Earth which mark Nicolas Roeg out as a great director..
From the opening strains of Tom Waits' gritty "Invitation to the Blues" (which is cut off by the wail of an ambulance!) every aspect--music, scenery, the astonishing acting--melds together into a masterpiece.Theresa Russell is simply a knockout as Milena, a woman who refuses to be "owned".
Bad Timing is Nicholas Roeg's film about a relationship that is fueled by an obsessive passion, more or less, on both sides, and ends in a kind of mutual destruction.
Throw in a little detective/criminal mystery entanglement, some trademark Roeg editing and narrative technique, and sprinkle some of the most appropriately steamy (and appropriately disturbing) mature sexual context in a movie since Last Tango, and you've got a sort of cult classic.It's the kind of work that, as someone who loves getting a filmmaker who approaches things from a skewed perspective almost like an intellectual, is nearly inspiring.
It deals with a psychology professor, Alex Linden (Art Garfunkel, the most unlikely of male leads for a sexually charged and complex individual, but out-does his previous turn in Carnal Knowledge as a subtle performer of a man in total emotional crisis), and his romance with young Milena (the extraordinary Theresa Russel, arguably her best performance to date, soul pouring out like it's her one and only chance to shine), who is possibly already married to a much older man across the Vienna border (Denhalm Elliot, great in his few scenes).They have powerful lust and some good times, even in Morocco of all places, but...
Many post-modern filmmakers only wish to try and make a film dealing with genre (i.e. crime/gangsters) like this, but Roeg does it sometimes subliminally, cut-aways implying sexual interaction and obsession that go the opposite way of the pondering style of a Last Tango (i.e. the operation scene, a cut-away between a tense gynecological exam during surgery and sex).The other thing that Roeg wisely does, as he did do sort of in Walkabout, is to let the actors play up to their strengths.
While it was trickier to to as a director, and to actually notice in the finished product, in Walkabout, in Bad Timing there are countless scenes where we see the actors tapping into the characters full-throttle, and revealing little layers in the script that wouldn't be present in a more conventional treatment.
For another, it's actually rather unnerving to watch the process of her dissolution, both due to how realistically it's shown and the fact that we want to like Malena (or at least I did).If you're at all a fan of Russell, I think you'll find that this is one of her best performances ever, and the direction and staging are first-rate.(It was also a bit weird to see Harvey Keitel with long hair.).
The constant breakups, the creepy, almost stalking behaviours, the outbursts, the attacks and counter-attacks and violence and general hell that is borderline personality - it's all there.Russell's character is a complete mess - drunk, angry, crazy - she has a string of boyfriends with whom she rows constantly, she smashes things up, she smashes herself up and generally goes completely ape.Garfunkel is brilliant - he has much the same trouble as his girlfriend but he *seems* more subdued, although he hides it better, he keeps coming back to her because *he's the same*.Keitel's detached, manipulating cop who tries to unravel the whole thing is probably his best ever work.
BAD TIMING is the one Nicolas Roeg film (from his initial period of peerlessly brilliant movies) which had so far eluded me; actually, for some reason, I had missed out on its one and only TV screening in my neck of the woods.Following in the footsteps of Mick Jagger in PERFORMANCE (1970) and David Bowie in THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH (1976), Art Garfunkel was the third pop star to be engaged as an actor by Roeg.
Clearly one of Roeg's most personal films, BAD TIMING is not only a harrowing study of male-female relationships or more precisely "l'amour fou", but is also another depiction by Roeg (as had been the case with all his previous pictures) of characters stranded in a foreign land, in this case two Americans in Vienna.
In hindsight, the tumultuous and almost deadly Garfunkel-Russell relationship is mirrored in the one between Garfunkel and Keitel, especially in the film's latter stages when the interrogation and subsequent revelation take center stage; the latter sequences, then, are capped by an enigmatic ending - due to Elliott's nick-of-time appearance and subsequent dematerialization - could this be a figment of Garfunkel's agitated state of mind?
BAD TIMING is shot in Roeg's typically fragmented style which, this time around, can perhaps be explained by the fact that the narrator (Art or Theresa) is under a lot of emotional (Keitel's interrogation of Art) and physical (Theresa's life-saving surgery) strain.
In another sense, BAD TIMING can even be seen as a sophisticated precursor to the erotic thrillers so prevalent in filmdom from the late-80s onwards.For the third consecutive time, Anthony Richmond serves as director of photography for Roeg and the film also boasts a splendidly eclectic soundtrack - Billy Holliday, Keith Jarrett, The Who, Tom Waits, not to mention some typical Viennese zither music a' la THE THIRD MAN (1949) - an inspired choice to be sure but, ironically, the prohibitive rights issue costs were also one of the reasons why BAD TIMING has been out of the public eye for so long.The Criterion DVD is therefore a very welcome introduction for me to this essential film.
Actually, after this viewing of BAD TIMING, I regret not purchasing Roeg's previous film, THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH, when Deep Discount DVD had their recent Criterion sale.
However, I should be giving Roeg's subsequent film, (also starring his then wife Theresa Russell) EUREKA (1984), a first look via my VHS copy; actually, had it not been for the recent interview with the still gorgeous Russell conducted for the BAD TIMING DVD, I wouldn't have known that Roeg and Russell had separated!.
Nicolas Roeg's little-circulated relationship dissertation between an American psychiatrist Alex Linden (Garfunkel) and a young American woman Milena (Russell) in Cold War Vienna has an uncanny and scandalizing paralleled real life happening befalls on its leading actor Art Garfunkel.
With that hindsight, one is prone to understand Garfunkel's sometimes perversely surly and tangibly perturbed state when facing off with either a barnstorming Russell or a probing Harvey Keitel, who plays Inspector Netusil, exerts himself in teasing out the truth out of a buttoned-up Alex, as the film's title refers, the timing of Alex's recount about the incident doesn't comply with the physical facts (car radio, Milena's state, etc.).Predominantly, Roeg expertly expounds Alex and Milena's torrid affair by punctuating its aftermath story-line with stacks of flashback in a random arrangement, from the starting point when Milena says farewell to her much older Czech husband Stefan Vognic (Elliott) in the Czech/Austria border, to the pair's encounter, dating, a Northern Africa vacation (prompts Alex's proposal of marriage), to the toxic disintegration due to their incongruity (Lüscher's color test Vs. Paul Bowles' The Sheltering Sky, are the obvious visual pointers).
It is a self-destructive game which takes two to tango, a woman's congenital insecurity meets a man's unrelieved self-regard, that's what Roeg rams home to us albeit his very distracting M.O. Honestly, it is a mind-bending journey, strewn with zeitgeist reflecting tunes (Billie Holiday, Tom Waits, The Who and counting), where the two leads engaging in graphic sexual acts (and they are nowhere near aesthetically pretty), or exchanging their thoughts in soft-focus treatment.
BAD TIMING, a pertinent name for its own ill-fated reception upon its release, is a well- accomplished, counter-cultural, innately honest examination on the caprice, intransigence, and ambivalence of modern relationship and sex philosophy, powered by strong performances, in particular, a spontaneously ravishing Theresa Russell..
His first two films as sole director were both excellent ones, "Walkabout" from 1971 and "Don't Look Now" from 1973, but I have never cared for his third film, the overlong, confusing and self-consciously arty "The Man who Fell to Earth"."Bad Timing", made in 1980, was Roeg's fourth film.
He was, after all, the man responsible for "Don't Look Now", with its controversial love scene between Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie.In one respect, however, Rank's criticism is accurate; "Bad Timing" is indeed a film about "sick people".
Roeg clearly liked using rock stars in his films, because the leading role in "The Man who Fell to Earth" is taken by David Bowie, an equally unsuccessful piece of casting.
Theresa Russell, who plays the object of the professor's obsession, is given the only good lines in the film.
While her life is fought for in a hospital, (Art Garfunkel) the man who called the ambulance is being questioned (great cutting!) about his relations to her.The rest is to save for people who haven't seen the film."Way ahead of it's time" cutting, acting, photography, directing, made this story, which is almost impossible to tell, plausible and makes the film full of suspense..
Bad Timing is a unique work.This is portrayed through its well crafted magnificent use of colour,flamboyant style and its laid back calmness.This makes the film very watchable and easy going on the eye.The films strange and almost abortive plot keeps you enthuised right through till the end.I would highly rate this film and recommend it to anyone.If its a high paced film your looking for, this film is not for you.Just sit back relax and enjoy the magic of this outstanding work..
But after a while the narrative begins to settle down, although there are always moments of chronological confusion.The film centres around Art Garfunkel's character who has an unhealthy obsession with the character played by Theresa Russell.
Most of the film takes place in flashback as Art tells the story to Harvey Kietel's character, a cop.
It remains a great film and as well as the sensational and brave performance from Russell and the appropriately more measured one from Art , we get a wonderful one from Harvey Keitel..
A police detective suspects foul play on the part of her lover, an American psychology professor (Art Garfunkel).Although his is only a supporting role, we must single out Harvey Keitel -- this is a great role for him and he exhibits some nice hair.
We end up with no sympathy for his character (which may have been the intent), little concern for the character's fate, and absolutely no understanding of his motivations or behaviour.There are only two reasons for tuning in: Harvey Keitel gives another stand-out performance (his character is probably the only interesting and sympathetic one in the film, and physically reminiscent of John Travolta in Pulp Fiction); and Theresa Russell's attractive and very watchable body is given ample exposure on numerous occassions.
First let me say that I do think Art Garfunkle can act and is a good supporting actor like he was in "Carnal Knowledge" but as a leading man in a slow moving film he's in over his head.
The plot of "Bad Timing" has something to do with flirtatious, troubled Theresa Russell and her relationship with an odd young psychiatrist.
The story of an attempted suicide of a woman (Theresa Russell) and the following investigation where his boyfriend (Art Garfunkel) faces the suspicion of an obsessed detective (Harvey Keitel) is set in a Vienna filmed with taste and style and told in a non-chronological manner that builds the story in an a series of interleaved present and flashback scenes.
Roeg's structureless style overwhelms a perhaps miscast Harvey Keitel, a struggling (as always) Art Garfunkel (the one pop-star casting Roeg didn't get spot on) and a ravishing Theresa Russell but ultimately wins out as the film lingers long and tantalizingly out of reach long after viewing.
This film makes "An Affair to Remember," and assorted Nora Ephron films look like the pablum they are.Similarly, in that scene on the stairway, she lifts her skirts and tells him, "This is what you want, isn't it?" Sometimes things are both simpler than we think and more complex at the same time.
Theresa Russell is sexy, convincing, revealing and OKAY but Art Garfunkel had a baaaaaaad timing.
And the intention was precisely to make our visual mind work like the troubled mind of Garfunkel's character.An extra significant point, something Ted Goranson really likes to notice, and which i'm starting to fall for is the empathy Roeg has with the actress, Theresa Russell, which would lead to marriage.
Art Garfunkel slips effortlessly in the character of a sexy psychoanalyst who loses his grip on things when he falls in love(or whatever it's called here) with a care-free,adventurous young woman (Theresa Russel).
This is because in spite of all the nudity and sexuality, it sure left me very, very bored.The film begins with some doctors working on an overdose patient, Milena (Theresa Russell).
Then, throughout the rest of the film, you see a series of flashbacks about her relationship with an American psychology professor, Alex (Art Garfunkel).
Through flashbacks, the audience learns a terrifying love story has ended with a criminal act.What makes this film so uncomfortable is that it relentlessly focuses on a time in our lives that most of us would like to forget- that is, the time when you know is relationship is doomed, but you have to wait until it hits rock bottom before you finally part ways.
Roeg understands that people can't divorce themselves from their emotions, even when they know intellectually that something is wrong.Although Theresa Russell as Milena is the undoubted star of the film- she simply overpowers everything with her vivacity and directness- special mention must be made of the "miscast" male leads.
It's about a destructive love affair between a man played by Art Garfunkel and a woman played by Theresa Russel.
Slowly the real story unfolds and the viewer learns about the darker sides in both characters.Roeg switches back and forth in the chronology of the story and that makes Bad Timing an intriguing but difficult movie.
The histrionic Theresa Russell is inexplicably in love with the narcissistic psychiatrist played by Art Garfunkel, who is sexually obsessed with her.
Ultimately, Bad Timing is just as much a horror story as Roeg's Don't Look Now. Fully realized from the first minute to the last, it is a movie by adults for adults..
for her, that is...Initially taking place at a hospital emergency room where Theresa Russell's Milena is being frantically kept alive by desperate surgeons, BAD TIMING consists of flashbacks concerning her doomed romance with leading man Art Garfunkel as Alex...The most intriguing aspect of Nicolas Roeg's comparably obscure motion picture is how a dying Milena is edited into sporadic bouts of love-making, laughter, arguments, more love-making, tantrums, aspersions, more tantrums, wandering through Vienna and even a quick road trip along desert terrain, like where the late auteur shaped his future assisting David Lean on a little excursion titled LAWRENCE OF ARABIA before carving-out his own desolate territory for WALKABOUT...Harvey Keitel has a determined, steady, sharp yet peripheral and thankless role as a detective investigating whatever's been left behind of Alex and Milena's relationship, which isn't much but empty rooms.
Unfortunately this movie was so bad nobody much cared.A man (Art Garfunkel) brings a woman (Theresa Russell) to a hospital.
In this case the star is Art Garfunkel, who plays an obsessive psychoanalyst who's powers of understanding the mind help him in no way understand the free-spirited woman he's fallen in love with.Coming 15 years before Pulp Fiction, this movie is edited out of chronology.
|
tt0021665
|
Birds of a Feather
|
For Cockney sisters Sharon Theodopolopodous and Tracey Stubbs, life is never the same again when their husbands are convicted of armed robbery and sent to prison. Sharon, a common, large and loud-mouthed character from a council flat in Edmonton, moves into her sister's luxury home in Chigwell, so that she can support Tracy.
Sharon has always felt inadequate next to her slimmer, elder sister Tracey and felt she had the tougher childhood. Her marriage to Chris, a waster of Greek Cypriot descent, was miserable and childless, supposedly due to Sharon's infertility. Chris's family condemn her for this but Sharon discovers that Chris is actually the infertile one. Sharon happily cheats on Chris and gives him grief when visiting. Despite this, she becomes bitterly envious whenever he has another woman, and only ever makes half-hearted attempts to divorce him until the new 2014 series, in which Chris finally demands a divorce from Sharon so he can marry again. Tracey, however, loves her husband, Darryl. His legitimate business was building conservatories but he made most of his money by robbing banks. Unlike Sharon, who is more realistic about their husbands, Tracey deludes herself into believing her husband is innocent, especially in the Christmas special "The Chigwell Connection", and when Darryl is finally released in series 7, she trusts him when he asks for a cheque on the company account, which leads to Darryl defrauding her out of her business assets. He and Tracey have a son, Garth, who becomes a chef after going to boarding school, and eventually marries Kimberley. This marriage does not last: in series 10, Garth has moved to Australia and started a relationship with a girl named Marcie. Tracey is the more honest and law-abiding of the two sisters, whereas Sharon is more willing to indulge in unscrupulous and often criminal activities, such as illegally subletting her council flat when she was living with Tracey, taking drugs, selling stolen merchandise, fiddling her VAT, and claiming unemployment benefit while she was actually employed
=== Dorien Green ===
The sisters' neighbour is the wealthy, snobbish, man-eating Dorien Green, a middle-aged woman who strives to create the impression that she is a glamorous beauty, dressing in a sexually provocative style, preferring mini-skirts, high heels and leopard print. She is played by Lesley Joseph. Dorien is married to Marcus, but is frequently involved with other men, with hilarious consequences. Dorien and Marcus are Jewish. Her marriage is also childless, due to her vanity and the lack of affection between her and Marcus. She is a regular, if uninvited, guest at Tracey's house, and mocks Sharon about her weight whilst Sharon teases Dorien about her lifestyle and age. However, Sharon and Tracey become the best friends Dorien has ever had, and the mutual teasing is friendly and playful and it is often shown that Sharon and Tracey care for Dorien and vice versa. If any of them get into trouble or have a problem, the others are often the first to help, regardless of the consequences.
Although Dorien had several flings with younger men, Luke Horton was her most frequent lover and she appeared to genuinely love him, from the first series until he left Dorien for a younger woman in the second series. He later appeared in the eighth series when it is revealed that he has married and settled down. Dorien's nemesis is the acid-tongued Melanie Fishman, a vindictive gossip who Dorien constantly attempts to outdo. Marcus eventually tires of Dorien's selfishness and leaves her to begin a new life with his mistress and their children. Dorien later starts a loving relationship with Richard Summers, which is initially strained due to Richard's teenage children taking an instant dislike to Dorien, which she gladly reciprocates.
There is some uncertainty about Dorien's maiden name. She says that her father's name was Arthur Friedman but a wedding invitation to Sharon and Tracey, reveals her mother's name to be Estelle Kapper. Later, Dorien refers to her maiden name as Kapper and an old flame also remembers her as Dorien Kapper. She grew up in Burnt Oak in the London Borough of Barnet. Dorien has several times claimed to be a graduate but never specified which university she attended and when. Throughout the series, Dorien toys with novel writing but is unpublished, until 2014 in which she is an established author. Dorien's mother appears on screen once but is often mentioned as an icy, domineering woman, and the two clearly have a stormy relationship. Dorien also has a brother named Jeffrey, who she believes to be their mother's favourite, as he lives a modest life in a semi-detached house and, unlike Dorien, has given their mother grandchildren. In series 11, it is revealed that when she was seventeen in 1965, Dorien had a fling with a man named Lionel and they had a daughter, Naomi, who was raised by Lionel. They reunite fifty years later where Dorien learns that Naomi is a vicar, yet she has inherited Dorien's appearance and fondness for risqué behaviour.
In the final episode of series 12, which was broadcast on 25th February 2016, Dorien celebrated her seventieth birthday. This episode was filmed on 14 October 2015, Joseph's actual 70th birthday.
=== Released from prison ===
In the series 7 episode, "Cheers", Darryl and Chris are released from prison and are determined to start afresh. Chris feels remorse for his crimes and not treating Sharon better during their marriage. He impresses Sharon by getting an honest job as a pizza delivery man. Darryl, however, feels that the only way to give Tracey the lifestyle he feels she deserves is to return to crime. He attempts to launder counterfeit money into Sharon and Tracey's swimming pool business but is caught and imprisoned again (at HMP Slade made famous in Porridge) – along with an innocent Chris, much to Sharon's dismay. Darryl and Tracey's marriage is severely strained by this and Tracey contemplates leaving Darryl, but decides not to but tells him that she will not be waiting for him, like she did when he was imprisoned before. In series 9, Tracey discovers she is pregnant and panics that Darryl may not be the father until she learns the other man had a vasectomy. When Tracey gives birth to her second child, Travis, Sharon vows to stand by her sister and raise the child together.
Sharon and Tracey's maternal aunt, "Auntie Sylvie" (Vivian Pickles), is frequently mentioned and appears twice. After Tracey's and Sharon's parents died, Sylvie raised them.
In the tenth series it is revealed that Tracey and Darryl have divorced and that Darryl moved to Wales on his release from prison. Tracey has remarried and is back living in her former marital home, "Dalentrace", in Chigwell, kicking Sharon out due to her dislike of Tracey's second husband, Ralph. At the start of the series, Sharon is back in her council flat and the two have not spoken for over six months when they "bump into each other" at a book signing. They are shocked to discover that the author of "Sixty Shades of Green" (a Fifty Shades of Grey clone) is their old friend Dorien. When Tracey offers Sharon a lift home, she confesses that she has thrown Ralph out after catching him stealing from her. Lonely, she persuades Sharon to move back in with her. Travis feigns annoyance that Sharon is back, but it is then revealed that he set up their "chance" meeting at the book signing.
As the three plan how their new set-up will work, Dorien arrives unexpectedly, after learning that she is being sued for plagiarising Fifty Shades of Grey. With all her assets frozen, she has no choice but to beg Tracey for a place to stay. Just as everyone is speculating how they will all fit into the house, Garth arrives with new girlfriend Marcie and her daughter, Poppy. By the end of the series Garth, Marcie and Poppy have moved out, with the couple opening a pop-up restaurant and the case against Dorien collapsed, due to a tabloid exposé about an MP she once dated – which proves the stories in her book were true. However, after initially planning to return to her former home in Hollywood, Dorien realises that Sharon and Tracey are her true friends and opts to stay with them.
In series 11, Garth comes home, having separated from Marcie. Dorien's past comes back to haunt her when, amongst her fan mail, she finds a letter from the daughter she gave up for adoption. Dorien eventually agrees to meet Naomi (Frances Ruffelle), who she is stunned to discover is a vicar with two grown-up children. Meanwhile, Tracey is faced with health concerns when she discovers a large mole on her shoulder is malignant.
In series 12, the police tell Tracey that Darryl died in an attempted robbery and that Garth is next of kin. The funeral is attended by Tracey, Sharon, Dorien, Garth, Travis and many of Darryl's gangster friends. Dorien is also revealed to have a granddaughter named Emma (Naomi's daughter), who briefly moved into the Stubbs house.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0335438
|
Starsky & Hutch
|
The movie takes place in the 1970s. The story centres around two cops who work for the Bay City Police Department. Detective David Starsky (Ben Stiller) is a loud, macho acting cop who loves his Ford Gran Torino, and recklessly pursues people for minor offenses, and Detective Ken 'Hutch' Hutchinson (Owen Wilson), is a cool easy-going cop, who sometimes actually works alongside criminals, claiming to be undercover, to investigate their activity. The two cops are made partners, almost as punishment for their recent shenanigans. Meanwhile, Jewish-American drug kingpin, Reese Feldman (Vince Vaughn), and his partner-in-crime, Kevin (Jason Bateman), are planning to bring in a shipment of drugs worth millions of dollars. They have developed a new type of cocaine which is untraceable in scent and taste. When Feldman finds out that one of his drug pushers failed a drug transport operation, he kills him and leaves the body in the ocean.
Starsky and Hutch are called to the scene where the body of the murdered pusher washes up a few days later. A clue from the dead man leads them to Feldman's house for questioning. Feldman denies any knowledge of the crime and states his regret for the man's death, but his wife mentions that the pusher had been dating a cheerleader. During questioning Hutch admires Feldman's boat, to which Feldman replies "It's a yacht." After meeting cheerleaders, Stacey (Carmen Electra) and Holly (Amy Smart), they learn from another cheerleader, Heather (Brande Roderick), that a jacket worn by the dead pusher was made by Big Earl (Will Ferrell). Their street-wise, underworld contact, Huggy Bear (Snoop Dogg) directs the two to a motorcycle bar operated by Big Earl. Starsky and Hutch go undercover to the bar dressed as the characters "Captain America" and "Billy" from the film Easy Rider. Discovering Big Earl is in jail, they go to the prison to speak with Big Earl, who has connections with Feldman's drug business. Big Earl, who is implied to be gay and has an obsession with dragons, then makes the officers do embarrassing things to get what they want. He gives them a packet of what they think is cocaine. When it is taken to the lab for testing, Doby (Fred Williamson), their captain, angered and humiliated about their interview (which was caught on security camera) tells them it is 'artificial sweetener' and takes them off the floater assignment. The duo invite Stacy and Holly to Starsky's place where Starsky puts the 'sweetener' in his coffee while Hutch sings Don't Give Up on Us (the original of which was actually recorded by David Soul, the original "Hutch"). Starsky, Hutch, Stacey, and Holly go to a disco where Starsky, while suffering the effects of the drug, challenges an arrogant dancer to a dance off, and goes crazy when he loses. Hutch takes him home and proceeds to have a threesome with Holly and Stacey.
Feldman continues to be the main suspect of the duo's investigation, after they are assaulted by an Asian dealer and his knife-throwing son, and the dealer mentions that his boss "had a yacht." Further investigation leads them to believe that Feldman stores drugs in his garage, and during his daughter's Bat Mitzvah, they go undercover as mimes attempting to locate the drugs. After confronting Feldman, Starsky shoots the lock off the garage door, accidentally shooting and killing a pony inside. As a result, Captain Doby indefinitely suspends both of them. Starsky tries to cover for Hutch, but Doby reveals that Starsky had filed a complaint against Hutch weeks ago, right after they first became partners. Starsky tries to explain, but the partners argue, and it leads to a split in their friendship.
Meanwhile, Hutch's young neighbor, Willis (Jeffrey Lorenzo), whom Hutch watches on Wednesdays, is involved in a bomb blast in Hutch's house, and breaks his leg (the bomb was intended for Hutch). Starsky comes to visit Willis in the hospital where a "who's at fault" argument with Hutch, finally leads to reconciliation. They both decide to go after Feldman and put an end to his drug business. With help from Huggy Bear, who grudingly acts as a golf caddie for Reese, they learn that Feldman plans to sell the drugs at a charity ball by hiding them in Volkswagen Karmann Ghias to be given away to preplanned dope pushers.
The disguised duo manage to enter the party and hold up Feldman, pretending to be winners of a car. Upon shooting open the trunk of the car, a large amount of cocaine is found. Feldman takes Hutch hostage, and in Starsky's attempt to rescue him, he accidentally shoots Captain Doby in the shoulder. Hutch covers for Starsky telling Doby that Reese shot him. In the ensuing confusion, Feldman and his girlfriend Kitty (Juliette Lewis) escape outside with the money that was used to buy the drugs. Starsky and Hutch pursue them in a car chase over a golf course.
Feldman and Kitty then take off in his yacht hoping to escape the partners. Not far behind, Starsky and Hutch decide the only way to catch Feldman is to land Starsky's car onto Feldman's yacht, which Starsky is fearful to do. Starsky gets the car up to speed on a pier and then hits a ramp, but jumps way off course and misses the yacht. It slams into the sea and sinks as the partners safely escape. However all is not lost; Huggy, who was hiding in the yacht, knocks out Feldman, with the golf club that Reese had accused him of losing earlier.
In the last scene, at a party celebrating the capture of Feldman, Starsky is still upset about the loss of his car. Huggy surprises him by buying him another Torino from the original Starsky and Hutch duo (David Soul and Paul Michael Glaser). The two happy cops roll out in their new car answering to the police radio.
|
comedy, murder, bleak, violence, humor, entertaining
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
But what ever the reason, it remained unveiwed.That was 2004 - Xmas 2006 and I get DVD vouchers, so In the January sales off I go to see what I can get, I do quite well, but have £3 remaining, I have 2 or 3 to chose from 2 I have already seen, and Starsky & Hutch.....So I bought it.......yet still it was unwatched until yesterday.......hungover and feeling a little lazy I needed something to pass the time that was easy to watch, funny, and not too taxing.....so on it goes.How surprised was I then when after only a few minutes I was giggling away.
Stiller was actually entertaining and I was enjoying watching him, Mr Wilson was very good and I got the vibe that the characters gelled as the ones in the TV series did.
When they begin investigating a murder that has ties to a prominent millionaire, the best qualities of each just might start influencing the other.Although I always wait to read others' reviews and comments until I've seen a film and written my own review (I do not want to be swayed or influenced in any way by other opinions), I can imagine that quite a few people would not like Starsky and Hutch.
Creating that combination is a difficult feat, but Phillips was largely successful.The combination means that Starsky and Hutch is not aiming to be over-the-top hilarious, and it's also not aiming to be overly consistent with the characters and tone of the original pilot film and series.
The 1970s spoof/homage aspect is far more understated and reverential than you'd normal expect from a Stiller film, but easy to like and understand.Other outstanding supporting roles are played by Vince Vaughn, Snoop Dogg, Will Ferrell and Juliette Lewis, all except Dogg slightly out of character, but just as enjoyable and funny as always, as they're all somewhat faithfully filling traditional 1970s roles.
Grafting their comedy personae onto the Starsky and Hutch characters was more easily done and natural than anyone might have thought, and provides a highly amusing 100 minutes, even if it's a bit of an acquired taste and not likely to be understood quite as well by future generations..
A funny and thoroughly enjoyable spin on the overused cop-buddy formula, "Starsky and Hutch" is one of the most entertaining films of 2004 -- even if it's nothing more than just that.
With a fair share of laugh-out-loud moments, and more than a handful of in-joke references to '70s pop culture (including the original source material: "Starsky and Hutch" the TV show), it also boasts a fine comedic cast with talented performers: Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, Snoop Dogg, Chris Penn, Amy Smart and some uncredited cameos by the likes of Will Ferrell -- and yes, even the original Starsky and Hutch.
("I get a good vibe from these guys," the younger Hutch exclaims in one of the film's most savory self-referential moments.)The film takes place in Bay City, "sometime during the '70s," when David Starsky (Stiller) -- a by-the-numbers police officer who spends his entire day chasing small-time crooks -- is paired up with a new partner, the reckless Ken "Hutch" Hutchinson (Wilson).
Placed on an assignment involving an alleged drug lord (Vaughn), who has managed to create undetectable cocaine, Starsky and Hutch find themselves in a number of awkward situations: getting a statement by Big Earl (Ferrell), a dragon-obsessed inmate with some major issues; the usual tidbits of information from Huggy Bear (Dogg), a friend and informant of Hutch's; and of course the mandatory romantic subplot involving a pair of sexy cheerleaders.The contrast of Starsky and Hutch is handled deliberately blunt: this comedy isn't as much a victim of the cop-buddy genre as it is a dead-on spoof.
However, he's just using his badge as an excuse to commit crimes -- and get away with them.I asked myself if it was as possible as the film implies, but then the Constantly Yelling and/or Upset Police Captain (another clichéd role that happens to show up in all these movies) tells Hutch that it's the seventh time he's been arrested for robbery, and Hutch tells him that he's undercover -- trying to work his way in through the criminal underground.
The joke, of course, is that we find out the robberies are all totally unrelated and bear no significant to a criminal underground of any kind.There are a few sequences in the movie that deserve a description of their own, such as when Starsky accidentally consumes a large amount of cocaine and works himself into an ultimate-high-frenzy, battling on the disco floor of a nightclub for short-lived glory.
After his opponent is unjustly awarded the gold medal, Starsky pulls out his gun and from there on the entire situation escalates into one of those scenes that -- like parts of Stiller's "There's Something About Mary" -- last on in viewers' minds even after the film itself fades away.
Most of these films always include a sequence where the police captain will suspend the movie's protagonist and frown on him, saying something cheesy like, "Your father, who spent years on the force and was one of the highest-decorated officers, would be ashamed of you!" Instead, the police captain tells Starsky that his mother would be ashamed of him.
And then after being suspended, Starsky takes a visit to his mother's grave and places a glazed donut on the headstone (she was the highly decorated cop in the family, apparently).The film was directed by Todd Phillips, whose resume includes such raunchy efforts at comedy as the crude-but-enjoyable "Road Trip" and surprising "Old School." The latter film starred Ferrell and Vaughn and contained a cameo appearance by Snoop Dogg (as himself), so obviously these guys enjoyed working with Phillips and, I'm sure, agreed to contribute to this movie just for the heck of it.The result is a very goofy, entertaining summer flick that never tries too hard and invariably never falls too hard, either.
Of all the recent buddy-cop movies, released lately this is one of the better ones.Biggest strength of this movie is in the two main characters played by Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson.
The movie is filled with many other great comical talented actors such as; Vince Vaughn as the main villain, Snoop Dogg and Will Ferrell and some smaller roles for famous names such as; Chris Penn, Carmen Electra, Amy Smart and Juliette Lewis.But the movie is more then just an ordinary buddy-movie, it also is a priceless parody of '70's TV-shows in general.
I think Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller have great on screen chemistry and I really liked the last film they did together in 2001 entitled Zoolander.
Ben Stiller & Owen Wilson make a great comedic team so when I heard about Starsky and Hutch starring both of them I was hooked immediately.
Well the movie started about 5 minutes after I got in the theater.Starsky and Hutch as I'm sure everyone knows is based on a buddy cop TV show from the 70s.
Starsky (Ben Stiller) & Hutch (Owen Wilson) are partners who are determined to bust their biggest case ever.
Reese Feldman (Vince Vaughn) is a drug dealer who is planning one huge drug deal but soon Starsky and Hutch are right on his trail thanks to the help of their pal Huggy Bear (Snoop Dog).
A lot of funny mishaps, spoofs of the original TV series, and overall a very enjoyable film ensue.Ben Stiller & Owen Wilson like I mentioned above are a match made in heaven.
Even the original Starsky & Hutch, Paul Michael Glaser & David Soul make an amusing cameo appearance.This film was written by three people and all of which I wouldn't think could create such a funny and interesting script like this.
Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson are the perfect comedy team in this funny and interesting buddy cop film.
Based on the popular 70's action show of the same name, Starsky and Hutch re teams Detectives David Starsky and Ken Hutchinson, this time played by long-time buddies Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson.
The two main characters are ably aided and abetted by Huggy Bear (Snoop Dogg) and, although there is a big-drugs-bust plotline, the movie's main intention seems to be to make a homage to the style and clichés of certain 70s filmmaking (and the original TV show); car chases, for instance, focus on tongue-in-cheek action rather than adrenalin, and the cops' love of empty-headed curvaceous women combined with a homophobia towards each other and gay men is portrayed laughingly as an echo of the attitudes of the times rather than appealing to those sentiments.
Stiller played the "by the book", straight and narrow cop, Starsky, and Owen Wilson played the loose, largely irresponsible, and borderline criminal, Hutch.I never saw the show to have as a reference which I think may have helped me enjoy the movie more.
To complement Stiller's Starsky, we have the equally dreadful, unfunny and charisma-free Owen Wilson as Hutch, whose smugness, cheesy grin and awful voice has allowed him to take over the mantle from Jim Carrey as Hollywood's most annoying (and unfunny) comedy actor.
But while his mom stuck with the same partner throughout her entire career, due to his extremely zealous brand of police work, Starksy burns through partners faster than his beloved Gran Torino goes through spark plugs.Detective Ken "Hutch" Hutchinson (Owen Wilson) is having career issues of his own -- he's a good cop, but his laid back personality and desire for a quick buck don't always get the job done.
Was this supposed to be an action movie or a comedy, cause it failed on both counts,They took 2 super cool cops from the 70's and turned them into idiots, It took all my will power to actually sit through this movie.When I got out and was asked to rate this film by a friend I tried to find some positive points, I found 2, Snoop dogg was actually ok as Huggy Bear and it was not as bad as Cat in the Hat.Its such a pity cause I really wanted to like this film.
Todd Phillips should have known better, seeing that he worked on the show in the 70's.The best bit in the whole movie for me is the cameo appearance at the end by Glaser and Soul.
Ben Stiller does commendable work, Snoop Dogg is good as Huggy Bear, but Owen Wilson is just winging it.
Continuing the recent success of comedies starring Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughan et al "Starsky and Hutch" is an immensely creative, though sometimes annoying, comedy about two cops with totally opposite characters after a rich drug dealer.
Unlike the revival of "Charlie's Angels" in films which pay homage to a popular television series of the 1970s, "Starsky and Hutch" seeks to parody the original, lively buddy cop show, which featured David Soul and Paul Michael Glaser.
But this film was not funny, and it underscored the limitations of Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller as actors.
The film would have been more successful if the writers and producers would have simply trusted the original material and brought back Soul and Glaser to reprise the roles, instead of casting Wilson and Stiller..
The whole movie is just Ben Stiller BS that would be expected as a bridge between scenes but the plot scenes are the bridge between these boring and un funny "comedy" bits.
5/10 cause I expected more from the cast, Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, Snoop...come on guys.
As Hollywood continues to prove that it has no new original ideas in their arsenal, along comes another remake of a popular 70's television program to the 21st century big screen.On the tails of the critically lauded, but relative box office successes of the Charlie's Angels and S.W.A.T. franchises, comes Warner Brother's new comedy, Starsky & Hutch.
Starsky (Stiller) is a play by the rules cop who gets paired with Hutch (Wilson), an officer not above a few illegal ventures on the side.
Stiller and Wilson do seem to have good chemistry together (and so they should having starred together no less than 3 times in the past 5 years), and Snoop Doggy Dog as Huggy Bear, hits all the right notes playing his character as a farce of the Antonio Fargas television persona.
Finally got a chance to catch up with the recent Starsky and Hutch film today on cable TV - oh dear.Okay I knew that it was going to be a spoof on the original series, I just didn't expect it to be so unfunny.
Todd Phillips, born 1970 therefore too young to appreciate Starsky and Hutch first time around, obviously didn't do his homework properly, so the film has many missed opportunities.Stiller seems to have done his homework on Paul Michael Glaser's characterisation of Dave Starsky, but Wilson just didn't bother, dumping David Soul's original interpretation entirely, for his own bland version.If you're going to come with up with a different version of a well-loved character, at least do what Snoop Dogg did with the Huggy Bear role, make it fresh and fun to watch!
Even the original series had more moments to smile at than this lamentable effort.I've given it 2/10, instead of the zero it truly deserves, only for Snoop Dogg's Huggy Bear and the nostalgic flashbacks seeing that red torino with the white stripes back on the road.Paul Michael Glaser and David Soul, don't worry about these pitiful pretenders, you two will always be - the real Starsky and Hutch!.
It was when the original Starsky and Hutch showed up.I think the problem for me was the direction this movie took.
But the commercials for this film made me laugh, and I love the chemistry between Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson; their bit at the Oscars last week cracked me up.
So any time you mix a Will Ferrell, Ben Stiller, Todd Phillips, Wilson brother, and/or Vince Vaughn these days...
Let's get one thing out of the way; 'Starsky & Hutch' is an entertaining movie, boasting two very funny performances by the leads, and if you're unfamiliar with the original television show it should provide some fun.
Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson star in another lame comedy, the previous being "zoolander." the duo have done 7 movies together.
the makers of the film went to the trouble of getting the period detail right such as the car the funky soundtrack and theleering at women but the characters are allwrong ben stiller and owen wilson may look the part but there any resemblance ends.
Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller play the titular character and although not over the top funny they are a good mixture of drama and goofy fun.
Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller play the titular character and although not over the top funny they are a good mixture of drama and goofy fun.
Star-sky and hutch is a remake of the 7os cop show that ran from 1075 - 1979 and starred Paul Micheal Glaser and David soul hear it stars Ben stiller and Owen Wilson is the two cops and to be honest its neither a great nor abysmal film just plain average to be honest .
Overall star-sky and hutch is a pleasant way to spend 95 mins Ben stiller and Owen Wilson are fine as the two cops with stiller being the highlight of the film he exhibits all of g lasers character traits and has all his mannerisms and the look of him you feel that it is someone who could be called Paul Glaser while Owen Wilson just completely through the motions and doing the same Schick he does all time completely ruining a role made by David soul ..
I think that it is a problem that Starsky and Hutch appeared as the same character as an original television series.
I mean, Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson were great in the parts, as for Snoop Dogg, he was brilliant.
Ben Stiller does a funny and classy job as Starsky and Owen Wilson is great as Hutch.
Back in the days when he did sketch comedy on the "The Ben Stiller Show" on HBO shows that he has much better comedic style when he's losing himself in the role rather than trying to be as funny as people think he is.Vince Vaughn probably does the best turn in the movie and Snoop Dogg deserves some respect for what is probably the funniest role, Huggy Bear.
This is now the second time I have seen Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson together and unfortunately, it just doesn't seem to work out.
It was more a spoof or a tongue-in-cheek movie.Sure the actor that plays Starsky resembles him quite a bit, but that's as close to the original series as it gets.Both my husband and I are big Starsky (Paul Michael Glaser) & Hutch (David Soul) fans, but this movie is the biggest disappointment that we've ever seen.At least the Charlie's Angels movies were entertaining.
Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson are so much fun to watch.
At times I was watching Starsky (Ben Stiller) and thinking Zoolander.
The original series that played for five seasons in the late 1970s is just a very thin candy shell of itself as the drama and action of the television program is replaced with moronic comedy and the film-chewing antics of the always annoying tandem of Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson (in the titled roles).
However i thought the film was fantastic, it was cheesy but it was funny all the way through!Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson made a fantastic team and made the, not so great, storyline insignificant compared to the funny scenes and the characters.
This movie, although it didn't resemble the original enough for me (Starsky and Hutch didn't act like these new guys).
If this happens a few times I will then start the movie at the beginning and give it a good viewing.But this never happened with "Starsky and Hutch".
|
tt0822858
|
Sublime
|
The plot centers on the protagonist George Grieves (Cavanagh), who checks into the Mt. Abaddon Hospital for a routine procedure only to find horrors await him. Awakening from what was supposedly a simple colonoscopy, Grieves is told by hospital staff that due to confusion arising from similar patient names he was mistakenly given a sympathectomy to cure sweaty palms.
As the days tick by Mr. Grieves' post-operative experiences grow ever more bizarre until he finally realizes that he is caught inside a nightmare of his own creation and seems unable to escape or awaken back in the real world. He understands that something has gone wrong in his post-operative recovery which is keeping him trapped in this netherworld of manifestations of all of his worst fears but he understands neither what the problem is nor what, if anything, he can do to awaken from it.
We eventually see his condition from his family's perspective and it appears hopeless. The doctors explain that there was a complication during the colonoscopy which created an air bubble in his bloodstream that eventually reached his brain and caused so much damage that he ended up in an apparently permanent vegetative state. He's been dead to the outside world for 10 months and his family is being pressured to remove all artificial means of life support.
Meanwhile, back inside his own mind, George Grieves is in a desperate losing battle with his own manifested fears and decides that the only way out is to commit suicide in this dream-like state hoping that it will cause his real body to expire and free him from the interminable torment he's had to endure. He manages to leap from a 7th-floor window onto the concrete below, and the final shot is of his real-world body lying in an empty hospital room where it flatlines, closing its eyelids in physical death.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
I will admit that I did not "get" a lot of what is allegedly the films symbolism and frankly the point of the movie really didn't hit me (I kept rewinding it right before the end to hear what Jenny and George were talking about because it seemed to be related to what he does) but to me, it didn't really matter.
I initially got this movie not really expecting that great of a film; like most of you who've seen it I found it at at a video store.
The movie itself is VERY slow, so for some people who haven't got the patience to watch the movie until its ending, and are expecting the more traditional hack and slash out of this horror movie, may be disappointed.The movie is full of metaphor, which is one of the things that I *really* liked about it.
I found this movie surprisingly good and I am quite sure it is going to be seen as such for anyone with a taste for oniric quasi-Kafkian moods (understandably deemed "boring" by the usual cheap-thrill lovers) .
It is a well written dark psychological piece that apparently asks too much from the typical movie consumer (i.e. following the thematic dialogs and references in the flash-backs).I also didn't see any problems with the acting or direction -- I generally liked the whole package.
Maybe the people giving bad reviews didn't watch the film all the way through.
The answer is definitely worth the build-up.Its true its fairly slow moving to start with but the whole way through it begs for a conclusion which makes it all the more rewarding when one finally comes.If you're interested in human psychology, you will like this film..
Nevertheless I found this film generally good and interesting.A middle age successful man is shortly to go into hospital for a routine procedure but is troubled by a recurring dream.
Are these events really happening or as I interpret it: is he simply going through a nightmare and experiencing his fears etc?All the performers are excellent, the design of the film is first rate and the music is often brilliant.
The story will keep you wondering until the end on what exactly is happening in this film, and when the end does come the concept is acceptable but the events that took place during the ending seemed a little odd.Let's also bear in mind that this is Tony Krantz first film as Director, and if you ask me he pulled it off well, the direction and shots where well laid out, the editing had some creative transitions between flashbacks, and the story was quite original in a day of cheesy slasher flicks.
Check it out, and don't let it fool you from the start into thinking its going to be like so many other weak Hospital Horror films as it builds its environment.
Complete waste of two hours of my time.I was turned on to the concept feel of the movie.
the horror is underlying in the extremely good acting a nd performances of the actor, the direction is magnificent, this film is really well thought and planned that is almost unreal as realistic you can get.
After watching this movie, I wanted the wasted hour and a half of my life back.
Yes, there are elements of other horror movies as the comments in the first thread describe, but they are only amusing references of better film efforts.
It's not thought-provoking except when you think, "Why am I watching this movie?" There is no character development.
no time to look up, i thought this movie had to be top ten psychological horror ever.
after that i was on edge by the TV the whole time unwilling to move or miss another second, i don't think i'll go recommending it to any of my people because they probably don't appreciate beautiful movies like this.
So often directors leave movies too open or end them to quick making me feel that I've wasted what could have been 2 epic hours of my life but 6 years after watching this movie I am still excited and still have discussions about possibilities and meanings.
It's basically a horror story, but on a sublime level, as the title would suggest.It's about a guy that goes to a hospital for a standard simple procedure, but it ends up all but standard.It doesn't raise a lot of big questions, but it definitely asks a few important ones, and in the process makes you take a good look at your own life.The cinematography and acting is top notch all along.
But that is the only flaw i immediately saw, and come to think of it, it might even have been deliberately.It jumps a lot in the time-line, and it sort of reminded me of Memento, another absolutely great movie.The pace is a bit slow, so it might not appeal to action buffs.
No, seriously.With competent acting, not much seemed to happen as the hot nurse - and she was hot - proved not enough to deter my growing resentment as the badly handled mystery eventually began to unfold, boring my to tears in the process, before things turned incredibly nasty towards the end.I reckon that somebody watched Miike's Audition and thought, "Hey, let's do an ending like that," failing to realise how out of place it was given the lack of warning in the set-up.It's difficult to go into any further details about this bag of crap without somebody sticking a SPOILER cuss on this opinion (since I don't actually write "reviews"), but the only thing you really need to know before watching this film is this: AVOID.Or, you can listen to your gut after the terrible opening and awful dialogue of the following bedroom scene, and turn it off not even 5 minutes in.Believe me, you'd only be sparing yourself from sitting through a very bad film..
I thought this was a really thought provoking movie from the start, and it only get's better as the movie slowly moves on,, A man who just reached his 40th birthday,, has everything going for him,, job , health , family,, then he goes to a hospital for a "routine" surgery,, somehow through utter incompetence his chart got switched and he get's an unnecessary prodecure that of course he does not need..
But now he must have an operation which requires a short stay in hospital, and George's suppressed fears and phobias slowly bubble to the surface, especially after he accidentally undergoes the wrong medical procedure.Sublime is a slow burning tale of paranoia and psychological horror that gradually builds in intensity, before fizzling out shortly before the end thanks to a disappointing denouement that isn't quite as clever or as original as it likes to think it is.Throughout the movie, director Tony Krantz carefully builds an atmosphere of unease and develops a nightmarish quality that inexorably draws the viewer though the bizarre happenings.
What he discovers only disturbs him further.Up until the very end, the film is pretty good: the acting is solid, the direction innovative (with good use of inter-cutting between two time-lines), the plot turns fairly unexpected, and there are some nasty moments to make you cringe.
Unfortunately, what Krantz delivers is a rather obvious 'twist' ending that is not totally unlike Adrian Lyne's superior chiller Jacob's Ladder.Sublime therefore suffers somewhat in the originality stakes, but is still worth a watch if freaky tales are your cup of tea (and particularly if you like them loaded with symbolism and hidden meaning)..
I have watched this movie and I think i wasted my precious time of life by watching this movie actually this movie is for intellactual peoples or for doctors as it was very very hard to understand what is going on in this movie.
I didn't find any interesting thing in it and just asked my self why you watched this movie.I highly recommend not to watch this movie if you are not a doctor or intellactual..I feel story writer or director should explain their viewers about this movie before so they can understand and enjoy it.
There is no way that this movie is a horror film.
Mandingo becomes George's biggest nightmare in him thinking that his dislike of whites or WASPS, like himself, will come out in the open when he's alone with him in his hospital room.As George's mind becomes more and more paranoid it's his other major fear, besides Mandingo, of being misdiagnosed which in that case, by being true, turns out to be well founded.
It's that infection that eventually had George's leg become gangrenous and later be amputated!The way things are being played out in George's heavily sedated and confused mind he as well as us in the audience don't quite know what's real or unreal in the movie.
It's that change as well as everything else that happens after that which keeps you guessing to what's really going on in the movie.We finally get to know what's the cause of George's strange and disturbing hallucinations at the very end of the film that ends up destroying both his mind and body.
I don't see anyone complaining about the time it takes to write a movie review, or queueing in the bank, or stuck in traffic.It is a shame that people are not willing to experiment different approaches to art (and in life!).
Anyone with an IQ over 80 will know the ending, after 30 seconds of watching this movie.The story is at most poor.
and that done badly and mixed with a bit of obvious racism.The IMDb people should not force me to write 10 lines of text for a movie that only deserves one: DO NOT WATCH THIS!I mean, how can one empathize with the situation when everything is presented from the standpoint of a man on anesthetics?!
The presentation of the film as a "horror movie" is completely inaccurate; any run of the mill slasher flick has a much better plot.
There is only one word to describe this mess of a film: dumb.I rented 'Sublime' because I mistakenly expected a sophisticated horror movie.
But it would still suck big time.A movie for and of people who fear 40 more than death, a long, hard and mind-numbingly boring view into the self-absorbed narcissistic mind one imagines is the result of generations of Hollywood inbreeding.Multi-phobic of all ages might find pieces of mild entertainment in this mess.
Well, I can't say I know for sure what the writer of the movie intended to convey but I'm happy to be left with my own interpretation i.e. the character George(performed very well by Tom Cavanagh) had lot of fears which he imagined to be real(the shelves full of files, dark corridor, the black nurse etc) and finally he found a way to tackle his fears once & for all.
When I read the plot before watching Sublime I was wondering how it could possibly make up a horror film.
Director Krantz would have done well to give more screen time to this actor.Another special mention must go to Katherine Cunningham-Eves as the beautiful nurse, Zoe. You'd think she would be hired just for her looks but Cunningham-Eves is actually pretty good.
In fact, much better than the weak links, which to me were the wife and the unidimensional and uninspired performance of Lawrence Hilton-Jacobs as the nightmarish Mandingo.The movie has a basic plot but is spiced by interesting concepts and a good music score to support decent camera work.Recommended for a rental if you like some of the movies referenced above..
My good notes which my stars are based for this film is that the movie continuously portraits the clean, dry as disturbing air from the hospital.
Thats actually a good reason to watch the film who gives the real senses (not like a chaotic set of E.R. or niptunik would give).
The film fails and the is actually not a big point course of the intended POVperspective from George; in the originality that gives to much references from more complex movies as 'jacob ladder' or 'the others'.
it is definitely an has-been-already-shot-movie but a believable character set and the narcotic deep hospital fear gives the rural of this 'horror' a good night-movie..
I thought this movie was gonna suck real bad, but I started to get into it just when it got too weird and touching towards the end.
This is probably the first Tom Cavanagh movie I've watched and it is not a good start, and also the Warner Brothers horror studio Raw Feed really sucks, 2001 Maniacs was kind of good, but Rest Stop and Sublime were their two first handmade films and I thought they were both horrible.
The movie did have good acting and was kind of interesting towards the end, but not even worth a rental.
That wouldn't have been a particularly bad resolution if the elements of his dream related in some meaningful way to what we know happened in his reality, but they don't.There are plenty of interesting ideas thrown into the mix in the first half of the movie - in between some aggressively blunt symbolism - which are never really addressed in any real fashion.
Add this to the forced racial jokes made by the Iranian doctor at the beginning of the movie and you can almost instantly tell what film takes about an hour too long to 'reveal' what we already know - that Mandingo is merely a manifestation of George's racist fears.
Since this aspect of his character has no relation to anything else in the plot, but Mandingo represents the sole 'villain' and the primary horror aspect of the whole movie, this whole element feels pretentious and overwrought.The characters are also left without any development - George's (apparently unjustified) fear of betrayal by his wife, his (lack of a) relationship with his brother, et cetera, are all brought up and then ignored.And finally the movie closes with George's realization that he's in a dream and decision to kill himself to end the dream and his own, real life.
In the end, this movie has nothing to say about the topics it brings up.Finally if you watch it from the "George as America" perspective that the director apparently intended, as per the special features on the disc, it's downright terrible.From that perspective, the film appears to be saying that America is victimized by black people, America is victimized by Iran, but luckily Iran is incompetent, and hot nurses love America...
This total lack of control over his own symbolism makes the message unintelligible without a running commentary, and therefore a complete failure.So we're left with a pseudo-deep movie (read: BS philosophy meets jumbled politics) that fails on every level of viewing except the least ambitious - a hospital thriller - where it manages to be "okay."Do I even need to say: Not Recommended?.
And the worst is that the movie makes no effort to show that this man in particular is racist, etc (as a matter of fact one of his close friends at the birthday party is black, so where does that leave us??) you are just supposed to know that he is a white male therefore afraid of lesbians and black people.
Reminiscent of a good TWILIGHT ZONE by way of David Lynch (it's interesting to note that director Tony Krantz produced MULHOLLAND DRIVE), this deceptively "simple" horror story manages to infuse a rich array of religious symbolism, political allegory, and moral quandaries, all without detracting from the gruesome matters at hand.In a nut shell, SUBLIME tells the story of George Grieves (Tom Cavanaugh), who checks into a hospital on his 40th birthday for a routine Colonoscopy.
This film was long, labored and pointless to the point of being inane.To spare you watching this - the story goes like this: 40 yr old white family man is admitted to hospital for routine colon inspection.
(At times, the movie begins to look like torture porn.) Who are we to think George deserves getting it in the thorax just because he thinks he can tell what his wife is feeling just by looking in her eyes.
while not a horror flick, nor an entertaining movie to watch, it has a statement and most of all it has meaning.
Not a horror movie, but worth watching....
I loved the movie rest stop which was put out by Raw Feed so I had a feeling I would like sublime as well.I was right!Besides it's catchy title I found that this movie really kept me interested.I didn't find it long or boring like some thought,but then I enjoy movies like this that start out slow and then build up.I don't get why so many people hated this film.It had some nice imagery and good effects without being too graphic and it had interesting symbolism.The movie was well acted by everyone.Thomas Cavanagh gave an excellent,convincing performance of an ordinary(but rich)family man who's fears were realized after a medical procedure went very wrong because of a mix up.I thought the black male nurse Mandingdong was a bit over the top .I didn't think George deserved to be verbally attacked so harshly and implied he's a racist.It nearly changed my opinion of the movie because I found the George character likable and not too unlike people I know.I looked past that part afterwards.
This movie did get me thinking about hospitals and how scary it would be if something like that actually happened.I have heard of mix-ups and patients getting the wrong medication and dying.There is fear before going under for an operation.
I do see why he lacked this; you wanted the white viewer identify, you guessed this fears would be the viewers fears (as most people who'll watch this movie are white and middle class) and would in turn make the viewer think about this.
As I started watching this film, it seemed like a cool movie.
|
tt2398231
|
The Homesman
|
Mary Bee Cuddy (Hilary Swank) is a 31-year-old spinster from New York, a former teacher who journeyed to the Midwest for more opportunity. She is an active member of the small farming community of Loup in the Nebraska Territory, and has significant financial prospects and sizable land ownership. She seems strong and independent, but suffers from depression and isolation. She makes dinner for her neighbor Bob Giffen (Evan Jones), and sings to him, but when she proposes he turns her down saying she is "plain, and too bossy"; he then leaves to find a wife back east.
After a harsh winter, three women from the community begin to show signs of mental instability due to the hardships they have faced. Arabella Sours (Grace Gummer) has lost three children to diphtheria, Theoline Belknap (Miranda Otto) kills her own child after a poor harvest puts her family at risk of starvation, and Gro Svendsen (Sonja Richter), a Danish immigrant, is shown to be in an abusive relationship with her husband and suffers a breakdown after her mother dies. Reverend Dowd (John Lithgow) calls upon one of their husbands to escort the women eastward to a church in Hebron, Iowa that cares for the mentally ill. One of the men refuses to participate in the lottery to determine who will escort the women; Cuddy takes his place, and the lot falls on her.
While preparing for her journey, Cuddy encounters George Briggs (Tommy Lee Jones), a claim jumper, who is about to be lynched for stealing Bob Giffen's land while he is away. Briggs begs Cuddy for help. Scared to make the trip alone, she frees him, and in return demands his help escorting the women. He immediately casts doubt on the job and insists he be free to abandon her at any time. To persuade him, Cuddy tells him that she is mailing $300 to await his arrival in Iowa, but secretly keeps it with her.
Briggs's experience comes in handy when the group crosses paths with hostile natives, and he is able to bribe them by giving up one of their horses. Later, when Arabella is kidnapped by a freighter (Tim Blake Nelson), Briggs gives chase, and the two men have a violent scuffle before Arabella kills her kidnapper. Eventually the caravan comes across the grave of an eleven-year-old girl that has been desecrated by Indians, and Cuddy insists they stop and restore it. Briggs vows to push on, so Cuddy stays behind and agrees to catch up with him. After restoring the grave, Cuddy sets out on horseback. However, she loses her way, and after riding all night discovers that she has gone in a circle and her horse has led her back to the grave.
Finally catching up to Briggs after another night of riding, Cuddy, distraught over having to wander the desert, suggests they marry. Briggs, like all the previous men, rejects Cuddy saying he "aint no farmer", and is only along for the promised reward. Later that night, a naked Cuddy propositions him, and despite his initial protestations, the two have sex. Rising late the next morning, Briggs finds that Cuddy has hanged herself. Briggs chastises Sours, Belknapp, and Svendsen, blaming their illness for Cuddy's death as he buries her body. He discovers that she had kept the $300 with her the entire time, and so takes a horse and abandons the three women. However, the trio surprisingly follow him on foot, and Arabella almost drowns while chasing him across a river. Briggs saves her and decides to continue taking them to Iowa instead.
Briggs seeks food and shelter at an empty hotel belonging to Aloysius Duffy (James Spader), who informs him that they have no rooms available for the caravan as a group of 16 investors are expected shortly, and the women would sour the establishment. Briggs lashes out at Duffy, whose men pull out guns of their own, resulting in a brief stand-off. Briggs leaves, but returns that night alone on horseback. He sends away the young cook, instructing her not to look back, and sets the hotel on fire, and shoots Duffy in the foot. Briggs takes a roasted pig to feed himself and the women and exits the hotel, leaving all inside to be burned alive.
Briggs reaches Hebron, passing the women into the care of Altha Carter (Meryl Streep), the wife of the church's reverend. He informs her of Cuddy's death but does not disclose the true cause. Guilty about having rejected Mary Bee's proposal, he has a wooden slab engraved with her name and plans to mark her grave with it. He gives a pair of shoes to Tabitha Hutchinson (Hailee Steinfeld), a hard-working young maid at the hotel he is staying at, and then proposes to her, after advising her not to marry some young man going west, but to stay in town. She replies by telling him "maybe". He then boards the river ferry heading back west, and starts to sing a rowdy song, "Weevily Wheat", with two musicians onboard. When asked to stop, he chastises the people at the pier for wanting to go to the western territories, calling the west a "goddamn devil". Briggs returns to singing, and as the ferry departs, one of the bargemen kicks Mary Bee's marker into the river.
|
depressing, murder, bleak, plot twist, tragedy, revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
In the bad old days of the pioneers in the Wild West, Mary Bee Cuddy (Hilary Swank) steps in when three women drift into various states of madness and need to be transported across the country to be cared for properly.
It is a story of hope and love, not the romantic kind, but real love for one's fellow human being, regardless of whether they can, or will, reciprocate.Shot beautifully with sprawling, dusty vistas that warm the heart and prickle the nape, the backdrop is a vast canvas of character and mystery upon which splashes of colour are smeared in the shape of wandering, human dangers.Though they say little, the trio of women (Grace Gummer, Miranda Otto and Sonja Richter) are far more than peripheral characters or the MacGuffin; they are the substance that binds The Homesman and the reason for the drama, gentle though it is.
It has a brilliant sense of time and place that tells the life stories of dozens of hard-enduring, long-suffering "forgotten men" -- the women no less than the men.The key heartbreaker is Hilary Swank's character of Miss Mary Bee Cuddy.
The Homesman, about a 31 year old (un-married/childless) woman (Hilary Swank) who takes up the challenge of bringing three crazed women across the Nebraska plains over five weeks with the help of a deserter-drifter left for dead (Jones), is in some ways meant to be a real Feminist Western (with a capital 'F'), and not in the way that a silly work like The Quick and the Dead was with Sharon Stone.
But it's a combination of things it's about, and emotionally the film does work quite well, in particular in the relationship that unfolds between the two leads.If you're curious to see a western that has the love of the plains of the West visually speaking ala Ford, but has the dark contours of someone like Mann - and added to that those super dirty production designs and character realizations from Spaghetti Westerns - this might be it, at least up to a point.
That might be fine in the book - or perhaps more was explained in other ways - but it still doesn't work, and what Jones goes for in awe-inspiring shots he leaves behind with some muddled story beats.Nevertheless, The Homesman is a good Western, a solid western digging into the roots of the genre and mixing the unsavory and horrifying (not like a horror movie, just some repellant images at times, but for a point), though whether one will want to return to it like other, better Westerns is another story.
'THE HOMESMAN': Four and a Half Stars (Out of Five)Tommy Lee Jones directed, co-wrote and stars in this western/drama film (set in the 1850s midwest) about a 'spinster' and a 'drifter' transporting three women, driven mad by the hardships of the time, across the country.
It's surprisingly dark, and extremely disturbing, but I enjoyed it due to it's strong character development, outstanding performances and odd beauty.Swank plays Mary Bee Cuddy, a strong and independent 31-year-old woman from New York.
She desperately wants to find a husband but can't, due to men finding her too plain looking (I don't think Swank looks bad at all in this movie, considering the film's time and setting).
The two make the long journey together and form an odd bond.The movie has been called a 'feminist western', by many, and I'd definitely agree it's a strong female character study, about the hardships women faced at the time.
Together, they gather the three ladies and escort them from Nebraska homes across the dangerous Midwest prairie to a safe haven in Iowa.Hilary Swank is an actress who had already won a couple of Oscars for playing strong women who had taken on masculine roles in life -- Brandon Teena in "Boys Don't Cry" and Maggie Fitzgerald in "Million Dollar Baby".
The movie was not the same when her character was not there.Tommy Lee Jones is one actor who, as of late, had seemingly been confined to playing curmudgeonly and cantankerous old men, and his Briggs here is not any different.
The Homesman, written and directed and starring Tommy Lee Jones tells the story of Mary Bee Cuddy (Hilary Swank) a spinster who takes on the responsibility of bringing three insane women to Iowa where they can be taken care of.She saves or spares the life of George Briggs (Tommy Lee Jones) and enlists him on her arduous five week journey.When you see Hilary Swank and Tommy Lee Jones, you know the acting is going to be stellar.
This above average film concerns about a pious , independent-minded woman called Mary Bee Cuddy (Hilary Swank) is assigned by the village priest (John Lightow) to carry three women (Miranda Otto , Sonja Richter , and Grace Gummer , Meryl's Streep daughter) who have been driven mad by pioneer life .
Intelligent and thoughtful screenplay by Kieran Fitzgerald , Wesley Oliver and the same Tommy Lee Jones , based on the novel by Glendon Swarthout that was published in 1988 ; in fact , Paul Newman owned the rights for a time, and wanted to direct the film himself , after a number of scripts, he gave up .
Much of the movie was shot on Tommy Lee Jones's own ranch .The film is a nice co-production , being produced , among others , by the great producer and director , the French Luc Besson .
I enjoy a good western but it would not be fair to this Tommy Lee Jones production to classify it as such without emphasizing the film is more than just a wagon trail journey of two unlikely characters across the rough and unforgiving western terrain.
No, it is the story of two unlikely characters, a single and strong willed farmer named Mary Bee Cuddy played by Hilary Swank and a thieving drifter named George Briggs played by Tommy Lee Jones who agree to transport three women by wagon with real psychiatric (madness) problems from Nebraska to Idaho.There have been hundreds of relatively good westerns produced in the past half century where the hero and heroine remain strong and stoic whilst riding through the barren lands their suits and dresses remain pressed and in pristine condition while their hair is coiffed perfectly, and miraculously the heroine's makeup never dries, cracks or runs.
So Mary Bee Cuddy agrees to make the arduous journey across the western plains maybe in the hope of finding a suitor in Idaho as she has run out of potential suitors in Nebraska and seems to be losing hope in raising a family on her own farm in Nebraska.As Mary Bee Cuddy commences her journey she comes across someone even more homely and desperate than herself in the name of aging drifter George Briggs who is within minutes of losing his life at the end of a rope for illegally claiming mining rights to another persons staked property.
He must first agree to travel across the western plains of Nebraska to assist Mary Bee Cuddy in the transportation of three insane women to a church in Idaho where they will receive the care and attention they will require to survive.And so the two hardened caretakers and their three insane passengers set out on their journey which I found to be not like any other western I had previously seen.
Some people may not be happy with the last 30 minutes of this feature film, but this is actually where writer/actor/director Tommy Lee Jones hooked me with what I felt was a good feature film that ended strongly.There are numerous cameos throughout the film including standout performances by Tim Blake Nelson as a lonesome cowboy, John Lithgow as Reverend Dowd, and Jesse Plemons as a derelict husband to one of the insane women.
Look for mother Meryl Streep in Idaho as the Reverends wife Altha Carter who enjoys sharing the screen with her real life daughter Grace Gummer who plays one of the three insane women Arabella Sours.I give the film a good 7 out of 10 rating..
The three women are vividly portrayed by Otto, Gummer and Richter, but this aspect of the film is only a side-bar to the crux of the story.This is of course about Mary Cuddy and George Briggs, a man and woman at total different ends of the spectrum.
In a genre that now sadly remains idle a majority of the time, it's a great joy to see grizzled industry veteran and virtual real life cowboy Tommy Lee Jones tackle Glendon Swarthout's source novel and create one of the most fully formed and interesting Westerns of the modern age, in what is a brutally raw, violently unapologetic and hauntingly beautiful modern day tale of the Wild West unlike any other before it and with a cast of uniformly great acting turns, The Homesman is one of the year's best films regardless of genre.Reigniting an oft far to dormant genre, Tommy Lee Jones has here gone on with the strength he showed as director in The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada and created a world set in the west that seemingly takes its cues from the novels of Cormac McCarthy and the visuals of a Coen Brothers journey and moulds it into a story that is an original and intriguing take of life in the harsh confines of the west.
Whether it be the solemn sight of washing clothes in the open plains of the frontier, a particularly large homestead fire or a raft of wince inducing moments involving the 3 tormented women at the centre of this journey, The Homesman is filled to the brim with outstanding movie making moments that are highlighted even more so due to a surrounding of multilayered characters and fine acting turns.Once more proving to the industry and we the audience members that she is one of the best actresses in the business, Hilary Swank delivers another award worthy turn as hardened city girl turned farmer Mary Bee Buddy who is the heart and soul of this tale.
These two leads are fantastically supported by all who appear throughout The Homesman's journey, from all three actresses locked away in the back of the wagon, brief appearances from the likes of Tim Blake Nelson, Jesse Plemons or James Spader, the ensemble of the picture are all universally great.Not a flawless film by any stretch of the imagination, The Homesman is however without doubt an affecting and moving motion picture that tells a story of heartbreak, love, loss and all things in between in the now underused setting of the Wild West that proves to be one of the year's most hauntingly realistic tales.
The Homesman represents a comeback of a movie genre, long forgotten by the public and hence the studios (or is it the other way around ??!!) – the western.In this case, out the ordinary duplicity: good guy vs bad guy, we have a story that portrays the difficulties of the relationships of the first settlers of the remote America, namely the women.Tommy Lee Jones and Hilary Swank embark on a perilous journey protecting 3 women gone crazy to a safe destination where they can be treated.On the way we there we are shown the difficulties in the relationship between an unmarried woman with a lone ex-soldier, that just what's to be left alone.It is very interesting to see the changes that traumatizing circumstances make in one's was of thinking.Tommy Lee Jones and Hilary Swank are excellent actors and the movie is also enriched by some all-star cameos by John Lithgow, William Fitchner and Meryl Steep.For those who like westerns it's a worthwhile experience..
Still, I was hopeful and interested on checking this one out, had low expectations, was just hoping it would be worth the watch.The Homesman is Directed by Tommy Lee Jones and it stars Hilary Swank, Tommy Lee Jones, Grace Gummer, Meryl Streep, Miranda Otto, Tim Blake Nelson, Hailee Steinfeld, Sonja Richter, William Fichtner and James Spader.
But it's a surprisingly good little movie and one that deserves an audience.Tommy Lee Jones directed and stars in this film about a drunken roustabout (Jones) who teams up with a prim spinster (Hilary Swank) to transport back to their families three insane women who've been undone by brutal life on the American prairie.
Not only have I been a fan of Tommy Lee Jones since he stuck his head out in "Love Story" and then secured me in "Rolling Thunder", I'm also from San Antonio and appreciate 'real' Texas people in the entertainment industry.A film like this will never be big at the box office these days - but if you're a serious movie lover that respects and enjoys an intelligent, non-CG, all-around-amazingly-well-done story, then THE HOMESMAN is a must-see.
It also has Hilary Swank, Grace Gummer and Meryl Streep (a little) which obviously keeps things at a high-quality level.I actually just want to thank the entire and great cast & crew, and especially Tommy Lee Jones for making this picture.
Director/Star/Screenwriter Tommy Lee Jones takes a major Chance with this Unusual Western Tale about Desperation and Insanity on the Harsh Nebraskan Plains in Americas Formative Years.
Along the way Mary Bee hires George Briggs (Tommy Lee Jones) as a Homesman to help her in the journey.
When Meryl Streep - as great as she is - and as Mrs. Carter, who receives the women in Iowa, talks to Mr. Briggs, I got the impression with her halting dialogue that she was really telling us, "what am I doing here?" Okay, maybe that's just me.The chemistry between Hilary Swank and Tommy Lee Jones was good, but could have had more grit.
To get the answer, you have to watch the movie till the end.The main appeal of this movie is surely the acting of main two characters Hilary Swank and Tommy Lee Jones.
Tommy Lee Jones' latest directorial effort brings the long-missed HilarySwank back to the big screen with a powerfully melancholic performance—a vulnerable single woman by the name of Mary Bee Cuddy (a type of name that's very familiar in the Western genre) who simply can't bear the boredom and desolation of her current life.
With the ceaselessly eerie score and disturbing imagery on display, The Homesman plays a lot like a Western with transparent horror undertones, as strange as that sounds.Whereas Mary Bee Cuddy desperately longs for a companion—for a romantic partner—to accompany her through the remainder of life, Tommy Lee Jones' George Briggs is very much an individual's individual, one who left the US Regiment of Dragoons once upon a time and since then has been doing just fine on his own without any desire for the responsibility and limitation that comes with tying yourself down to other people.
I didn't catch any cliché except for maybe one scene, where Tommy Lee Jones shows you shouldn't turn down a hungry frontiersman and his crazy women ;) The Homesman is no Action Movie.
There was no flow to the film, most of the time I couldn't understand Tommy Lee Jones' accent, and Hilary Swank's character was messed up.
What I imagined was something like what is depicted in this unforgettable film though I doubt I would have been so generous with those who considered themselves men of the cloth.This movie is difficult to watch in places but it appears to be making the case that the prairie made some women mad.
I can believe that women like her Mary Bee Cuddy would have had a strong effect on the community and the men around them but that they often died with barely a footnote.Tommy Lee Jones is always a pleasure to see, but this movie which he directed is a special privilege for us moviegoers.
After he cleans himself up, they set of for there dangerous journey, which has a few bumps on the way and the two main characters, played by Hilary Swank and Tommy Lee Jones, are bonded together in such a difficult situation.
The journey is long, dangerous and ultimately tells us more about these characters than any destination ever would.Mary Bee Cuddy (Hilary Swank) drives this movie forward.
No one could care for these three unfortunate women, so someone has to get them back across the Mississippi River to Iowa.That someone turns out to be Mary Bee Cuddy (Swank), along with George Briggs (Tommy Lee Jones).
However, both Cuddy and Briggs are tough and capable, and they manage to keep going.However, about two-thirds through the movie, Director Jones makes the decision that Actor Jones is the most interesting character in the film, and he concentrates the plot on him.
On the exterior, "The Homesman" appears to be a run-of- the-mill, formulaic western but what lies deeper in the story are unexpected twists, bizarre flares in subplots, and an unusual path the film takes during its final third.Mary Bee Cuddy is a great character, and a big, complicated one at that.
A well-suited performance, for the character played by the director & male lead Tommy Lee Jones - who develops a surprising change of heart over his direction in life.
As always, Hilary Swank and Tommy Lee Jones deliver excellent performances.I would recommend the movie to anyone who wants to watch a Western or a period film with more sense than senseless, firing guns..
Like I said all in all a good film, and definitely one of Tommy's best performance; you can tell he put some time in his character development..
Tommy Lee Jones makes his directorial debut in this western drama set in the 1850s starring Hilary Swank as Mary Bee Cudy, a lonely woman in a rural Nebraska who is tasked to extort three women (played by Grace Gummer, Mirando Otto, and Sonja Richter) who have gone mentally insane, across the country on her wagon.
|
tt0118566
|
Afterglow
|
The lives of two unhappily married couples intertwine in Montreal, Canada. The marriage between Lucky Mann (Nick Nolte), a contractor and his beautiful British wife, former actress Phyllis Hart (Julie Christie), has been in a poor state for years. Their relationship fell apart when Phyllis revealed to Lucky that their daughter Cassie was not his biologically. She had her with an actor while he was in the Army. Cassie ran away to Montreal and they have not spoken in years. The Mann's moved from California to Montreal to find her without success. Phyllis is depressed after learning that her daughter's father, actor Jack Dana, recently died. She begins to question her own mortality and goes to see a doctor for a checkup, and spends her time watching her old films that she starred in with Dana. Phyllis knows Lucky cheats on her with his construction clients, and therefore they have a silent agreement that they will not have sex. Lucky is shown cheating on her with Gloria Marino.
Meanwhile, corporate executive Jeffrey Byron (Jonny Lee Miller) and his wife Marianne (Lara Flynn Boyle) are also unhappily married. Marianne desires children and is starved for affection by Jeffrey, who seems only to be in love with himself. Jeffrey is depressed and contemplates his sexuality and suicide. One day after work Marianne tries to get Jeffrey to have sex with her because she is ovulating, but he denies her. She decides to start preparing a room for a baby in their condo anyway and hires a contractor referred to her by her friend Isabel's mother Gloria, a guy named Lucky Mann. She is instantly attracted to him and they begin an affair. Jeffrey meets Phyllis in a bar where Phyllis had just witnessed Marianne and Lucky on a date. Jeffrey is instantly attracted to Phyllis, and seems to have a need to be with an older woman after showing being attracted to his older secretary, Helene. Marianne is attracted to the older and rugged Lucky. Jeffrey invites Phyllis away for a weekend at a resort, and she initially says no and goes home to Lucky. Phyllis tries to sleep with Lucky and he denies her, so she tells him that she knows about Marianne. She ends up meeting Jeffrey and going away with him. Once they are at the resort they meet up with Bernard Ornay and his mistress Monica Bloom. Ornay also becomes attracted to Phyllis which causes a rift with Jeffrey. Jeffrey and Phyllis begin to have sex but decide not to, and leave the resort the next morning.
The two couples end up in the same hotel bar, and Jeffrey and Lucky have a physical fight. Marianne and Phyllis leave together and go back to the Byron's apartment, where Marianne reveals she is pregnant with Lucky's baby. Marianne does not know yet that Phyllis is his wife. Phyllis becomes upset and leaves. Jeffrey and Marianne have sex and makeup. Lucky finds Cassie and they makeup. At the end of the story, the same thing that had happened to Phyllis had happened to Marianne. They will both have raised a child with another man that is not the father. Marianne tells her friend Isabel the baby's father is Jeffrey, which reveals she does not plan on telling Lucky that it is his, just as Phyllis had done with Jack Dana. The final scene shows Phyllis in bed crying, knowing that Marianne will have Lucky's baby, and emotional over Cassie coming home.
|
humor
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0028092
|
Pennies from Heaven
|
In prison, Larry Poole (Bing Crosby), a self-described troubadour, is approached by an inmate named Hart (John Gallaudet) who is on his way to the electric chair. Hart asks Larry to deliver a letter to a family called Smith near Middletown, New Jersey. After finding the family, which consists of a grandfather (Donald Meek) and a young girl named Patsy (Edith Fellows), Poole tells them that the letter holds a key, reveals that the condemned man had unintentionally killed Patsy's father and that he is giving the Smith family his old house and former hideout, the only thing he has to give as atonement.
Susan Sprague (Madge Evans) represents the county welfare department and it is her job to see that Patsy is raised "properly", or the girl will go to an orphanage. A variety of misadventures befall Larry as he tries to help "Gramps" out with Patsy to save her from the orphanage, all while Susan and he are falling in love, paternally.
To get cash for a restaurant license, Larry gets a stunt job at the circus, but is injured. While he is in hospital Gramps comes to let him know that the county has taken Patsy away. Larry believes Susan went behind his back and had Patsy placed in the orphanage. It is discovered that Susan had no part in it, but she loses her job defending Larry and his care of the child.
Larry has the circus perform for the children so that he can 'break Patsy out', when Patsy lets Larry know how Susan feels about him. Their attempt to free Patsy fails. Afterwards, Larry finds out that Susan has gone to New York and he goes there to find her.
While in New York, Susan is approached by two policemen looking for Larry, not to arrest him as she suspects, but to bring him back to the head of the County Welfare Department to help deal with Patsy, who has gone on a hunger strike. The policemen are watching Susan's apartment in the hopes that Larry will show up. When he does, they make him leave with them, after he and Susan reveal their feelings for each other.
When they return to the orphanage, the head of the welfare department begs Larry to help them with Patsy. Larry agrees to adopt Patsy and raise her with the help of Susan, who agrees to marry him and be a mother to Patsy.
|
depressing
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Bing Crosby was loaned out from Paramount to Columbia for this film and Columbia did no better for him in the way of budget than Paramount.
Again relying on Crosby's personality to bring in the box office, if anything Columbia probably spent less money than Paramount on his films.What they did do was give Crosby a good supporting cast, a role tailor- made for him and a good score of tunes to sing, topped by one of his immortal hits, the title tune Pennies from Heaven.
This was the second of 15 movie songs introduced by Bing that were nominated for the Academy Award as best song when that award actually meant something.Crosby's Larry Poole is a more delineated character than most of the ones he did in the 1930s.
He's asked by a prisoner who's on death row to look up the family of a man he murdered and give them the key to an old house that the prisoner owned.
He meets up with the family which consists of juvenile Edith Fellows and grandfather Donald Meek.
He also tangles with social worker Madge Evans, but in the end all his righted.In the real world I can't believe that civil servant Evans would ever take up with a vagabond character like Larry Poole, definitely not in this day and age.
But if he's played by Bing Crosby, well.........The film has one other interesting feature.
Finally Bing asks just what is this expected windfall and Meek replies, "The Townsend Plan."Today's audience would not get that dated bit of humor, but the Townsend Plan was the brainstorm of a Doctor Francis Townsend who was a retired physician who came up with a scheme in which the elderly were to be paid in scrip (in other words money that had to be spent) and then that money would be taxed through the sales which would in turn pay for another month's scrip and so on and so on.
At the time of the filming of Pennies from Heaven this plan had a lot of followers in the country which was in a depression.
Of course Townsend never got his plan passed, but a lot of historians credit him with raising such a fuss over what we did with our elderly that the result was Social Security.One of Bing's best..
PENNIES FROM HEAVEN has an improbable story about a drifter (BING CROSBY) who plays the lute and sings for his supper at a nightclub he opens at The Haunted House Cafe.
The house has been inherited by DONALD COOK and EDITH FELLOWS from a prisoner on death row who wills the house to them as atonement for having killed the girl's father and is turned into a café by Bing and his friends, including LOUIS ARMSTRONG who is the vocalist and trumpet player.The main focal of the plot is Bing's relationship with bratty little Edith Fellows, who causes no end of trouble throughout and is the most irritating factor about the whole thing although she's meant to be amusing and cute.
MADGE EVANS as a social worker brings some sense of practicality to the whole affair and DONALD COOK provides some good humor, but the script meanders all over the place.Crosby makes the role of the drifter pleasant enough but his character is never quite believable.
Only when the musical numbers are played does the film reach any real level of entertainment, particularly during the "haunted" number at the café featuring a skeleton dance while Louis Armstrong belts out the song.This is a harmless trifle in Bing's career, on loan to Columbia before his big successes at Paramount, and mostly because he delivers a few songs in his unmistakable crooning style, particularly the title tune.Bing is his usual amiable self, but the script is miserable.
Bing Crosby and Edith Fellows.
Pleasant if meandering Bing Crosby vehicle casts him as a man unjustly jailed who is given a note to deliver by a condemned man.
Out of prison, he tracks down the Smith family in New Jersey and discovers a lonely girl (Edith Fellows) who lives with her destitute grandfather (Donald Meek).
Crosby ambles along with them and becomes part of the family, much to the dismay of a nosy social worker (Madge Evans).
No one seems unduly concerned about school or the fact that a total stranger has moved into the household.Not a lot of logic here but Crosby and Fellows are quite good.
Not a great film but it has a few pleasant songs, including the title number, and Crosby continues his screen persona of easy-going and decent.
McLeod, no relation to the 1981 musical of that same title featuring Steve Martin and Bernadette Peters, stars Bing Crosby, on loan from his home studio of Paramount, in a forgettable but likable story with a notable title tune that underscores the film opening credits, presenting pennies falling from the thundering clouds above bouncing to the wet ground below.
His biggest dream in life is to go to Venice, Italy, and ride on the gondolas, which, at present, seems unlikely.In the story's fade-in, Larry, serving time in prison on a supposed smuggling charge, with one more week to go before his released, is met by a man Hart (John Gallaudet), a condemned prisoner on his way to the electric chair to die for his crime, who wants Poole, the only man he trusts, to deliver a letter to a family named Smith of Middletown, New Jersey, and explains his reasons.
Following this dramatic scene opener, quite unusual for a musical-comedy, finds the pardoned Larry drifting along to a carnival where he encounters a pre-teen but tough little girl (Edith Fellows) being cheated at a game booth by a slick barker (who charges a dime for a throw of six rings).
YOU CROOK!" After making the acquaintance with Patsy and later her grandfather (Donald Meek), who are flat broke and in financial need, and learning that their last name is Smith, Larry finds that they are the Smiths he's been searching for.
With the help of the positive-thinking Larry, he happens upon an idea of turning the old place into a roadside restaurant called the Haunted House Cafe.
The second half of the story focuses on Susan Sprague (Madge Evans), a county welfare agent, who feels Patsy, an incorrigible child who has been skipping school, isn't being brought up in the right atmosphere, especially when Patsy is bonding with a man who had spent time in prison, thus, threatening to take her away.Aside from Crosby's easy-going personality and his easy-listening crooning, Madge Evans' blonde beauty and Edith Fellows' temper tantrums controlled only by Crosby, whose "taming of the shrew" is through his singing, the supporting cast also features a very young Louis Armstrong as Henry, the hired hand, trumpeter and vocalist of the Haunted House Cafe; Nana Bryant as Mrs. Howard; Charles C.
Wilson as the Warden; and character actress Nydia Westman appearing briefly as the landlady.Nice tunes, compliments of songwriters Johnny Burke and Arthur Johnston include: "So Do I" (sung by Bing Crosby); "Pennies From Heaven" (sung by Crosby to Edith Fellows during a thunder storm); "Skeleton in the Closet" (sung by Louis Armstrong); "Let's Call a Heart a Heart" (sung by Crosby to Madge Evans); "Pennies From Heaven" (reprise); "One, Two, Button My Shoe" (sung by Crosby and orphan children); "So Do I" and "One, Two, Button My Shoe" (reprise/finale).As in most Crosby musicals of the 1930s and '40s, PENNIES FROM HEAVEN is a likable production no different from the movies he has done over at his home studio at Paramount.
Along with the film, young Edith Fellows, who resembles a youthful Jane Powell, in a performance that could have been played by another registered movie "brat" named Bonita Granville, is as forgotten as this movie itself.
PENNIES FROM HEAVEN will go on record as her best known film work, for that her subsequent features, mostly for Columbia, have been minor programmers that remain hidden in the land of oblivion.
After she asks him what his name is, the camera focuses to the girl's point of eye-view from the bottom up as Crosby's character, appearing quite taller, looks down and answers her question.
A similar such scene occurs later as Crosby sings to the tune of "So Do I" while Fellows does some street dancing to earn some extra money as the tenement people throw some loose change from their apartment windows above.
While there are enough good songs to go around, only "Pennies from Heaven" remains legendary, earning an Academy Award nomination as Best Song of 1936, losing to "The Way You Look Tonight" from SWING TIME (1936).Available on DVD and shown on Turner Classic Movies(TCM premiere: December 5, 2005), PENNIES FROM HEAVEN, which which runs 81 minutes, is worthy screen entertainment made palatable by its good songs and fine supporting cast.
And you have to love the interplay between Bing and Louis Armstrong - and while you're watching Louis, that's Lionel Hampton playing the drums rather than vibes tonight - not many remember that he first started on the drums before moving to the vibes.
Bing Crosby is one of the few performers who while he performed in over 70 films while he was alive, was so talented he has now appeared as a performer in just as many after his death in archive footage.
The big stars like Crosby even later than this had the power to own their own films and get a piece of the box office.This film has the major attraction of Crosby in his prime with plenty of support and a fine performance by Louis Armstrong who is one of the great musical performers of the era too.
The script is light hearted and puts together just enough plot to get through all the great musical numbers.This is the type of film that isn't made anymore but is great to see, especially since a lot of Crosbys work is very entertaining.
I was ten years old and this was one of Bing Crosby's earliest films.
I believe this is the first film he did with the great Louis Armstrong.
Pennies from Heaven 1936 is a great film and has a wonderful scene with Louis Armstrong singing "Skeleton in the Closet" while chasing a skeleton all around the room.
Bing Crosby plays a drifter serving a stretch in prison when he's asked by a condemned inmate to deliver a letter to the family of the man the inmate killed ("Anybody that can sing sappy, sentimental songs in prison wouldn't double cross a guy taking his last walk").
He also finds himself at odds with a pretty social worker whose job it is to see the young girl is properly cared for.An enjoyable bit of fluff with nice comedy and some mild tugging at the heartstrings.
There is not much actually that's wrong with Pennies from Heaven, other than that the story is very slight and you have no trouble figuring out how it's all going to end and that Madge Evans would have seemed more comfortable if she had more to do.
Pennies from Heaven is not a lavish-looking film, nor was that needed.
Pennies from Heaven's Oscar-nomination was more than justified as it is a truly appealing song in all respects and is heavenly sung by Bing Crosby.
Bing Crosby is reason enough to see any film, and he certainly doesn't disappoint, giving a charismatic and (incredibly) appealingly heart-warming performance and singing beautifully as always.
He shares convincing chemistry with Edith Fellows, who does a great job being cute and sassy, she didn't seem that much of a brat to me.
Donald Meek is typically wonderful, and seeing early-career Louis Armstrong in Skeleton in the Closet was surprising in a pleasant way.
8/10 Bethany Cox. Excellent film- bing and Edith Fellows are a great team!.
Edith Fellows does NOT play a brat, but a determined and pleasant young girl who can use a little guidance.
The songs are fun and Bing and Edith make a great team!
Donald Meek is typically good, but Edith steals the show in the first scene at the carnival.
Bing Crosby brings his usual charm in the movie Pennies from Heaven.
Just watched this touching and musically entertaining Bing Crosby movie on YouTube.
In this one, Bing's a released prisoner who's promised a condemned man to give a note to a family named Smith.
That turns out to be a grandpa (Donald Meek) with a granddaughter named Patsy (Edith Fellows).
And the songs are good enough to get one humming though the highlight is one done by the great Satchmo-Louis Armstrong-who provides a rollicking tune called "Skeleton in the Closet" that provides a fun thrill on its own.
There's also a female orphanage rep (Madge Evans) who becomes a potential love interest for Bing.
Really, Pennies from Heaven is just a dandy fine picture that should make you a fan of Crosby's music if you're not already.
And while this movie was being shot, then-current members Spanky, Darla, Buckwheat, and of course Alfalfa shared a song with Crosby and Ms. Fellows on set which I found out when I saw a picture of them in the book "The Little Rascals: The Life and Times of Our Gang" by Leonard Maltin and Richard W.
The other connection was Mickey Daniels-he plays a Hay Wagon Driver that takes Bing, Patsy, and her grandfather to the "haunted house"-who was one of the original members when the series started in 1922..
Bing Crosby is alright but the songs he sings are forgettable and too bland.
"Pennies from Heaven" is little more than a Bing Crosby vehicle -- one badly in need of a tune-up.It starts off well enough, with a man about to be executed for murder handing a letter to a self-styled "troubadour" (Bing Crosby) to be delivered to the family of the man he killed.
Once Crosby finds them, he makes a half-hearted effort to help (he's on his way to Venice), but his affection for the man's daughter (Edith Fellows) encourages him to stay.
When a social worker (Madge Evens) comes after the girl to put her in an orphanage, Crosby announces a plan to open a restaurant.It is at this point that the story runs off the rails of plausibility, crashing into a chasm deeper than any Wile E Coyote ever fell into.
Louis Armstrong (whom Crosby insisted be hired) is a treat, Edith Fellows is an agreeably anarchic child, and Stanley Andrews (the host of "Death Valley Days") has an unbilled role as a plainclothes officer.
Evans, though, is sufficiently blah one wonders how a woman-hater like Crosby's character would ever find her attractive.Jo Swerling wrote better scripts than this one, but Norman McLeod's direction is tight and brisk.
Note his unusual camera angles, as when Fellows looks through her opera glasses at Crosby.Nevertheless, "Pennies from Heaven" is one of those "less than the sum of its parts" films in which everyone's contribution is wasted on a poor story.
In one film of the period, made away from Paramount at Columbia, Crosby changed for the better his devil-may-care attitude long enough to help a down-and-out family
"Pennies from Heaven" cast him as a friendly vagabond, released from prison after being convicted on a false charge
He befriends the daughter (Edith Fellows) and father (Donald Meek) of an executed murderer, setting them up in a ramshackle mansion that he turns into a profitable café
Sentimental and curiously melancholic, the film was one of the very few Crosby movies to acknowledge the Depression.
However, I can happily say that because the film turned out to be a lot of fun AND the music was light and enjoyable.The film, oddly, starts on death row!
He wants to see Bing Crosby--a man you just can't imagine being in prison!
He is to locate the family of the murdered man and give them a deed for a home--a small way the condemned man can try to make amends.Eventually, Bing does find the family--which turns out to be a child and her grandfather (Donald Meek).
They are is trouble--without money AND a social worker (Madge Evans) breathing down their necks--they want to put the child in an orphanage!
In fact, the plot is on the sappy side and totally illogical.But what shines through in this film is Bing Crosby's charisma on screen.
He asked fellow inmate Crosby to deliver a letter to his family when he gets out.
Madge Evans ably plays the beautiful social worker.
Edith Fellows plays the girl, but I can't say I was enthralled by her performance.
Louis Armstrong is along for the ride, and Donald Meek is delightful as the grandfather of the girl.Nothing special, but you may enjoy it..
More realistic and even better actors included her own rival, Jane Withers, Warner Brothers' Sybil Jason, and in this Bing Crosby musical from Columbia, the divine Edith Fellowes.
No tears, no cloying cuteness and no overly sweet smile to take your mind of the depression, she was like someone you'd have seen a few years before in Hal Roach's "Our Gang" series.Bing is getting out of prison for a crime he didn't commit and goes to visit the orphaned young girl (Fellowes) and her grandfather (Donald Meek) to help them out after agreeing to assist them from the man who killed her father.
Meek and Fellowes fall instantly under Crosby's spell, especially after he introduces them to the haunting title song.
They open a restaurant and nightclub specializing in chicken dinners with a haunted house theme, hoping this will prevent Evans from taking poor Edith away.
But in true depression fashion, the government wins, and Crosby does all he can to win her back-this time legally and for good.A pleasing musical comedy, this is aided by the appearance of Louis Armstrong and his band who perform in the very funny haunted house dining sequence where all sorts of funny gags are leashed on the unsuspecting customers.
|
tt0787031
|
The Hunchback of Notre-Dame
|
The gypsy Esmeralda captures the hearts of many men, including those of Captain Phoebus and Pierre Gringoire, but especially Quasimodo and his guardian Archdeacon Claude Frollo. Frollo is torn between his obsessive lust for Esmeralda and the rules of the Notre Dame Cathedral. He orders bandits to kidnap her, but the hunchback is captured by Phoebus and his guards, who save Esmeralda.
The following day, Quasimodo is sentenced to be flogged and turned on the pillory for one hour, followed by another hour's public exposure. He calls for water. Esmeralda, seeing his thirst, approaches the public stocks and offers him a drink of water. It saves him, and she captures his heart.
Later, Esmeralda is arrested and charged with the attempted murder of Phoebus, whom Frollo actually attempted to kill in jealousy after seeing him trying to seduce Esmeralda. She is sentenced to death by hanging. As she is being led to the gallows, Quasimodo swings down by the bell rope of Notre-Dame and carries her off to the cathedral under the law of sanctuary, temporarily protecting her from arrest.
Frollo later informs Gringoire that the Court of Parlement has voted to remove Esmeralda's right to sanctuary so she can no longer seek shelter in the cathedral and will be taken away to be killed. Clopin, the leader of the Gypsies, hears the news from Gringoire and rallies the citizens of Paris to charge the cathedral and rescue Esmeralda.
When Quasimodo sees the Gypsies, he assumes they are there to hurt Esmeralda, so he drives them off. Likewise, he thinks the King's men want to rescue her, and tries to help them find her. She is rescued by Frollo and her phony husband Gringoire. But after yet another failed attempt to win her love, Frollo betrays Esmeralda by handing her to the troops and watches while she is being hanged.
When Frollo laughs during Esmeralda's hanging, Quasimodo pushes him from the heights of Notre Dame to his death. Quasimodo later goes to Montfaucon, a huge graveyard in Paris where the bodies of the condemned are dumped, where he stays with Esmeralda's dead body until he dies. About eighteen months later, the tomb is opened, and the skeletons are found. As someone tries to separate them, they crumble to dust.
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
One of my favourite Burbank Films Australia animations. Initially I wasn't sure whether an adaptation of Victor Hugo's classic novel would work in 52 or so minutes. I needn't have worried though, as Burbank's Hunchback of Notre Dame is one of my favourites of theirs alongside Wind in the Willows and Peter Pan. Is it the best version? Possibly not, the 1939 Charles Laughton film is incredibly well made and moves me to tears every time I see it. But of the three animated versions seen, I believe also there is one from either Golden Films or Burbank Animation Studios, it is for me second to Disney's(which is not perfect but I personally love it for the animation, music, characters and how much it moved and thrilled me) and much better than Jetlag's(not bad as such but one of their weakest efforts overall). What I love about this version is many things. In all honesty I wasn't expecting much from the animation quality, the cover was suggestive of a rather sketchy story-book-like style, but I was surprised. There is a lot of detail in the backgrounds, the dark yet more elegant than usual visual style is very fitting with the story's mood and the characters right from the grotesque yet immediately identifiable Quasimodo to the beautiful, both in character and how she's drawn, Esmeralda. The music lacks the ambitious and almost operatic scale that Disney has, but on its own it is very impressive in this regard, beautifully and subtly orchestrated while with some evocative, haunting parts. The writing is not childish or over-complicated, Quasimodo's exchange to Esmeralda in the cathedral after he rescues her is most moving, and the story is compelling and focused in tone(doing all that while also being perhaps the closest in spirit to the book). The characters are memorable, Frollo is not as complex as his novelistic counterpart but hardly stereotypical either, Esmeralda I have always found an improvement on screen than the rather naive and flat character in the book and Quasimodo is as he should be poignant despite his appearance. You do feel sorry for Gringoire, Phoebus is not as big a jerk as he is in the book and Clopin is menacing and darkly humorous. The voice acting is good, Ron Haddrick being brilliant as Frollo. All in all, highly recommended as one of Burbank's best. 9/10 Bethany Cox. A solid work. I prefer the Disney version, but this one is pretty solid too. While it works with a big book, the storytelling is fluid and easy to follow, in spite of the short time of the film. The character designs are rather dull, but the backgrounds are fairly detailed and the animation looks fluid. The characters themselves are not particularly complex, but are effective. Quasimodo and Esmeralda are sympathetic, and the rest do their work.The writing avoids being childish or hyper-complex, focusing well in the story and having a few moving lines. My complaint is that it lacks a bit more of emotion and impact. The voice acting is solid. The opening sequence and the incidental score are awesome and successful.In conclusion, this is a legitimately good work. A shame I cannot say the same about a few animated adaptations that are mediocre at best.. Very decent adaptation. Victor Hugo's story of Quasimodo is a true classic. Pity that I never read it, nor watched any of the many film adaptations.. until this one. So pardon me for not comparing - except with the data on Wikipedia, and I must say this animation seems to convey much of the original story (of course leaving out the heavy stuff of sex and killing). But the atmosphere (dramatic music, the Paris background, especially Notre Dame) appeared aptly rendered to me, and the persons, notably Esmeralda, drawn in a serious (non-cartoonish) style. The Dutch-distributed DVD I bought for 1 had German and French dubs, and of course I preferred the latter as more fitting, even though I did not understand every word.Given that this is rated "age 0 and above" in Germany, I found it worth watching even at 52 years old :) Much more convincing than Jekyll & Hyde from the same Australian studio ("Burbank" - quite a nod to Disney!), which was made kid-directed by adding the frame of grandmother and child. At least for delivering "illustrated classics", Burbank seems to do good jobs, and I'll buy more of their works when I see them in the bargain bin.
|
tt1263778
|
La belle personne
|
After the death of her mother, Junie (Léa Seydoux) transfers to the school that her cousin Mathias (Esteban Carjaval-Alegria) attends. She catches the attention of a lot of people, especially Otto (Grégoire Leprince-Ringuet) and Nemours (Louis Garrel), her Italian teacher. In Italian class, a record of Maria Callas singing Lucia plays, which causes Junie to rush out crying, leaving her affairs behind. Nemours sees a photo of her taken by another student and swipes it. After this, Nemours pursues her even though she has mixed feelings about it. He is so enamored by her that he breaks off his relationships with Florence Perrin, a teacher (Valerie Lang), and Marie, a student (Agathe Bonitzer). Nemours switches seats with Mathias during a field trip. Marie sees a letter left on the seat and it spreads throughout the student body. This letter is a love letter that all of the students think was written by Nemours. Junie, upon reading the letter, becomes very upset, believing that Nemours is in love with somebody else. Mathias goes to Nemours and explains that it was his letter from another boy named Martin and asked him to say that it belonged to the teacher. One of Otto's friends from the Russian language class is asked to spy on her after Junie acts cold to Otto and sees Nemours acting tender to Junie. He mistakes it for kissing and Otto confronts Junie about the misunderstanding. She denies it and goes home. Otto kills himself the next day by jumping from a very high floor at school. After Otto's suicide, Junie skips school for three weeks coming only after Nemours tells Mathias that he will be taking sick leave until the end of the semester. Nemours follows Junie around and she decides to approach him. He asks for some time to talk to her and they are seen running around the city like children. He takes her back to his room where she starts talking about love. He takes her home where they set a date for 5pm the day after next. Nemours waits till seven, then calls Mathias. Mathias comes down and tells Nemours that Junie left yesterday, and he is not allowed to say where and to forget about her. She also said she never wanted to see him again. Junie is seen on a ship departing for somewhere else.
|
tragedy, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
This is a lovely, deliberate, melancholy look into the fairy-tale lives of pale, beautiful, preternaturally graceful high-school students in Paris - a dreamy, pearly, wintry Paris on which the harsh sun never, ever shines.The Beautiful Person is so hypnotically beautiful that it drew me through the somewhat jarring adjustment I had to make from my placid late-middle-aged American world into theirs, which teems with sex and longing, but - Oh, my!
Those reviews also hinted that I might be slightly disappointed after Christophe Honoré's last movie, the remarkable Love Songs (Les Chansons d'amour).
This is a sadder movie, but it is no less deeply satisfying.Like Love Songs, seeing this once is not enough: I need my own copy so I can watch it over and over.
Also like Love Songs, I expect the pleasure it gives will grow richer with each viewing.Something nice I just realized: there are no drugs in this movie, hardly any alcohol (none at all among the kids), no vomiting, no farting, no bullying, no mindless cruelty or grossness of any kind.
After her mother's death, a pretty teenage girl (Lea Seydoux) moves in with relatives and attends school with her male cousin.
"Junie", the protagonist, first gets involved with "Otto", the shy odd-man-out in all these sexual shenanigans (perhaps because he's the only one with a decent haircut), but she soon finds herself drawn to the young Italian teacher (Louis Garrel), who is already involved with another student in the clique AND a fellow teacher.This kind of sounds like a French bedroom farce--especially a scene where one character drops a lurid love letter from his pocket and everyone thinks it belongs to the Italian teacher, leading to all kinds of misunderstandings.
In that respect this kind of reminded me of Catherine Breillat film, but it also has a surprising lack of sex scenes (aside from one strange scene where Seydoux bares her breasts for her boyfriend in what looks to be a school hallway or the streets of Paris).
It's a modern-day film judging from the occasional use of cell phones, but the characters still pass notes instead of text messaging.
I guess France is just a different place--at least their movies certainly are.Seydoux is pretty good here even if her character is frustratingly opaque.
She and Anais Demoustier (who has a small part in this and would appear with Seydoux again later in a similar film called "Le Belle Epine") might be the only girls prettier than their male co-star Louis Garrel, who has appeared in seemingly every other French film since making his mark in Catherine Breillat's 2007 film "The Last Mistress".
This is kind of strange movie for a lot of reasons, but it's also actually pretty good..
Christopher Honoré's La belle personne is a compelling curiosity; transposing the courtly world of Madame de La Fayette's classic 17th century story, La Princess de Cleves to a modern-day French lyceé (with its own courtyard), the film is a compelling observation of "courtly" love in a postmodern world; although it would be convincing to argue La belle personne is not very modern in its presentation of present-day bourgeoise Parisian etudiants.
The title alludes to 17-year-old Junie (Léa Seydoux), whose aura and presence recalls a ghostly incarnation of Godard's muse Anna Karina (Perhaps a self-conscious homage to Godard by the FEMIS-teaching Honoré?).
Following the death of her mother, Junie refuses to live with her father (for unknown reasons), choosing instead to live with her cousin, Mathias, in a haute-bourgeoisie Parisian arrondisement close to the school she and Mathias attend.
' Soon enough Junie becomes the default objet d'amour for the male etudiants, namely love-sick Otto (Grégoire Leprince-Ringuet) at first.
However, she soon troubles the cad-in-school Italian teacher, Nemours (the lanky yet ever-foppish Louis Garrel) with her otherworldly presence, prompting him to quickly end two amorous entanglements with a middle-aged fellow teacher and a stubborn 16-year-old female student.
With the ensemble of regulars (Garrel, Hesme, Mastroianni, Leprine-Ringuet etc), traversing both films, La belle personne perversely feels like a sequel somehow taking place in a parallel world to Chansons.
As a modern-day exploration of courtly love, La belle personne, is worth seeing numerous times to catch the many subtleties it withholds on first viewing..
I honestly thought I was watching a film from the 60s until I looked it up on IMDb. Everything rung of the 60s from the washed-out color palette (lots of white, grey and cold bluish tints) to the inexplicably brooding, emotionally muted female protagonist who falls into a love tangle (as in Buñuel's "Belle du Jour" (1967) or Vadim's "Le repos du guerrier" (1962)) to the very 60s French soundtrack (Nick Drake, Alain Barrière, Callas) to the big hairstyles on men.
Coming from a relatively puritanical culture, it didn't sit well with me that the film was about a 30-something high school teacher trying to seduce a 16-year old student.
The question posed is: can 1 true love exist, free of all the scandalous infidelities & betrayals, or is human nature such that impetuous desires and unchecked emotions always cause sexual & emotional chaos?You may find yourself needing to watch this film a 2nd time or, as I had to do, rewinding certain scenes to figure out exactly who is who, especially if you're watching the English subtitles.
Instead, like the web of love & deceit itself, the plot is intended to be challenging if not confusing.In the 2nd half, the story distills down to the main 3 characters, and the final 30 mins pack a whollop.
Having seen this at the 33rd Cleveland International Film Festival, I will admit to not having an appreciation of Christophe Honore's other work, have not read the book, nor did I recognize any of the actors.
This film is a hidden gem for the lovers of various French traditions: epistolary literature of 17th and 18th century, the breeze of French philosophy of love, friendship and education,, view at old traditional environment of Parisian schools mixed with contemporary teaching styles, love intrigues and tragic resolutions, etc.
That is the substance of French literature, art, philosophy, and its always over and over joy to observe it, in cinematic works like this.
Especially with two eye-candies such as Lea Seydoux and Luis Garrel, who at the same time, happen to be good actors.
Her character may be unfathomable as the rest, but at least it's understandable why everyone keeps on falling in love with her.
She's also a rather amazing actor; hard to tell it here but her performance in Blue Is the Warmest Color was terrific, and not because we get to see her naked a lot.One other thing that bothered me about this film was that almost all the actors were so good-looking.
for he is just too beautiful, and although he proclaims he loves her, in the end she knows he will ultimately leave her for another..
at times he looks and acts more like a student than they do)..
For a TV film, Christophe Honoré's 'La Belle personne' is elegant and allusive.
It's a rethinking of Madame de Lafayette's' 17th-century classic 'La Princesse de Clèves' for Paris lycée classroom and courtyard--which may make you think of the way de Laclos' 'Dangerous Liaisons' was adapted to an American high school in Roger Kumble's 1999 'Cruel Intentions.' Honoré makes use of the fact that the good looks of youth confer a kind of nobility, high school cliques resemble court life, and teenage machinations aren't far from royal plots.
The director features Louis Garrel, himself clearly a "beautiful person," for a fourth time.
The way he slips in appearances by Clotilde Hesme and Chiara Mastroianni and a tragic main role for Grégoire Leprince-Ringuet, all from the director's musical film 'Love Songs,' with one song included, makes you feel like the director is playing off his own company of players.
As the self-centered seducer Nemours, Garrel, himself part of a French cinematic dynasty (his father and grandfather are both film icons), gets movie royalty for his love interest.
Léa Seydoux, who plays the central female, lycée newcomer Junie, is a direct descendant of scions of the two great houses of French cinema, Gaumont and Pathé.
There's some titillation (but not much sex), long kisses, and a chance to look up close at beautiful boy and girl faces.
But while the director's 'Dans Paris' lurched back and forth between hilarity (embodied in Louis Garrel) and deep melancholy (hovering over Romain Duris) and in 'Love Songs' a sudden death clouded everyone else's life, this time the teenage passions, ostensibly mortal, feel more superficial, and Nemours, who is involved with a woman teacher and a girl student at the film's start, barely shows a flicker of concern about his multiple affairs and broken hearts apart from the worry that they might get too messy.
So the film may be a pleasure to look at; it may even provide the vicarious pleasure of imagining life at a snooty Paris high school; but the sweetness and sublime gloom of 'Love Songs' and 'Dans Paris' are now more fleeting and peripheral, replaced by machinations it's somewhat difficult to keep track of.When Junie arrives at mid-term, her life disrupted due to the death of her mother, all eyes turn toward her sultry pout.
This school lacks the ghetto intensity shown in Cantet's 'The Class' or the elite-school rigor of Verheyde's 'Stella.' Nemours purveys Italian by setting up a field trip to Italy (which falls through), having pop song lyrics read and translated, and allowing a student to play a record of Callas singing Lucia, causing him and Junie to fall for each other when Junie weeps and rushes out, leaving behind her photo-portrait for Nemours to grab and stash away.Then comes the misplaced love-note, which gets very complicated, and leads to a revelation at a Métro stop about boys loving boys.
And Honoré's relatively weak grasp on what happens in the classroom can't detract from his ability to convey with some vitality the snippy-chic atmosphere in the hallways, and the quick devastation of a teen romance gone wrong (the original 'Princesse de Clèves,' by the way, was fifteen).Thanks largely Alex Beaupain's songs, Honoré's 'Chansons d'amour' captured a bittersweet melancholy that perfectly fit the gray winter season in the Bastille quarter of Paris where it was set.
Some of it flits by too fast to take in the first time.Working on the adaptation with Gilles Taurand (who wrote Téchiné's excellent 'Strayed'), Honoré has shown a light touch and is working in a consistent vein that is ever more Parisian and urbane, ever more "Dans Paris." Except for "Comme la pluie" sung by Otto (Leprince-Riinguet), this film has no songs by Honoré's 'Love Songs' collaborator, Alex Beaupain.
According to the director, unfortunately, love doesn't last forever, at the end it's a very disappointing feeling and the only honest conclusion for it can be the one that happened to Otto.
The film's composition is very smart, with the storyline that appears messy for most of its duration, but all the loose ends come together by the end, when Junie makes her brave and unexpected decision (a great surprise of the film).
All the sideline events seemingly distracting from the main story lead Junie to this particular decision, more in the 17th that in the 21st century style, but justified by all she has seen and by her own uniqueness as a "completely honest person" and a "very strong person" (according to others).The choice of actors is excellent, as always the case with Honoré.
I would like to mention Léa Seydoux who has an amazing presence, which was crucial for the story to make sense.
Luis Garrel is another actor with a great magnetism who makes the story credible.In general the film is done with an impeccable cinematographic taste and it's impossible not to mention the song by Alex Beaupain, which just like in Dans Paris, is the only song in the film, but sung right on screen in the emotional climax of the film, and just like in Dans Paris, it occurs like the most natural thing.La belle personne, like the director's previous films, requires a very attentive viewing or maybe more than one viewing in order to notice the details, and the details are crucial for the adequate interpretation.
In some instances, it is also important to know some French (the crucial conflict of the lost/found letter story gets resolved once Nemour points out to Junie that from a grammatical point of view it's written by a man, and not by a woman – the moment unfortunately completely omitted from the English subtitles).
First half hour of this films wanders among characters' stories and relationships.
When the love triangle is about to close, the writer throws one his character into the void.
After teaching us the art of levity with his splendid "Les Chansons d' Amour", Cristophe Honore tackles a loose adaptation of the Princess Des Cleves in a modern day Parisian high-school.
Junie, a new comer in mid-term, joins her cousin's class, and soon afterwards gets entangled in the game of love.
Otto, a boy that I would term the common denominator of serious lovemaking and affection in the film, of stably pursuing his affection towards Junie, is in a way our guarantor in the film of common sense and, at least for me, someone to identify with.
But that happens admirably quickly and unaffectedly from both parts, even though we get to understand that Junie has recently lost her mother, that is why she came to school at this time of the year and why she gives way to moods of grave beauty.We are then introduced to the third main character, the one who is given ample presentation in a way, Nemours, a somewhat winning womanizer of both his fellow teachers and students, teacher of Italian.In one of his classes, and under the spell of Callas' Lucia di Lammermoor, Junie gets, for reasons no one probes, overwhelmed with emotion - this is the decisive moment, when Nemours and Junie pierce each other with glances signifying love.Next step, a miscast letter, that everyone thinks is Nemours' and that is being addressed to Junie, finally gets into Junie's hands - yet it is, as we come to learn, her cousin's, addressed to a boy, whence the pressure to retrieve it, though with admirable clarity and absurdity Junie surmises that it is a letter really written to her by Nemours, even though he plainly denies it.
Junie, even if having claimed the letter, does not give in to Nemours' lovemaking, but instead gives herself to Otto, after having tenderly and mischievously given him just before a children's book with the title Otto, and half-said to him that there is another person involved.
That is why Junie rebuts Otto's claim; that way, and as it should be, we loose the common denominator in love's proceedings, and love becomes fatal.
From that point on, Junie decides not to give herself to Nemours on grounds that their love will last for some time then expire, ranging it to the hordes of commonality, thing impossible, since Otto, by his suicide, raised the standard to such a degree, namely and actually loving her all his life, that anything less will be degrading.
So, after this explanation, she leaves it all behind.Up until somewhere in the middle of the movie I was still wondering to what kind of explosion C.Honore's boiling sourdine will give in, but I felt in a way that the film regressed to some kind of mannerism, in using devices of the two films that came before it, namely the singing in exactly the same tone, and using an actor/singer of the "Chansons d' Amour", right before Otto's suicide, and then, the cut editing in a somber interior reminiscing the technique involved in "Dans Paris", when Junie and Nemours finally meet, the two of them, alone, inside.
It may seem trifle, yet I took it as regressive, since C.Honore set himself the standard so high!That said given the fact that this was made for TV, it is of superlative quality as any film we come to expect from French film-makers.
Also the fact of watching the same team of actors playing in two films in a row, gives one a rare warm feeling and the wish that they would go on for some more!Even the fleeting presence of Chiara Mastroianni!
The subplot is a pleasure, too: the way the two young boys' love is presented in a mocking documentary fashion; and the way in their case the third party reacts, recurring to violence, not contending himself, as happens in the other triangle, to the violence of words.The photography is very good: a gripping, nuanced grayness allover finely portraying the incidents, and at one point, the beautiful faces of the adolescents, not exactly like the rococo fresco coming in the middle of the sequence, but the way a grave, beautiful Giotto stares us.
Beautiful actors, Nick Drake soundtrack and excellent cinematography can't hide the fact that this is a confused and amateurish story without a message.
The main problem is the script: we never get to know the characters, we don't understand what motivates them.
There is no real "story" to follow, no beginning and no end.
I liked the cold and grey colours added to the picture, which fit the mood of the film quite nicely.
She knows she is only attracted to Nemours, however, Nemours, a grown man sprouts out all these fancy words about how he was in love with her and they feel so careless coming out of his mouth as he was not convincing at all.
He was a delight, but, his voice was too weak, drowned out by all the other plots happening on screen, so much so, that the ultimate peak of the story -- his suicide -- left no impact on me.I did enjoy the ending, which I found pleasant and fitting, and a decision which was very mature of Junie.In conclusion: Aesthetically pleasing -- yes.
|
tt0445054
|
Les 7 jours du talion
|
The ordinary life of surgeon Bruno Hamel (Claude Legault) is destroyed when his daughter Jasmine (Rose-Marie Coallier) is raped and murdered in a park. Upon learning that the police apprehended the prime suspect, laborer Anthony Lemaire (Martin Dubreuil), Hamel plans to take revenge. He abducts Lemaire while he is being brought to his trial by drugging the officer driving the transport vehicle and brings him to a secluded cabin. Using a remote-controlled computer to conceal his location, Hamel calls the police to inform them that he plans to murder Lemaire in seven days, the seventh day being Jasmine's birthday. After killing him, Hamel will give himself up to the police.
Police detective Mercure (Rémy Girard) leads the investigation to discover Hamel's whereabouts. Mercure himself suffered a personal tragedy when his wife was killed during a grocery store robbery. Though Mercure acknowledges that the imprisonment of his wife's killer has not made his life more bearable, he becomes determined to stop Hamel before he commits murder.
Over the course of the seven days, Hamel brutally tortures Lemaire. Initially frightened and in incredible pain, Lemaire starts to accept his fate and mocks Hamel for not enjoying himself as he inflicts painful injuries on him. Lemaire eventually admits to raping and murdering Jasmine, along with three other girls. Hamel contacts a news station to have the families of Lemaire's victims informed about his captive's confession. When the mother of one of Lemaire's victims disapproves of his actions, Hamel kidnaps her and forces her to see Lemaire.
By the seventh day, the police locate Hamel's cabin. Hamel gives himself up and lets Lemaire live. As the police lead him away, a reporter asks him if he still believes vengeance is right. Hamel responds with a "No." However, when asked if he regrets what he has done, he gives the same answer.
|
revenge, neo noir, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
This movie is a very intense psychological thriller filmed in very grey and depressive images and words that create a perfect atmosphere for this doom slow paced movie.
Let me warn you first: There are not many torture scenes in this movie, so if you expect some gore stuff here, you may not be satisfied at all in the end.
But there are also metaphoric elements in this movie like the scenes with the dead deer body that represents the dead body of the raped and killed daughter that lead us slowly towards a melancholic end that many find unsatisfying but which fits perfectly to the whole atmosphere and intention of the movie.
When the father has kidnapped the murderer of his daughter and the police is looking for him, you expect that the tension and action raises, that each character's profoundness may be developed and that there are some disturbing twists but nothing happens at all.
This movie's strength is its depressive atmosphere and the main actor's brilliant acting but it has too much of a one man show.If you are looking for an alternative depressive psycho thriller with some philosophical elements, I highly recommend this movie for you.
Those who have watched Saw or Hostel will find the violence bearable, but this is not a gore movie like these two franchises; it is a psychological film.
"Does knowing your wife's murderer is behind bars make life any more bearable?""7 Days" is a powerful and brutal film about a happily married surgeon who as a result of the rape and murder of his daughter falls into a dark obsession with revenge.
There were a couple of things that didn't make much sense to do and the ending left a little to be desired."7 Days" may not be the cream of the crop of revenge flicks, but it does succeed where others fail.
Just like in the recent Australian revenge thriller The Horseman, we have another Father who's snapped and is now taking matters into his own hands on account of his little girl's demise.
But that's not to say this one, on any level, is less brutal.As I hinted at, 7 Days is a story of a Father's vengeance for his 8 year old daughter that was raped and murdered.
It's a simple story that people across the board can relate to, but only a select few would ever try to tackle; and it shows, as this is no joy-ride for the Father, and his actions against his daughter's killer are eating him up inside.7 Days is an engrossing film; with it's bleak and unforgiving style, it captured me right from the get go, and didn't let loose until the final scene.
This movie first and foremost delivers a story that thrusts you into the Father's shoes, and urges you to relate through either simple but affective symbolism, affective and violent outbursts, or scenes of pain-staking solitude.
And also adding in a sub-plot with a hardened but sensitive detective that's trying to stop our protagonist, the film only intensifies.7 Days is a graphic, intimate and emotional film that tells the story of questionable actions from the side you're supposed to be caring for.
The acting is superb, it is very much a "huis-clos" as we call it in French, a duel of actors in an enclosed space where no one else can see them.I'm not a fan of torture porn, I've never seen the Saw and Hostel movies as they aren't my cup of tea personally.
It takes you on a journey inside your own mind as you compare the emotions of those affected in the movie, and compare them to emotions you think you might feel if something as horrific as the initial crime should (heaven forbid) happen in your everyday normal life.The plot is simple, the direction is stark and unwavering, and the story is beautifully acted by all the players.
I really liked this movie and am sad to say that I do not want to watch it again.
While watching it you will go through a whole case of emotions, from anger, distraught, disgust to the feeling of love a father has for his daughter.
Amazingly acted and directed, this movie was done in a perfect, raw, way to help you feel what the father is going through.
Seems like a lot of plots now a days rely too heavily on the surprise twist and "I did not see that coming" response from the movie goer rather than emotion.
Revenge is sweet in 7 Days, a Canadian torture thriller in French when a surgeon's daughter is abducted, raped and killed by a low life criminal named Anthony.
I base myself on the fact that i've viewed a lot of horror films and psychological thrillers and the like, this is unlike any i have seen although i did watch a trailer on the DVD when it loaded about a little boy thats abducted and killed and the parents the father being a doctor get revenge 'the torture' although i haven't seen said film yet I'm kinda thinking its gonna be the same thing..I like the fact there is no soundtrack to this film, i really get a sense of the parents pain and I'm pretty sure if someone did that to my daughter i wouldn't be responsible for my actions either.Its graphic yet moving and the actors played the roles well..
And I'm not the type of guy who will rush in the theatres for a Canadian movie: Most of the time, I don't even like the films my country produces, as I am more of an American cinema follower.
Of course people are going to say this is a revenge movie like any other, but where Les 7 jours Du talion (or Seven days) differs from movies like The Last House on the Left is that the violence (which is surprisingly realistic and shocking) isn't there to excite the viewer, but it's there mostly to disturb him or her and does so effectively in this intense psychological drama.The story is about a surgeon named Bruno Hamel whose 8 year-old daughter Jasmine is kidnapped and brutally raped and murdered.
When the police think they have found the killer, Bruno kidnaps the main suspect and tells the police that for seven days, he will torture the man and kill him on the seventh day as an act of vengeance.
Reading this synopsis, you probably think that you have seen this material a lot already but no movie has shown this material in a more effective manner than seven days.
Seven days is a great psychological thriller, in which we can see deeply into the mind of a mourning father and his internal transition.If you're expecting movie with pain and blood you're going to get it, but you will probably be bored as this movie goes deeper and linger upon the thinking of the both, the criminal and the victim.Main character being a surgeon give the plot authenticity and the bloody scenes really leave no space for imagination.
But it's not like in most film, when you sympathize with the victim and you want the perpetrator to be stopped.As the movie goes on, you don't know what to think anymore.
On the other hand you start to ruminate if you would have the courage to do the same as the main character.In the first half of the movie you can see a beginning of a change from a good man, good husband and a good father to a ruthless coldblooded criminal, drifted by the pain from the loss of his daughter and most of all the guilt.And you have to wait until the very end to see if the transition will be completed..
When police arrest a man for the rape and murder of Dr. Bruno Hamel's 8-year old daughter, the distraught father (a strong performance from Claude Legault) seeks revenge, kidnapping the suspect and subjecting him to a week of unimaginable suffering while the police desperately attempt to track them down.Revenge is sweet, as the saying goes, but 7 Days challenges this notion: after inflicting untold pain and suffering on his victim, Bruno doesn't feel any better—he is just as empty inside, his grief no less severe than before, his anger unabated.
The film questions whether, despite our understandable wish to severely punish the human garbage who commit such evil crimes, revenge might not be the wisest route to take.Superb performances, tight direction from Daniel Grou, and some truly disturbing imagery make this film hard to ignore, but it is its highly debatable central theme—to torture or not to torture— that makes 7 Days a more powerful viewing experience than many of the 'torture' films that we've had to endure post-Saw..
The summary of the movie is this in a nutshell, "A father captures his daughter's killer/rapist and then doesn't know what to do next." Doesn't sound like a great revenge flick, and if I had known this from the beginning, I wouldn't have wasted my time..
I thought this dark drama had solid acting and a powerful message but it had a sluggish pace and I didn't agree with the main character's actions to advenge his daughters rape and murder and it's not one of those revenge thrillers that you root for the guy getting revenge, I pretty much felt sorry for both of them.
In the end I can't find anything that I really liked about this film, it just was way too bleak for me and it really didn't bring anything new to this genre and it just brings your mood down big time.
Overall there is some torture scenes in this movie that is not for the squeamish but it focuses more on the characters and how they deal with the crime than being that type of film, again more of a drama and judging from some early reviews it's overrated and nothing I will recommend or would want to see again, your're not missing out on anything amazing.
The coloring and cinematography really helps set that dark mood.After his young daughter gets raped and killed, a father sets out to revenge her..
Based on a novel by Patrick Senecal, "Les 7 jours du talion" tells the story of surgeon Bruno Hamel, whose daughter is brutally raped and murdered.
Hamel decides to do himself justice by kidnapping the murderer and plans on torturing him for seven days, after which he will execute him.Does this story sound familiar?
However, I can guarantee that the approach that this film takes is very refreshing and will manage to deliver plenty of food for thought and discomfort to its audience."Les 7 jours du talion" doesn't waste a lot of time in showing the perfect happy family clichéd scenes.
What happens next, as you may imagine, is a descent into one's personal hell, as he kidnaps the monster who killed his daughter, locks himself up with him in a secluded cabin in the middle of the woods, and performs horrible acts of torture on him.Keep in mind that this is a gruesome film.
The music isn't there to dictate how you should feel during the torture scenes, or when you see Bruno Hamel hold the mutilated dead body of his own daughter.
It's because they were anxious of what was going to happen next, because the music did not provide a single hint.The paradox behind the concept of revenge is the main theme of this film.
I can wholly empathise with Bruno the young man in the movie whose daughter has been murdered and his wishfulness for revenge to the killer.there are several films of this genre I wish to mention.
whether torture can be distinguished from unjustified violence in movies of this kind I am not sure.I enjoyed'seven days' and followed the sub titles throughout for English translation.
Yes there were some scenes which were overdone.I watched the film because oddly I like movies in the French language and the storyline from the DVD cover appealed to me.
But in the case of SEVEN DAYS, this film is predicated on the rape and murder of an eight year old girl, and this begs some form of intellectual or psychological conclusion at the very least.
Is revenge the only real justice when someone you love is killed at the hands of another?That is the question that '7 Days' asks and in a way lets the audience answer as they watch a Father (Claude Legault) get revenge on his daughter's killer (Martin Dubreuil).Jasmine Hamel, an 8 year old girl, left her home to pass out invitations door to door for her upcoming birthday party on her way to school.
Beware - the torcher scenes are graphic, realistic and very disturbing and there is a lot of full frontal male nudity (the accused rapist/murderer is stripped nude once kidnapped and naked the rest of the film).
However, I don't see the film as something only a sadist who enjoys the sub-genre of 'torcher porn' would like - b/c the movie is more about the emotions behind the actions than the actual physical pain.
This film is in the style of other shockingly dark French and foreign horror/revenge thrillers.A man's 8 year old daughter is raped and killed.
Dr Bruno Hamel (Claude Legault) is a devoted husband and father, who is struck with every parent's worst nightmare, when his eight year old daughter is brutally raped and murdered.
Hamel therefore resolves to kidnap the killer, take him away to a nice secluded spot, and systematically torture him for seven days, culminating in his execution, on what would have been his daughter's birthday.
Hamel, over a seven day period, tortures the rapist, as the police attempt to find him before he kills the man.
The torture itself happens in intervals as Hamel takes time out contemplating about the loss of his beloved child, dealing with intense grief and coming to grips with the rage and sorrow, returning to his victim to release pent up emotions, boozing as to make his job easier to handle.
Probably the most chilling scenes involve Hamel kidnapping the mother of a girl Lemaire killed(she confesses that she has moved on and doesn't agree with Hamel's torturous methods, this raising his ire)and Lemaire talking about Hamel's daughter(how she was the prettiest, crying out for her father to save her).
In the instance of the woman Hamel kidnaps, he has her confront the man who took her daughter(he feels she should never forget the person who done such horrific things to her child, closure or no, he should not get off that easy), placing her in the torture room to view his ravaged and chained body lying in a pile on the floor.
I watched this entirely in french so i cannot comment on any of the dialogue but i dont think it mattered in this, its not hard to understand, it was a sad movie and i thought that the torture scenes would be too much for me but i handled it fine because the man was so awful, what he did to the little girl was so awful, i really felt for the husband and wife, especially the husband, the acting was wonderful even without English subtitles, i was immersed in the story and felt pain along with the parents(obviously nothing compared to what parents actually feel in this situation ) so i cried my eyes out when he sees his daughters ghost and unties her and washes her, it was so ..
When the maniac is caught, the man kidnaps him while he is being transported to court and leaves a note saying he will torture the man for seven days, then kill him before turning himself in.Realistic look at revenge is a disturbing entry in the torture porn genre.
Seven Days carries no moral or cultural statement any more profound than the rather trivial observation that torturing someone for vengeance is wrong and probably won't satisfy you anyway - a point that is hammered home not through any nuances of plot or emotional drama, but by being bluntly stated in dialogue in the later stages of the film.I can't recommend this one, I give it 3 out of 10 because it's just about watchable..
Although the story is fairly weak in the movie, I feel that this is not that type of film, anyway.
In 7 Days, a doctors 8 year old daughter is brutally attacked and killed by a perp, who is later kidnapped from a truck, being hauled off into police custody.
I agree with others that have stated the lack of music, special effects and other " mood enhancements " leave the viewer, in particular fathers, to decide for themselves how the Dr, fathers, actions make them feel within themselves, rather than walk away able to say it was the directors choice of music or effects that made them feel the way they did, after watching the film.
It's very confronting for those that find themselves cheering for the Dr that it was the circumstances that left them feeling that way rather than effects or music choosing the moral viewpoint they adapt at the end of the film.
I for one felt that the Police officer who called in the fathers location towards the end betrayed any man finding that they are faced with the circumstances of the film.
I want to believe that upon finding myself in those circumstances that I would act just like the Dr. Any doubts that I had about those feelings disappeared when I saw the pedophile murderer, crying and trying to bargain his way out of his fate.
I'm going to review "7 Days" today, which is a Canadian/French horror revenge drama thriller ( WOW!
As if that's not disturbing enough, "7 Days" will explore how one man steps over the line of being sick enough to molest a child, but to murder an eight year old girl as well.
I was really looking forward to watching this as I love revenge films.
|
tt1424431
|
Tsar
|
The film is set between the years 1566 and 1569 during the era of the Oprichnina and the Livonian War. The film starts from the time when the Russian Orthodox Metropolitan Afanasii has died and Tsar Ivan IV has summoned his childhood friend, Hegumen Philip Kolychev of Solovetsky Monastery. The film is divided into four parts.
1. The prayer of the Tsar. The Tsar is praying in his cell and asked the Lord to help him in his business. Meanwhile, Hegumen Philip arrives in Moscow, and on the way rescues a girl Masha, who is fleeing from a group of guardsmen. Receiving the Hegumen when he arrives, the Tsar invites him to become Metropolitan of Moscow, but Philip initially declines. The Hegumen meets his nephew, who is leaving for the wars and urges the Hegumen to flee from the Tsar, as those around him cannot survive. The Tsar returns to Philip, gives Masha an icon of the Mother of God, and persuades Hegumen Philip to become Metropolitan. Philip, witnessing the horrors being committed by the Oprichniki, urges the Tsar to show mercy to his enemies.
2. The Tsar at War. Metropolitan Philip's nephew fights in a bloody battle against the Poles and Lithuanians at Polotsk. There is also Masha, who has escaped from the Tsar and brought the icon. Thanks to the icon, the bridge collapses under the Lithuanian cavalry. Polotsk governor returns to Moscow, but news arrives that the Lithuanian and Polish forces went around to the rear of the city and that the Governor himself surrendered the town. The enraged Tsar desires to execute all the Governor's men. Metropolitan Philip defends them, which also triggers the wrath of the Tsar. The governor is arrested, and Malyuta Skuratov brands his chest.
3. The Tsar's Wrath. The Tsar orders Metropolitan Philip to judge the governor, and the court convicts the governor's men of treason. Realizing that the defendants are speaking the truth, Metropolitan Philip refuses to sign the death warrant. Meanwhile, the Tsar prepares their execution: he pits them one on one against a bear. Killing two commanders, bear attacks Kolycheva. At this point, Masha runs into the arena with the icon and tries to stop the bear. It kills Masha with his paw. Metropolitan Philip, horrified by the senseless brutality of the Tsar, seeing the futility of their attempts to persuade the Tsar to give up violence, enters the arena, and raises the icon. During a service at the Church, he refuses to bless the Tsar, who furiously strips the Metropolitan of his rank and forces him to watch the execution of his nephew on the rack. The Tsar decides to pardon Philip himself, but forever exiles him to a monastery, where he is treated as an ordinary prisoner, shackled, deprived of even water.
4. The Tsar's fun. Heinrich von Staden builds a "torture camp", which is planned to convene the people to festivals and watch the torture of prisoners. During the inspection, the Tsar's jester Vassian quotes the Book of Revelation, comparing Maria Temryukovna with the Whore of Babylon, for which the Tsar burns him at the stake. Meanwhile, in the monastery Philip's chains are supernaturally loosened, and he receives the gift of healing and foresight. He warns Archbishop Pimen that they will be accused in his death. Philip encourages them to run and save themselves. However, the abbot, and almost all the monks stay with him. The Tsar arrives, but Philip again accuses him of horrific violence and refuses him a blessing. On the orders of the Tsar, Skuratov strangles Philip with his own hands. Despite the order to hand over Philip's corpse, the monks bury Philip in a wooden church and lock it; guardsmen burn the church with the monks inside.
Final Scene - The Tsar waits for the beginning of his tortures. Despite the order to assemble, no one does. "Where are my people?" - asks the Tsar. Then he prays the Jesus Prayer then again asks - "Where are my people?"
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
An impressive work, for someone acquainted with Russian culture and history.
The acting is superb and the reality imposed by a bloody Russian King is overwhelming; as well his evil deeds were unfolded in the movie respecting all the historical facts.
Its really marvelous to encounter in the movie the Christian orthodox struggle with the absolute power of the King and his outlawed deeds.
If u really want to see what church meant in Russian past you are really invited to watch the movie, I can assure you it will shock your mind.
Pawel Lungin seems to agree with the previous and paints a terrifying portrait of his persona with the ultimate counterpoint in Metropolitanate Philipp, the religious overseer of Moscow and the Church.
In this tale of madness, torture and dementia the innocent will perish, but will stick with their ideals, while the cruel remain with only eternal damnation that awaits them...Both main actors Pyotr Mamonov (Ivan) and Oleg Yankovskiy (Philipp) are a real tour de force.
They are absolutely unbelievably good in the parts they play and especially Mamonov gives possibly the best performance I have seen in years.
And yet with some much going for the movie in the actor department I felt massively under-awed by the direction of this movie.The story never really flows or builds and essentially history passes this movie by.
In the end most is left to imagination or historical knowledge, as the movie merely suggests several key moments in time, but all this happens off screen.
In the end you never really understand the changes in Ivan and the engulfing madness.
Within several minutes you see Ivan turn from a god-fearing fanatic claiming all his deeds are in the name of God and for his glory into someone claiming that ruling a country takes place outside of God. No credible build-up was really given to such a sudden change of views.All in all the madness is inconsistent and after watching the movie I feel like I know less about Ivan than before watching it.
We all know Ivan the Terrible was a mad tyrant, and many know that Philip was a Saint.
The film shows little more, and little depth to Ivan, and none to any other character beyond Philip.
The film implies all the churchmen were saints, when in fact many (understandably) collaborated with Ivan.
The parallel with Stalin is obvious, but somehow the greater distance in time makes the message more abstract and therefore more powerful.The metropolitan is slow to grasp the depth to which his childhood friend has sunk, but when he does the way in which he stands up to Ivan in word and deed is both moving and inspiring.
Best seen in the context of Russian film history.
I checked out the "Hollywood Reporter's" review of the showing in Cannes, and the first line of that review corresponds to the first comment I would post myself, relating it to Tarkovsky's "Andrei Rublev"(1967) and Eisenstein's "Ivan the Terrible." (1944)While the title of the film is "Tsar," the personality of the Metropolitan Fillip, played by Oleg Yankovsky, really dominates.
Like Tarkovsky's "Rublev" Fillip attempts to find spiritual meaning in the harshness of his times, and Ivan at first come across as an object of pity to whom the church father attempts to give spiritual guidance.
The film presents of trinity of "Holy Fools" (Iurodyvye), who traditionally speak prophetic truth to power - in the persons of Fillip, the little girl, an the jester (whose revelations of Ivan's cruelty are for the film-viewers alone).
Ivan tells Fillip to speak the truth to him, but becomes progressively more opposed to the holy truth and therefore more and more "terrible."Stalin found confirmation for the "great man" approach to history in Eisenstein's earlier historical epics, but Eisenstein's "Ivan the Terrible,Part II" was banned when the historical necessity argument gave way to grotesque depiction of the oprichniki and the murder of a young pretender to the throne.
The magnificence of the regal costuming and sets do not startle the viewer with pageantry, but rather offer a grotesque contrast between the mask of wealth on display in the presence of masses violently spilled blood.What may appear as "straightforward storytelling" is in many ways a polemic with historical narratives of the past.
Ivan is most terrible in the power that he wields through insanity and belief in his role as God's appointed servant..
The famous Russian producer Pavel Loungin paints a grim - though realistic - picture of the brutal rule of Ivan the Terrible, the first self-proclaimed Tsar of Russia.
The depth and sophistication of the movie are obvious to everyone familiar with Russia's bitter history (and, sadly,) present.
On top of that, the critical parts in the movie are played by the outstanding actors Oleg Yankovsky (metropolital Philip Kolychev) - one can only wonder how a 21 century actor can portray a saint and Peter Mamonov - a chilling representation of the maniacal Tsar Ivan, who does not give you a minute of rest throughout the movie.
The movie is surely a landmark in filming history.
I agree completely with the author of "Sergei Eisenstein honored" in calling this film the third part of Eisenstein's intended trílogy of the most debatable of all Russian tzars.
Eisenstein had planned a third film to his great "Ivan the Terrible" project but never came to fulfill it since already the second part was forbidden by Stalin, and Eisenstein died before Stalin.
However, this film would have satisfied Eisenstein completely as a fulfillment of his last cinematic dreams.Of course, it has flaws.
Pyotr Mamonov is not quite convincing as the tzar and does not stand up to a comparison with the incomparable Nikolai Cherkasov as the leading actor in Eisenstein's masterpieces.
While Eisenstein's films are monumentally theatrical with every scene a masterpiece of composition and every face unforgettably impressive in pictorial portraiture, Mamonov as the tzar is too much of a caricature and is overdoing it in a grotesque way that falls out of the personage that the tzar really was.
This twisted interpretation of the life on the throne is worsened by the revolting presence of the fool, who pushes the exaggerations far over the top of any credibility.All this grotesqueness, which really was part of Ivan's reign but only one side of it, is wonderfully balanced by Oleg Yankovsky as the metropolitan and childhood friend of Ivan, who the tzar desperately appeals to for friendship, which his ways make impossible.
Here you have the full integrity of a real man who just can't compromise with his conscience and sense of right and wrong, while Ivan is way beyond any hope of insight in this matter.
The metropolitan dominates the film, and the film is a masterpiece mainly because of him.Of course, there is very much you miss of Ivan's other aspects as a tzar.
Neither Eisenstein nor Lungin included the episode of the slaughter of his son Ivan, and concentrating exclusively on the personal relationship between the tzar and the metropolitan, the film feels more episodic like a rhapsody than like an accomplished epic.
Impressive fragment of Russian history, it is, in fact, a parable.
And the ambition of Pavel Lungin to say never death truth.Like a diamont, this movie has many faces.
Different impressions, heavey images, a new Mamonov, a short travel in history book to remind details about central character.
Film 'Tsar' made some social resonance in Russia,- dividing people who do not accept film because of huge mortality and deaths in film(it's true - 'Tsar' is dark and cruel) and those who see the human Drama in face of Tsar Ivan, drama of the governor - is really not the best in Lungin's biography,though the best in my.
and Im thanking life and faith to let me do my job as good as i could)))) Also i've got lots of new friends,- among them Tom Stern -the cinematographer of 'Tsar'.- really good American,- i took a look on his projects with Clint Eastwood, and opened this to brave Americans for myself..
portrait not of Ivan Vasilievich but for a manner, an usual manner of East to use the authority with high force and profound fear.
Pyotr Mamonov gives a strange, cold, unpredictable, vulnerable Ivan.
a Tsar looking for himself, lost in good intentions and noble projects.
Well, everything is painfully wrong here - choice of Pyotr Mamonov as a Tsar Ivan The Terrible is the first and worst error - he just is a mere buffoon and horrid performer, overplaying almost every aspect, and instead of a paranoid tyrant we see a psychotic idiot with whimsical ticks.
The great late Oleg Yankovski as Fillip is pale and bland, while Ivan Okhlobystin as a Tsar's jester is a simple clown with no merit.
"Nothing destroys authority more than the unequal and untimely interchange of power stretched too far and relaxed too much" (Francis Bacon Sr).Pavel Lungin's film, promoted at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival, absorbingly develops some aspects of the reign of tsar Ivan called the terrible which spanned a considerable period of time in the 16th century Russia.
It rather occurs to create an image of a ruler who himself stretches his power too far and destroys his authority.
Yet, a viewer might be led to wrong assumptions through the title: it is not solely a film that should be called 'a tsar' but rather 'a ruler and his voice of conscience.'The director manages to develop the figure of the ruler (powerfully played by Pyotr Mamonov) and his 'prophet' the voice that helps him turn to God, that is Philip Kolychev (played by Oleg Yankovskiy).
Philip, for some time a metropolitan, reveals to us the true face of the ruler who is power obsessed and a man rather weak innerly but very much disguised as a powerful tyrant.
Metropolitan Philip is a man of God who confronts the never ending conflict: church and state.
This relation between the tsar and his metropolitan seems to evoke above anything else, seems to be a key drama of the entire story.Divided into four parts, THE PRAYER OF THE TSAR, THE TSAR AT WAR, THE TSAR'S WRATH, THE TSAR'S FUN, the movie sometimes seems to skip continuity.
The dramatic resonance of the story is intensified by the period the action is set (the 1560s), the Oprichnina and Livonian War, a particularly cruel time that marks the Russian history with notorious cruelty.
While Eisenstein's movie sometimes seemed to glorify the courage and power of Ivan (especially in the first part accepted so powerfully by Stalin), this movie marks the clear contrast between the cruel ruler and men of God.But the movie's flaw lies in the fact that it does not really build upon some psychological image of a man, some sophisticated depiction but rather divides the characters into the good and the bad ones.
Except for the Oprichnina who are, naturally, all bad, the pinnacle of that approach is Maria Temryukovna, Ivan's second wife (not depicted by Eisenstein), the tsar's evil genius and seen as a 'whore of Babylon' having fun at the cruelty.TSAR is a film worth seeing as a slightly different approach, perhaps most, however, because of excellent performances.
The plot of the movie covers a short term of the rule of the Russian Tsar Ivan the Terrible during one of the most controversial periods of Medieval Russia – Oprichnina.
The Tsar, feeling lonely, rushing about his obsession of the forthcoming end of the world and Judgment Day, being on the verge of insanity called for the Solovetsky Monastery abbot Phillip Kolychev, his childhood friend.
Being shocked by the bloodthirstiness of Tsar's party, Phillip bravely tells Ivan the Terrible the truth.
Wrathful Tsar put the metropolitan into disgrace, exiled him and later killed secretly, as well as Phillip's nephew and his fellow warlords for the false accusation of yielding up Polotsk to Sigismund.In my opinion this movie is more likely a simple narration without any deep moral message in it, being less successful work of Pavel Lungin then previous "Ostrov".
Pavel Lungin's flawed power house film is more a film for the head for the heart-then again it grabs you by the throat and squeezes.Nominally the story of Tsar Ivan (the terrible) battling with his Metropolitan (head of the church).
The film is a battle between vengeance and mercy, its an allegory between belief and certainty, a reflection of self vision and the vision of mankind, a look at the Stalin years in Russia, and the madness of rulers in general.Its a kick in the chest.More interested in making a point the film is more an essay or fantasia or poem rather then straight narrative.
There is a plot, its just that some of the details are lost and people represent things more than are characters, the Jester is Satan, the little girl grace...
Unlike some people in modern Russia I am not a Monarchist, which means my view towards the historic Russian Monarchy is mostly negative.But the way Tsar Ivan (Vasilyevich) Groznyy, called the "terrible" in the Western world, was portrayed in this film is just absurd.
The years in the film were 1565-66, Ivan IV was born in 1530, which means he should have been about 35 years old.
Although the actor playing Ivan in the film was no younger than 50 years of age.
Ivan in the film is too old.And that is only part of the problem of the film.
Events portrayed in the film are either in the wrong year or simply never happened.
The film presents the year 1565 as disastrous for Russia, Poland is successfully conquering the country and numerous military disasters have led Ivan to believe the Russian people are turning against him.Ivan himself is presented as a delusional psychopath that spends his time sitting alone speaking to "god".
And as the film progresses more and more people are killed or tortured in cruel ways, Ivan even instructs his men to build a massive torture exhibit where hundreds of people presumably were to be tortured at the same time.By the end of the film Ivan has become an Anti-Christ figure, his men are shown burning people alive and they visibly enjoy it.
I have a suspicion that the actual Church was involved in the production of this film.It seems like only a Polish take over of Moscow can save Russia from the cruel tyrant.Ivan IV was not an angel, but he was not a psychopath like the one shown in the film.
He could do cruel things, but today Russia owes its vast territory and influence thanks to the actions of Ivan Groznyy.
What can I say but that Eisenstein would be honored to see what this movie represents.In fact, and in my own personal view, if Eisenstein were alive these days, he would probably have filmed this movie the same way.The light and shadow play, evident homage to Sergei Eisenstein, the tenuous colors, always kept at very low intensity, not to make it to vivid or bright, but clearly reminiscent of the only color palette included in the Ballroom scene in "Ivan the Terrible", add all the glory and respect to the lineage of its two predecessors.I would even go further.
This can be considered the third chapter, or the third installment to "The Boyar's Plot" and "Ivan the Terrible" by Eisenstein, concluding thus the intended trilogy.The actors are all excellent, particularly the two principal figures, Pyotr Mamonov as Ivan (whose looks strikingly resemble his predecessor, Nikolai Cherkasov), and as Philipp, the Orthodox Metropolitanate, Oleg Yankovskiy.
One can guess that most of the cast comes from a true and solid theatrical background, but their theatrical skills are well put into use in this masterpiece of a movie.The director, Pavel Semyonovich Lungin, is a worthy follower in the enormous footsteps of his legendary predecessor, Sergei Eisentein.
His style and his technique are immaculate and show a sense of artistry uncommon these days.I can only say a loud Bravo, to everyone involved with this movie, since they have given us the ideal ending to "Ivan the Terrible" and in such a way, as not to disrupt the continuity of the trilogy.In the words of Pavel Lungin, it is a warning to the ever changing world we know today, not to relapse into the same mistakes of absolutism of the past, but work toward a more tolerant future.I salute you, Pavel Semyonovich, and hope you will direct some more movies like these..
I know a little bit about Russian history and had even read a biography of Ivan the Terrible years ago.
Eventually I could see that this film covers a very short period in the middle of Ivan's reign, where he contends with his hand-chosen Metropolitan (church leader guy) Philip, a la Henry II-versus-Thomas a Becket.
Ivan wants a rubber stamp for his brutal goings-on, Philip refuses.
I had to go home and look up the deal about Ivan's use of whipped virgins to do his cleaning, for example.There was not as much blood and guts as there could have been.
They're awful.Where this film SHINES and is WELL WORTH your time and money is with the visuals: the setting, the costumes, the cinematography in general.
And though I deplore the use of animal skins as garments, all that fur was just gorgeous.The film's lighting is brilliant.
The further he gets from his cell, the more he looks like a tsar.
They did a great job of recreating the look without having original locations to use.It's got a lot of great "look and feel" details too: poor dental hygiene, smoky interiors, people who look like they bathe twice a year.Very few characters emerge as much more than placeholders, but the actors playing Ivan and Philip are both very good.
We get no real insight into either man, though.So while it's not a great film, those interested in Russian history will enjoy aspects of it.
|
tt0329717
|
Hollywood Homicide
|
LAPD Sergeant Joe Gavilan (Harrison Ford) is a financially strapped Hollywood homicide detective who began moonlighting as a real estate broker seven years ago. His partner is Detective K. C. Calden (Josh Hartnett), a much younger officer who teaches yoga on the side and wants to be an actor. The duo are assigned to investigate the murders of four men, members of a rap group called H2OClick who were gunned down in a nightclub by two unidentified assailants. The detectives discover there was a witness in the nightclub who escaped unnoticed, and they work together to track him down. In the midst of it all, Gavilan has to deal with a looming real estate deal that may be the key to getting out of debt, while Calden further pursues his dreams of acting by trying to be scouted by talent agents.
Unknown to the two detectives, Antoine Sartain (Isaiah Washington), the manager and producer of H2OClick, has his head of security eliminate the two hitmen they had hired to carry out these murders and the murder of Klepto, a rapper whom Sartain also managed and produced, whose case is still open. Initially, Gavilan and Calden had believed the murders were gang-related, but Calden later sees the bodies of the hitmen at the morgue and puts two-and-two together to conclude that the murders were being orchestrated by someone else. The detectives also notice some eerie similarities between the H2OClick and Klepto homicides and figure that the two cases are connected. Gavilan learns from an undercover officer posing as a prostitute that the songwriter for H2OClick, a man named K-Roc, had suddenly gone missing; and Gavilan believes he is the murder witness they had been tracking. However, it proves difficult to track down K-Roc when they cannot determine his real name, but it is later discovered that K-Roc is Oliver Robideaux, the son of Olivia Robideaux (Gladys Knight), a former Motown singer.
Meanwhile, the arrival of Lieutenant Bernard "Bennie" Macko (Bruce Greenwood) at headquarters unnerves Gavilan—both have had a bad history with one another ever since Gavilan proved him wrong on a case years ago. It also turns out that Gavilan's love interest, a psychic named Ruby (Lena Olin), used to date him. Macko is intent on taking away Gavilan's badge, going so far as to try to frame him and place both detectives in interrogation. After they are released, Gavilan and Calden seem to have formed a closer bond, and Gavilan offers to help the latter when he reveals that his father Danny Calden who had also been a cop had been mysteriously gunned down during a sting operation gone wrong. His partner at the time, Leroy Wasley, was implicated in the murder, but later released on lack of evidence.
Gavilan and Calden continue the investigation—they track down K-Roc to his home, where Olivia Robideaux professes her son's innocence and that Antoine Sartain, the manager of the group, was the real culprit. Sartain had been embezzling money from both Klepto and the members of H2OClick for years, and when they later found out, they threatened to hire lawyers to nullify their contracts. Enraged, Sartain had ordered the murders that were later carried out by the hitmen as a "lesson" to all the other members under his record label. It also turns out that Sartain's head of security is none other than Leroy Wasley, and that Macko is also in league with him as well.
They prepare to arrest Sartain and Wasley, but can't seem to find their location. Desperate, Gavilan enlists the help of Ruby, who, after a brief meditating session, leads the two detectives to a clothing store. Just then, Sartain and Wasley happened to drive by the store, and Gavilan and Calden follow suit in a wild car chase that leads them through the streets of Los Angeles, that later separates and pits them against Sartain and Wasley, respectively. While struggling against Sartain, Gavilan manages to overthrow him, and Sartain winds up falling from the top of a building to his death in a dumpster. Meanwhile, Wasley has a gun drawn on Calden and admits to killing his father. But Calden utilizes his acting skills to distract Wasley just as he is about the pull the trigger, incapacitates him, reveals he had a tape recorder on the whole time(capturing Wasley bragging about having murdered his father), and arrests him. Gavilan and Calden reunite as LAPD officers swarm the scene in the background, but Macko appears and calls for the arrests of the two officers. However, Macko winds up being the one led away in handcuffs for his affiliations with Sartain and covering up Wasley's corruption.
The next scene shows Gavilan and Ruby (wearing the dress she bought at the clothing store) attending a production of A Streetcar Named Desire, in which Calden was playing a lead role. It is implied that Gavilan successfully brokered the real estate deal, and Calden is giving his all in the pursuit of his acting dream. However, both of them receive calls from police headquarters and leave in the middle of the play. In the end, Gavilan and Calden are both heard ordering cheeseburgers, saying it would be "a long night".
|
paranormal, violence, humor, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Hollywood Homicide has them trying to balance the investigation of murders involving members of LA's rap industry with unusual extracurricular activities and concerns.The most obvious aspects that make the film work so well are the extracurriculars.
It's hard not to be entertained by him in the old Star Wars films, where he was hilarious as Han Solo, or to root/feel for him in the Indiana Jones trilogy and films like "Blade Runner", "Witness", the Jack Ryan films, "The Fugitive" and "Air Force One".Thing is, "Witness" marked the turning point of Harrison's career in which he would mature into the modern day quiet, reluctant hero.
As a result, it never quite realizes it's potentially funny premise or even serve as usual time filler.Ford plays Joe Gavilan, a cop working real estate on the side and Josh Hartnett is his younger partner KC Calden, who works a yoga class on the side, sleeps with his customers and is also an aspiring actor.
This is a great summer movie and Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett are a joy to watch!
I love the way Harrison Ford switches from cop mode to real estate agent mode at the drop of the hat and he was so funny being a slave to his cell phone.
Josh Hartnett plays his rookie partner who has a part time job as a yoga instructor and who thinks of quitting the force to become an actor.
After seeing the movie in the sneak preview, I know the film makers knew exactly what they they were making - a flat out comedy with some good, funny action sequences.
This is an excellent buddy cop movie, with lots of action and a good plot, it won't win Oscars for story telling but it's interesting.
HOLLYWOOD HOMICIDE (2003) ** Harrison Ford, Josh Hartnett, Lena Olin, Bruce Greenwood, Isaiah Washington, Keith David, Dwight Yoakam, Lolita Davidovich, Martin Landau, Master P, Lou Diamond Phillips, Gladys Knight, Smokey Robinson, Kurupt, Dre, (Cameo: Eric Idle; Robert Wagner as himself).
By-the-numbers cop/buddy flick with Ford and Hartnett as gruff and flaky (respectively) LAPD detectives on the case of a rap group assassination while attempting to juggle their moonlighting gigs as real estate broker and wanna be actor (respectively) with a more-miss-than-hit attempt in the laughs department sadly by the out-of-touch script by director Ron Shelton (who acquits himself however in the action sequences including a smash bang-up thrilling car chase along Hollywood Boulevard) and Robert Souza that may have worked 20 years ago with its punchy takes at how LA is a town of many colorful characters on the make at something other than their boring careers (in this case police work).
There we see the producers, the groups, the "showbiz"
It's even related with theater and movies, because one of the main characters wants to be an actor; and in a decent comedic way, he's thinking about acting each time he's doing something; and he probably isn't that good.I'm talking about K.C Calden; Josh Hartnett's character.
More importantly, and if you were wondering, Shelton directs his actors perfectly, making a stupendous balance between the pro and the amateur, the old and the young; Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett.
In the end, their characters are nothing else but cops, in a film that leaves a lot of plot situations unresolved, is a bit long, not funny enough, but different from the gross humor that everyone finds easy to put on paper..
Some of these should have given away to most people the real intentions of this film.The 'love' scene with Harrison Ford should be the last clue to anyone blind enough, that this is really not to be taken seriously and can be considered made specially for Mystery Science Theatre.The film is called 'Hollywood Homicide', I believe, so titled as to ruffle some Hollywood feathers with the notion that Hollywood has been killed by the never ending rain of terrible buddy cop movies.
The real joke is that some suit somewhere probably OK'd this as a real action movie.In fact, the funniest thing is that some people took it seriously and enjoyed it as a serious action movie.The chases are deliberately over the top lame (I mean really, really bad), the dialogue is so silly and pointless it just makes you laugh, the character development is totally non-existant, the cliches flow non-stop, the whole side plot of internal affairs is placed there because it's in every buddy cop movie, etc, etc.
Harrison Ford was a good cop with some trouble and a great real estate man on the side.
It is continually tedious throughout.What is worth mentioning is that the film maker seemed obsessed with the ring tones on the character's mobile phones, to a point where it was just irritating (if you are supposed to turn off your mobile phone during the course of a film, why did the film makers insist on pushing this annoying plot-device on us?).It would've been much more interesting if Mr Ford and Mr Barnett were just playing themselves (real actors moonlighting as cops).
Good cops, bad cops and villains with SOCAL written all over their faces and inflected in every line.But, hey, it's summer and Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett deliver some good laughs and a pretty hot high speed smash 'em up chase through Hollywood in this cop/buddies film.The genre is pretty familiar to all.
It's not going to be easy for Ford and Hartnett who seem to be dealing with all of this in their spare time.It's all the usual kind of stuff you expect in modern police comedies or dramas and this is a bit of both.
Somehow it manages to be witty and in good taste, while giving us just enough action (and I don't just mean car chases...do understand, Harrison Ford is involved, and Josh Hartnett isn't exactly unattractive either ;) to keep us wildly entertained.The one-liners are a riot, but there's an underlying parody here too, that is rampant throughout the movie.
The movie makes fun of buddy comedies, of car chases, and of Hollywood in general, by showing you just how ridiculous it really is.And yet...somehow these two stars (especially Harrison Ford, but I am impressed with young what's-his-name too) are so likeable, and so genuine, that we can really believe their situation, and root for them.Kudos to the makers of this film.
It does involve cops and a murder investigation but it is the natural humour in the movie and the interplay between Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett that is the best reason to see it.
But don't bother about the murder investigation or bad guys and watch the movie for Ford and Hartnett.
Ultimately you have to think that those who have wanted to see Hollywood Homicide would have done so by now, certainly fans of the generational divided lead actors (Josh Hartnett and Harrison Ford) would have long since tuned in to see what it's like.
The wry portrayal of the police system in a bustling Los Angeles is nicely etched into the froth, with the sidebar of coppers having two jobs being a deft poke in the ribs.Good fun with well crafted action scenes, but the main strength is in the writing and to see once again that Ford has been very undervalued as a comedy actor of the years.
I'm not really a fan of the over-the-top humor that seems to rule the comedy films these days, so this kind of humor really surprised and delighted me...I can guarantee you a good time if you liked Bad Boys, Lethal Weapon, 48 hours etc.6.4/10.
Either way, this continues my personal Harrison Ford streak (dating back to Star Wars, there hasn't been a movie of his I've seen that I've genuinely disliked, not even the strictly mediocre Random Hearts).Ford stars as Joe Gavilan, a Hollywood detective moonlighting as a real-estate broker who's desperate to sell a house just to pay off his mortgage and alimony payments.
As a matter of fact, the "main" plot is barely given any genuine development, it's just there to provide the movie with a frame with which the leads can interact and get into some physical action.The movie's success lies mainly with leads Ford and Hartnett, who, surprisingly, aren't the typical mis-matched buddy pairing I was expecting (they actually get along pretty well).
The roundabout way that things unfold in Hollywood Homicide is quite frankly a breath of fresh air, because the tensions in the movie aren't hinged on the solving of any crimes, but on Harrison selling that property and Josh playing 'Stanley' to perfection.
Josh Hartnett's dead eyes, the thick writing of it, and Harrison Ford being in a buddy-cop comedy !
Making one that tries to mix action and comedy through the police of Hollywood itself is sure a good idea but the final result of that turned out to be not at least a spoof of the subgenre but a reason to ask God to have mercy upon all the past movies of the same kind whereas the worst of them was by all means greater than (Hollywood Homicide).What really did happen to this entertaining formula ?!
And. And also to note that Harrison Ford must really be delusional to still believe after all his failures that he is a good enough actor to do comedy.But in the midst of all the little jobs done by various trades (the cars, the girls, a few jokes) there were two elements that were not a waste: two of the most interesting mature women in film.
Disappointingly mild action-comedy/buddy movie about two mismatched L.A. cops—one a stiff veteran who sells real estate on the side, the other a young stud who teaches yoga and aspires to become an actor—who are paired together to try and solve a homicide case involving up and coming rap artists.
This movie was an entertaining and great first attempt by Ron Shelton who took risks with his material and found an fine balance between humor and story plotline that truly promises even better things to come.Harrison Ford did great with his expressions, his sense of humor, and his letting go and enjoying, playing his part while Josh Harnett went a long for an enjoyable romp with a different kind of cop movie.
Potentially entertaining scenarios present themselves only to be mishandled by either lazy acting, lazy writing, lazy directing, or a combination of all three.Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett have zero chemistry together in the lead roles as kind of mismatched buddy cops, who each moonlight in other occupations and have way too many side issues going on in their personal lives, especially, annoyingly so, with Ford's Joe Gavilan.
He even ends the movie with Ford cracking the same unfunny lines he began with in one of his opening scenes.It's clear Shelton's talents lie in the sports film genre, rather than crime comedy.
Hollywood Homicide starring Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett in an odd pairing and unrealistic cop crime comedy drama.
I love Harrison Ford, and here he stars in "Hollywood Homicide" as a cop/real estate broker.
The film also features Josh Hartnett as his partner/fledgling actor, Lena Olin, Bruce Greenwood, Isaiah Washington, Keith David, Dwight Yoakam, Lolita Davidovich, Martin Landau, Master P, Lou Diamond Phillips, Gladys Knight, Smokey Robinson, Kurupt, Dre, with a cameo by Eric Idle, and also Robert Wagner.
Hollywood police detective Joe Gavilan (Harrison Ford) and his young partner K.C. Calden (Josh Hartnett) are investigating the murder of a rap group at a nightclub.
Hollywood Homicide is a mediocre movie with an average storyline that I felt had the opportunity of being very different but simply didn't and a cast that could have delivered more.The set up of a buddy cop comedy in LA with Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett easily could have worked but simply didn't,they completely lacked any necessary chemistry for their parts.I always love seeing Harrison Ford on screen,but was very disappointed by his performance in this,he simply couldn't do comedy,he delivered pretty much every line very poorly and I feel like he slowly lost more and more interest in his role throughout.There were certainly a handful of parts that made me laugh,but there wasn't enough and there was nothing aside from that,the action sequences are unimpressive,and we are never really given any reason to truly care for these characters.It has its moments,but Hollywood Homicide is mostly a poorly written and poorly acted comedy that I would not recommend.
It's not hard to see what attracted Harrison Ford to Hollywood Homicide, buddy cop movies if done well are usually successful, Josh Hartnett was on a role after 'Pearl Harbour', 'Black Hawk Down' and '40 days and 40 nights'.
Two LAPD detectives played by Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett investigate the murder of an up and coming rap band.
In his spare time Ford moonlights as an real estate agent, Hartnett as a yoga instructor, but he really wants to be an actor, an spends a lot of time reciting 'A Streetcar Named Desire'There are scenes of action, car chases (more like Smokey & The Bandit than Bullit) chases on foot and shoot outs.
It had Harrison Ford, it was about cops, couldn't be all bad."Hollywood Homicide" retells the story of Joe (Ford) a policeman who dabbles in real estate on the side.
Set in a city where everyone aspires to be something other than what they are, Josh Hartnett's K.C. Calden wants to be an actor while Harrison Ford's Joe Gavilan would rather be in real estate.
This is not just because the "Cop Genre" has been claimed almost exclusively by TV shows like CSI, NYPD Blue etc etc, but also because the story and characters here are too big and too small for the big screen.Harrison Ford plays a hardened cop who has a side job of selling real estate, the business cards come out at crime scenes as he tries to sell a white elephant in the Hills district.
Josh Hartnett plays his younger and more enthusiastic partner who really wants to be an actor.Both these characters would work well on TV as we could see them develop, rather than be constrained by a very unimaginative cop crime plot.
Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnet aren't bad in their parts, just that these characters become quirks without the time and development they need to really work.Plus the car chases and violence is just so over the top.
Hollywood Homicide is a typical buddy cop comedy with Harrison Ford as the experienced cop and Josh Hartnett as the rookie.
I loved the way that our two cops had lives outside of work (real estate and yoga/show biz).Not the greatest movie on earth, but it was good to laugh that hard..
It is amazing how funny Josh Hartnett and Harrison Ford can be when they are in the same movie.
It was great fun seeing Harrison Ford so loose and amusing, but at the same time giving an exciting action performance one comes to expect from his movies.
Watching it, I didn't know if it was intending to make fun of itself or if the film's makers really thought the Hollywood roles of detectives with outside jobs was funny.
Harrison Fords character plays a cop who is greatly in debt and also holds a job as a real estate desperatley trying to sell a house and turn a quick profit.
The rap music and score of the film were pretty good too.For anybody who is a fan of Harrison's work such as myself go see this movie, you won't be disappointed!*** out of ****.
While watching Hollywood Homicide I couldn't help but feel like Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett probably had a good deal of fun making the movie, and certainly a good deal of this fun is shared by the audience.
The action nor the chasing down of suspects is all that interesting but it does get you to the middle point of the movie when both Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnet turn on the funny switch and you really just forget about the mundane details of the plot.What sells this film are the characters almost in the same way that it was the characters that had you coming back for more in the Lethal Weapon movies.
And even though the Lethal Weapon films does a better job creating thrilling scenes and balancing it with scenes of buddy humor, Hollywood Homicide actors Ford and Hartnet have a genuine connection that works and is funny.
Harrison Ford coasts on his waning charm and (literally) phones in a performance, while Josh Hartnett is his usual, dazed-looking self, much like a five-year-old who wandered onto a movie set.
Remember when Harrison Ford was the biggest star in Hollywood because he made great movies?
Those days are feeling like a more and more distant memory.While "Hollywood Homicide" is by no means terrible, it is a routine and surprisingly boring buddy cop movie.
I'm a big fan of Harrison Ford and it was great just to see him in another movie, but him and Josh Hartnett seemed to work really well together.
There is some good action scenes, and seeing Harrison Ford do somethings against type is worth the price of admission alone.Anyway, here's the basic plot, two cops played by Ford and Hartnett are assigned a rap murder case in Master P's club.
Hollywood Homicide isn't a good film when you get right it down to it, nor is it a really bad one.
Formula buddy/cop action/comedy casts a worn down looking Harrison Ford as a detective and a sleepwalking Josh Hartnett as his junior partner...
While others may want to call it a bad detective movie, I like to call it a lovely comedy, a parody of both Hollywood industry and the police world.
"Hollywood Homicide" has two good ideas: a cop who is also a estate agent, and a younger detective who wants to be an actor.
If you like Harrison Ford and/or any of the actors mentioned above then I strongly recommend Hollywood Homicide!
|
tt0417397
|
9 rota
|
At a farewell ceremony in Krasnoyarsk, a band of young Soviet army recruits is preparing for their departure to their place of military service. On arrival at their bootcamp in the Fergana Valley of Uzbekistan they meet their drill instructor, Senior Praporschik Dygalo, a seasoned, traumatized veteran of several tours in Afghanistan and a brutal trainer who treats the recruits harshly and at one time suffers a nervous breakdown. During their training, the recruits overcome their differences and build bonds. Between the training sessions, they receive lessons in operating plastic explosives (which prompts some comic relief) and how to conduct themselves in Afghanistan (underlining the vast cultural differences between Western and Arabic culture).
On their arrival at Baghram air base they greet a group of VDV troops who have fulfilled their military service and are due to return home. One of the departing soldiers gives one of the new arrivals, Lyutyi, a talisman that he claims has kept him safe through several tours and multiple firefights. Homeward bound, the departing soldier's transport plane is hit by enemy fire from the nearby mountains and crashes, giving the new recruits their first taste of war.
Shortly thereafter, the soldiers are assigned to the 9th company, where their trainer and drill instructor, Dygalo, had previously served. The company is soon deployed to the front as part of Operation Magistral and is instructed to hold a nameless hill at all costs. After some preliminary skirmishes, the company's position comes under sustained attack by a large number of Mujahedin fighters and is overrun. In the end, the company holds the hill until reinforcements arrive, by which time seemingly only Lyutyi is still alive.
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0062776
|
Candy
|
The Candy Candy manga provides a "coming of age story" in the shōjo genre. Candy, an abandoned orphan taken in by the orphanage Pony's Home near Lake Michigan around the start of the 20th century, spent the first years of her life at the orphanage, to where she would often return to repose and to decide her next course in life. When Annie, her best friend at the orphanage, was adopted, she ran outside crying, and met briefly a young man in kilt who told her not to cry. Candy retained fond memories of the young man and, not knowing his name, remembered him as her "Prince on the Hill". The young man will have great influence and importance in her life later on.
When she turned thirteen, Candy was taken in by the Lagan family as a companion for their Lagan family daughter, Eliza. The Lagans treated her poorly and eventually made Candy a servant girl. When the Lagan family accused Candy of stealing and sent her off to work in their family farm in Mexico, Candy was rescued from being sent to Mexico by William Audrey, the sole heir of the very wealthy Audrey family and the owner of the Audrey estate. William Audrey became Candy's adoptive father, but his true identity remained a mystery and she would not meet him until the end of the story. He was also the uncle of Candy's first love, Anthony Brown, and a relative of Anthony's cousins, the Cornwell brothers Archibald (Archie) and Alistair (Stear), as well as the Lagan children.
Later on, Anthony died in a hunting accident when he was thrown off the horseback. Thereafter, Candy, along with Archie and Stear, and the Lagan children, were sent to London to attend the prestigious St. Paul's College, a secondary school, where she met the rebellious bad boy Terry Grandchester the illegitimate child of a British Duke, although she has once saw him crying on the same boat she was taking to travel to London. Terry was her second and grand love (in the words of the author Keiko Nagita/Kyoko Mizuki in the essays found on Misaki's website, "the great love that cannot bear fruit"). Circumstances divided the pair when Eliza Lagan schemed to have Candy expelled from St. Paul's by manipulating them into a scandal.
After the scandal, Terry left St. Paul's to protect Candy's reputation, but Candy also decided to leave. They would both embark on their individual life journeys forward in the United States, where Candy trained to become a nurse in Chicago around the time of World War I, and Terry pursued a career as a rising star actor on Broadway in New York. An actress in his theater troupe, Susanna, became attracted to Terry and believed she loved him. During a rehearsal session, an accident occurred and Susanna saved Terry's life, but in the process became disabled. Her injury destroyed her acting career. Her mother demanded that Terry takes care of her for the rest of her life. Susanna herself became depressed and attempted suicide, knowing that Terry loved Candy and did not love her. Feeling responsible, Terry was torn between reuniting with Candy and his duty to care for Susanna. When Candy discovered what happened, she decided to sacrifice her own happiness and left Terry, so Terry could remain with Susanna, even though Terry did not love Susanna and was deeply in love with Candy.
Afterwards, Candy returned to Chicago to continue her life. By chance, she became the nurse and caretaker to her adoptive father, William Audrey, who lost his memories after a World War I related bomb explosion on a train in Italy. William ultimately regained his memories and revealed his true identity to Candy. At the end of the story, Candy discovered that he was her childhood Prince of the Hill. In Italy, however, the anime's ending was changed, and Candy and Terry meet again at a train station deciding to stay together.
In 2010 the novel "Candy Candy The Final Story" written by Mizuki using her real name Keiko Nagita, Candy discovers that Susanna has died and Terence writes her a letter to say that for him nothing has changed, leaving hope that they will reunite.
There were some plot and character differences between the manga and the anime: Candy's age was different for several events when she grew up at Pony's Home. In the manga, she was six or seven years old when she met her Prince of the Hill, but was ten in the anime. Her sidekick pet raccoon Kurin/Clint belonged solely to the anime version.
|
psychedelic, satire
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
But perhaps the most reviled of the lot has been the film Candy.Candy tells the simple tale of a sweet young thing that goes out into the world to grow but finds herself confronted at every turn by typical male stereotypes (played by some of the biggest stars of the day) who really only have one goal in mind.
Along the way she meets up with the artist (Richard Burton), the soldier (Walter Matthau), the healer (James Coburn) and the guru (Marlon Brando) among others.
Despite the premise Candy is more like a teasing Roger Vadim film (think Barbarella) and the nudity is kept to an absolute minimum.
The biggest surprise is even with the big name cast, the films best performance belongs to John Astin as Candy's Father and also as her lecherous Uncle who has his own designs on her.
The lead actress Ewa Aulin is lovely to look at but delivers all of her lines like she has just learned them phonetically and has no idea what she is saying and the directer allows the pace to drag at many points.Still if the films from this era interests you than this one should be required viewing.
Based on Terry Southern's classic novel, CANDY is remarkable film featuring a swinging soundtrack, actors like Richard Burton and Marlon Brando spoofing themselves, and a fast-moving picaresque story that satirizes late 60s America (military, academia, Eastern religion, etc).
Advocating sexual freedom and experimentation, Candy is one fun movie with a funny script by Buck Henry and wild visuals, like a glass-bottom limousine and Brando's gurumobile.
that's what makes it great.Seriously, its like if in 40 years, film critics try to asses the cultural validity of 'Dude where's my Car'.
It starts off great, with Richard Burton (McPhisto) with wind constantly blowing thru his hair no matter where he happens to be, squaring off with John Astin as Candy's square father Mr. Christian.
Expect tons of name puns like that, and way loads of social satire against all the 6 food groups of establishment authority figures (Military, Doctors, Beaurocrats, Teachers, Cops and Spiritual Healers) and see what they all have in common, namely hypocrisy and Candy.This seems to be a sequel of sorts to The Magic Christian in not only author, but style and attitude as well.
Its also reminiscent of Harold and Maude, O Lucky Man, Brewster Mcloud, Holy Mountain (okay, a tiny bit) and half a dozen other late 60's satirical and somewhat surreal comedies.Who needs a linear plot when you have great social satire performed by top actors (Marlon Brando, James Coburn, Walter Matthau)?
With a stellar cast of Richard Burton, Walter Matthau, Charles Coburn, Marlon Brando (and Ringo Starr), how could writer Buck Henry go so wrong???
The video clip reminded me that the movie is just as good as I remember!McPhisto, played by Richard Burton, reminds me of my old Psych Professor, Don Whaley, who taught a WMU and North Texas State.
If you understand this movie,it is very funny.It is really an exaggeration of the way life is.It shows the plight of naive young girl,who encounters men,who want nothing more,than to get into her pants.
Naive high-school beauty Candy Christian (Ewa Aulin) begins her odyssey of sexual misadventures at a poetry seminar given by the reviled but popular poet McPhisto (Richard Burton).
Candy ends up on an Air Force jet where she is once again seduced, this time by a mad air force officer (Walter Matthau); later she is taken advantage of by a brilliant surgeon (James Coburn) who performs a dangerous operation on her injured father.
and, yes, you've guessed it, he too takes advantage of the over-sexed yet ever-innocent girl.It is hard to be sure if there is any point to all this, though the lack of a meaningful narrative suggests that the film is trying to convey some kind of subtextual meaning.
a salary of $50,000 to rip off Aulin's clothes and romp around with her seems a pretty fair incentive!) Candy is a total mess of a movie, but you should still watch it if only to say you've had the dubious pleasure of experiencing its unique brand of vulgarity, chaos and extravagance..
i was very young,maybe early teenage years when i was fortunate enough to view this movie in it's entirety on late night tv in australia.since then i have made it my personal quest to locate it on video if it exists in that format.to this day my efforts have been in vain.my memories of "candy" (1968) are very blurred even though i was substance free at the time due to my age but images from the film are still quite fresh today.this was helped by some recent documents on terry southern's work (he wrote the novel in the 50's,as well as easy rider,dr strangelove,uncredited writing on casino royale) all favourites of mine & most people who would have an interest in viewing cany again or for the 1st time.i agree with what i've read that it would be more appreciated in todays viewing standards.john astin who plays dual roles had a standout performance,what sticks in my mind is the brain surgery one of his characters had to endure which resulted in a 240 volt powerpoint being inserted into the back of his head to attach some electrical device to aid his recovery.all shortlived cameos by the likes of richard burton,marlon brando,james coburn & walter matthau are all brilliant.i can't see (as one reviewer suggested that marlon may have buried the film rights out of embarrassment) the whole movie is intended as a farce & it looks like everyone involved had a hoot making it.see IMdb review for extensive review,i could easily use my 1000 word maximum recounting my fond memories which i hope one day can be complimented with a 2nd viewing.you know something is special when one can rave about it over 20 years later from the time it was experienced.i have tried italian video suppliers out of desperation to access a video copy,the only chance now seems to be from a pirate copy.hopefully someone out there can help in this regard.film was also known as "candy e il suo pazzo mondo" as it was a joint american/italian production.title star was played by former miss teen sweden ewa aulin cameo also by ringo starr as a mexican gardener,hope to here back from any other fans of an extraordinary rare 60's classic,cheers stuart.
I cannot imagine how you can possibly put Marlon Brando, Richard Burton, James Coburn, Walter Matthau, Elsa Martinelli and John Huston in a film and fail?
The main character Candy (Ewa Aulin) wanders through this film like she is basically stoned, and you could watch a porn film and find a wider degree of expressions on someone's face (Basically she makes Jenna Jameson look like Meryl Streep).
This film is without question the greatest waste of talent in motion picture history (Brando, Coburn, Matthau & Huston FOUR Oscar WINNERS (Burton nominated 7 times)), and thus belongs in my 10 All-Time worst film list (Not quite "Machete" or "Walk On The Wild Side" but pretty damn close).
It's the psychedelic story of Candy Christian (Ewa Aulin), a teenage girl who constantly gets raped.
The mammoth cast includes John Astin as Candy's father, Richard Burton as a Dylan Thomas-like poet, Ringo Starr as a gardener, Walter Matthau as a general, James Coburn as a surgeon, Charles Aznavour as a hunchbacked thief and Marlon Brando as a guru.Okay, so I didn't actually experience the 60s, so "Candy" doesn't have the same significance to me as it did to my parents' generation.
Most scenes seem to go on forever ("the director wouldn't shorten any of it in the editing!" said the designer) but it is incredible watching Walter Matthau, Marlon Brando, James Coburn and Ringo Starr (as a mexican..
Embarrassing performances by such "luminaries" as Richard Burton, Walter Matthau, James Coburn, and Marlon Brando were obviously turned in for scale- that is, the scale the director must've used to weigh out the dope that permeates this piece of tripe.
Granted, there are some very weak sections, e.g. the Matthau, but I laughed even as this absurd chapter came to a close...it's a product of an era when not only sex, but laughter and freedom, were celebrated and must be seen in that mindset...this is a movie that people who write certain modern movie guidebooks will never, ever, ever understand...for the simple reason that, in this era, as prurience increases, thus does narrowmindedness, so that we come to forget completely the now remote atmosphere in which such a film could be made..
After watching him trying to get it on with a mannequin, I thought to myself, "He must have loved Elizabeth Taylor so much to have allowed himself to be humiliated like that." This was around the time he bought the famous 69-carat Taylor-Burton diamond for his wife, and he needed the money.The music is terrible, the acting is terrible, there is no plot, and overall it is a tasteless mess..
Christian Marquand's film-version of the Mason Hoffenberg-Terry Southern novel (adapted by the usually acerbic and talented Buck Henry) becomes a star-studded, but frantic and unfunny sex spoof ('alleged comedy' would seem more appropriate).
John Astin is amusing as Candy's father, but everyone else in the cast (Richard Burton, Marlon Brando, James Coburn and Walter Matthau among them) is simply dreadful.
Marlon Brando, Richard Burton, Charles Aznavour, James Coburn, Walter Matthau, John Huston, Ringo Starr, john Austin, Elsa Martinelli, Anita Pallenberg and Sugar Ray Robinson are among the cast with Ewa Aluin in her first film role as Candy.
All in all, I don't think I completely understand this movie, but I enjoyed it nonetheless, especially because of its stars Ewa Aulin, Marlon Brando, Walter Mathau, and Ringo Starr..
The "encounters" she experiences involve various stars of the period.Basically, Candy is an innocent & winsome adolescent continually seduced by several institutional isms: romanticism (Richard Burton), patriotism (Walter Matthau), professionalism (James Coburn) and mysticism (Marlon Brando); I'm not sure what ism Ringo Starr's character falls under (ethnic-ism?).
I saw this film in 1969 when it was released (though I suspect that it was actually 68 before I joined the Air Force) and still remember gags like the restaurant Candy steps into and orders a Coke.
"You must go beyond hunger - beyond thirst" while the hungry and HOT Ewa Aulin complains of hunger is a gem of a scene, along with Burton's WAYYYYY over the top Dylan Thomas type poet.Mark here that a scene in the overrated "American Pie" of sex on a pool table was done better here where you actually SAW the act, and not just heard about it while characters were supposed to be seeing it.All in all, those who choose to hate this film, get a sense of humor.
Marlon Brando explains as an Indian guru the title of this highly weird and boring movie, the girl who is named candy stands for C and Y, you get it!?
What i really tried to figure out when i was watching this movie is why do all these stars show up in this movie, the only explanations i can think of is that they lost a bet or the cast was blowing their heads off during filming.
When you're 17, and love the Byrds, Steppenwolf and later Dave Grusin, and the music pushes the movie no matter HOW bad it is, you've got a winner to a 17 year old.
There were several films I remember seeing when I was a kid growing up that would forever change my view of women, they were 'Barbarella', '1Million Years BC' & 'Good Grief It's Candy'.
So, I unwrapped the DVD, put it in the player, told my girlfriend about it being a bizarre film that I saw when I was a kid & I couldn't really remember that much about the movie but there was a gorgeous girl who starred in it who I fancied when I was younger.
As satire & a social commentary of the time it pretty much took the rip out of all the establishment, including hippies.I am still thinking about the movie a day on trying to suss out what it was trying to say, whether it was trying to say anything, whether it was one of the best or the worst films I have ever seen.
One of the most maligned of the all-star "anything goes" extravaganzas typical of the late 1960s – this time with pretensions towards satire given its origins as a Terry Southern novel (here adapted for the screen by Buck Henry, who also appears briefly as a lunatic) – is not too bad, actually (somewhat in the same vein as THE MAGIC Christian [1969] but slightly more entertaining), though it does run badly out of steam two-thirds of the way in.18-year old Swedish "newcomer" Ewa Aulin plays the naïve but well-meaning heroine who's taken advantage of by practically everyone she meets; actually, she had already appeared in two notable Italian movies both starring French actor Jean-Louis Trintignant – Tinto Brass' DEADLY SWEET (1967; which I caught at the 2004 Venice Film Festival with its infamous director in attendance!) and Giulio Questi's DEATH LAID AN EGG (1968) – and she would go on to star in two more worthwhile European movies which, incidentally, both feature Italian actress Lucia Bose' – Romolo Guerrieri's THE DOUBLE (1971) and Jorge Grau's BLOOD CASTLE (1973; with which I'm unfamiliar myself) – before bailing out of the film industry altogether to become a teacher!
The impressive supporting cast includes (in order of appearance): John Astin who has the triple roles of Aulin's father, a hellish vision of same and her uncle; a somewhat embarrassing Richard Burton is MacPhisto, a poet-teacher (with wind forever blowing in his face) who is worshipped like a rock star by his students and whom the script requires to lick champagne off the glass-plated floor of his limousine and make love to an inflatable doll!; Ringo Starr's role isn't clearly defined but he seems to be the Christians' Mexican gardener (could he have been the inspiration for FAWLTY TOWERS' Manuel?); Elsa Martinelli is Aulin's promiscuous aunt; Walter Matthau the general commandeering a paratrooping outfit; James Coburn a celebrated surgeon; Anita Pallenberg his jealous nurse/lover; John Huston a colleague/rival of Coburn's; Charles Aznavour a hunchback criminal with a penchant for magic tricks (climbing and moving along walls or literally diving into a mirror just like in a Jean Cocteau film); Marlon Brando as an Indian guru who practices his meditation aboard a truck rambling throughout America; also in the cast as a couple of Starr's whip-wielding sisters were Euro-Cult favorites Florinda Bolkan and Marilu' Tolo.The film is most notorious perhaps for being one of Brando's weirdest acting choices during his lean years; then again, it seems that his presence was pivotal in securing the film its backing (he was friends with director/former actor Marquand who, unsurprisingly, never again stepped behind the camera); still, the best and lengthiest 'episode' is the one featuring Coburn, Pallenberg and Huston (in which Astin and Martinelli also turn up) – while Enrico Maria Salerno was hilarious as an obsessive cine-verite' film-maker who, when asked a question by a police officer, replies: "Who directed it?" and later even films himself as he is passing out!
Unfortunately, my experience with the film was further marred by the fact that the audio on the copy I watched went badly out-of-synch around the 90-minute mark (thus including Brando's entire segment)...and no matter what I tried – usually, playing the same scene over again would fix the problem – I couldn't get it to work properly!.
No wonder so many famous people wanted to do this movie: Brando, Richard Burton, Ringo Starr, Coburn...
As someone else here said, Candy shows how men are devious and conniving creatures who will try every dirty trick in the book to get into the pants of an attractive young girl.I only wish I could know what Kubrick thought of this film.
Star studded cast with Ringo Starr( a young man nearing the Priesthood), Richard Burton (as a larger than life drunken poet), Marlon Brando (as horny Maharishee/Bhagwan style guru), and many other crazed characters.
This film is downright embarassing from the inept direction all the way down to the wasting of great actors like Matthau,Burton, and Brando to name but a few.
'Candy' is a terrible waste of real talent, much like Preminger's stinker of the same year, 'Skidoo'.The only thing that got me through the film is the fantastic body of the young Ms. Aulin.
However, the sight of such talents as Richard Burton, James Coburn, Marlon Brando, Walter Matthau and John Astin making complete fools of themselves with a terribly unfunny script by Buck Henry is not a pleasant thing to behold, and it is hardly 'great'..
I didn't laugh so much this time around but then I don't laugh as much as I used to -- at anything.But look at that cast: Burton, Huston, Brando, Aznavour, Coburn, Pallenberg, Matthau, among others.
Now as far as this movie is concerned it certainly had its share of major actors to include Marlon Brando (as the Eastern mystic named "Grindl"), Richard Burton ("MacPhisto"), Walter Matthau ("General R.
Ewa Aulin plays the title role, a not-so-bright sexpot who happens to continually be in the wrong place at the wrong time, encountering one sex fiend after another, from Mexican gardener Ringo Starr(!) to military man Walter Matthau to creepy poet Richard Burton.
No. The movie offers a series of comic bits, each featuring more or less great actors, encountering Candy: Richard Burton as the poet McPhisto, Ringo Starr as the Mexican gardener Emmanuel, James Coburn as the surgeon Dr. Krankheit, Walter Matthau as General Smight, Charles Aznavour as the hunchback, and Marlon Brando as the guru Grindl.
|
tt0092030
|
The Supernaturals
|
One hundred years ago, deep in the sullen backwoods of the Southern United States, a Confederate town is held captive, the soldiers forced to walk through a piece of woodland laced with mines. Because he is found wearing a Confederate States Army outfit, Jeremy (Chad Sheets), a young boy is also forced to make the crossing. If they make it across the minefield the Union Army 44th will set them free. Only Jeremy and his mother (Melanie) - who runs to save him - survive, despite the fact that the mother has stepped on a mine. Jeremy exhibits unearthly powers. Jump to circa 1985 and a platoon of soldiers are out on manouevres in the same backwoods. They too are the 44th, descendants of the Union platoon of years before, those who committed the atrocities. The main character here is Pvt. Ray Ellis (Maxwell Caulfield), the only soldier to catch glimpses of the beautiful and mysterious Melanie; Ellis also has a romantic interest in Pvt. Angela Lejune (Talia Balsam). The platoon decide to camp inside a circle of yellow grass seemingly caused by brush fire, a spot from which the wind only blows outward. Pvt. Ellis is reluctant to camp there, but Sgt. Hawkins does not like having her authority undermined. Whilst the platoon are setting up camp, Melanie reappears - this time witnessed by all in the platoon - and takes a strong interest in Pvt. Ellis who bears an uncanny resemblance to her husband, Evan.
Trouble for Sgt. Leona Hawkins (Nichelle Nichols) and her platoon begins with the soldiers' drunken and childish antics; however, events take a sinister turn when Pvt. Cort (Bobby Di Cicco) is found shot in the head. They inexplicably lose radio contact and the nearest town is over twenty miles away. Hawkins and her platoon go in search of - and arrest - Melanie, who lives in an old wooden shack with what looks to be her father or grandfather, a withered old man. In the cabin they discover the relics of muskets and an old diary, written by Evan. They take Melanie back to camp, but leave the old man at the cabin; he is too old and frail to go anywhere. During the night, an eerie fog rolls in, encompassing the 44th, and the Confederate Dead close in on their camp. Most of the 44th are subsequently killed - one-by-one - whilst Pvt. Ellis heads off into the woods in search of the old man who, it turns out, is Jeremy (he has used his powers to keep his mother the same age). Along the way he is forced to do battle with the Confederate zombies and also runs into Melanie, who shows him a locket. Inside is a picture of Evan, and Ellis immediately recognizes the resemblance. He snatches the locket from around her neck and runs in the direction of the cabin. Once there he persuades Jeremy to end the evil spell and send Melanie and the zombies back to wherever it is the dead are supposed go. Exhausted, Jeremy dies and Ellis returns to the camp where Lejune and Hawkins are waiting, the only survivors. Ellis embraces Lejune and the locket falls from his hand to the woodland floor, where it is lost amongst the leaves.
|
suspenseful, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Scottish-born Maxwell Caulfield and Star Treks Nichelle Nichols go down to the woods and get a big surprise.
A force that has brought back the dead confederate soldiers to wreak revenge on some recruits.
The only few merits it has, are the neat ghost story concept (Return of the Civil War Zombies) and some commendable attempts at creating atmosphere (mainly with the use of lighting and fog).
It's like it wants to, but can't, really.The zombies appear to have cool make-up effects, but it's hard to tell because you hardly get a good look at them.
It sort of plays out like a supernatural slasher movie in the woods.
Either way, they all still act like teenage boy-scouts.
THE SUPERNATURALS might still be worth a watch if you fancy this type of typical 80's stuff, but make sure to lower your expectations.I really wanted to like this film a bit more, this second time around.
I've read some pretty extreme (both positive and negative) reviews for this movie, but it's really a very middle-of-the-road affair.
It's directed competently enough to keep you from feeling that you totally wasted your time with it, but it's also so derivative that it can even be called a ripoff (especially of Herschell Gordon Lewis' "Two Thousand Maniacs"; it has practically the same plot).
I am a huge fan of zombie movies, so, when I found this one, I jumped to the chance of renting it.
And then I knew I made a bad choice.The movie is about a group of army recruits being led into the backwoods by their head sergeant, Uhura from Star Trek.
And that wasn't a good sign.Eventually, some "supernatural" stuff starts to happen, relating back to some flashback of a kid walking through a minefield with all these Confederate soldiers, only to have all of them blown away, except for him.
She's just with them now.I was starting to fall asleep until finally some guy got killed by two zombies in an underground bunker.
Then there's that, "We've found a body, now let's find the killer" scheme until finally, that night, there is...yes...a shoot-out between zombies--which we barely ever see--and the recruits, who are getting killed left and right.
We saw an equivalent of ten zombies in the whole movie, uninteresting deaths, and basically no horror.
So why then do I like this movie?
It's because The Supernaturals is one of those movies from my childhood.
There is a lack of gore, however, the zombies look cool, when visible.
'The Supernaturals' is one of the most sinister horror films to come out of the 1980's.
The woods serve as an appropriate setting for this creepy horror movie, and there is - despite previous reviews - enough gore to keep the average horror fan entertained.
However, what makes this film stand out from other zombie films, is the tight plot and the faultless directing.
The use of the mist-shrouded woods, the 'seemingly' disused underground bunkers and the ancient stone cottage - now a haven for the long-dead - create an eerie atmosphere.
From the film-maker of "He Knows You're Alone" (1980) "and "Distortions" (1987); Director Armand Mastroianni's generic survival zombie feature "The Supernaturals" has a good concept (army recruits on a training mission in the woods of the Deep South encounter dead confederate soldiers), which isn't entirely realised.
The performances are decent enough (Nichelle Nichols, a pinning Maxwell Caulfield and Talia Balsam) and look out for a cameo by one of the Bee Gees; Maurice Gibb as a Union soldier.
Although the dialogue is bad, numerous technical mistakes are made (especially the entire nature of military training exercises), and the climax is somewhat confusing, the film maintains an unsettling atmosphere, which is surprising given that the best parts of the film take place in broad daylight.
Anyone who likes a ghost story or "living dead" films (this could conceivably fit into either category) should enjoy it.6/10.
Nichelle Nichols stars as a drill sergeant who takes some young army cadets to an isolated forest to do some training, but they run afoul of several ghosts / zombies from the Civil War. Some are good, but most of them are seeking revenge for having to walk on fields with land mines at gunpoint.
A good cast is wasted in this slow moving, dull flick with poor zombie effects.Rated R; Violence, Profanity, and a Mild Sexual Situation..
While on tactical manoeuvres, an army division (led by Lt. Uhura and including Geordi La Forge) is attacked by the reanimated corpses of civil war Confederate soldiers who, in 1865, were forced to walk across a minefield by a cruel Yankee officer.Incredibly, director Armand Mastroianni takes this blinder of a premise - Southern Comfort meets Night of the Living Dead meets 2000 Maniacs- and makes one hell of a dull horror out of it.
Too much of the film focuses on the soldiers as they trek through the woods and set up camp, and when the zombies eventually make an appearance there is a distinct lack of juicy gore, Mastroianni clearly aiming for eeriness and atmosphere, back-lighting his zombies and shrouding them in fog.
Unfortunately, all he really achieves is boredom.The really silly ending sees Private Ray Ellis (Maxwell Caulfield) convincing Jeremy, the only survivor of the minefield massacre and now a very old man, to end the horror by sending his vengeful mother, an immortal witch, to the afterlife.
There were some kills with decent special effects near the end but nothing particularly memorable..
Supernaturals (1986) is a terrible film.
This film is so bad that if your t.v. is stuck on one channel and this movie comes on I have one word of advice for you.
Not even bad movie lovers would want to waste their time on this rubbish.
A group of brain dead soldiers go out playing "army men" on some sacred battleground and learn the hard way that "The south shall rise again!" What happens next?
Please avoid this movie like the plague.
The plot is good, it's quite interesting but cheesy special effects, and bad acting make this a bad movie.
The zombies are laughable, and the ending is...
NOT a horror movie.
However, it is "horror-ble" The acting sucks, the script must have been written by a wookie, and the special effects are below cheesy, they're worse them some of the stuff full moon studios produces.
To anyone interested in renting or watching this film, let me make this abundently clear to you: There are only 5 minutes worth of zombies in this film which really have nothing to do with the story or plot, or lack there of.
If you're looking for zombies, I suggest moving on to a real movie like Day of the Dead.
There was the potential for this to be something quite good, except the script and acting got in the way.
The backwoods locales are, for the most part, effective and promising but with Nichelle Nichols as the Sargeant you know your in trouble.
Maybe if she just tried to act a little bit instead of sleepwalking through her role another dimension could have been added to this yawner but seeing as how she's not getting much help from her supporting actors(including Star Trek:The Next Generation's LeVar Burton)or limp script, who can really blame her?
In the midst of the regular lulls in the action there actually are a few inspired scenes of zombie Confederate troops lumbering across mist enshrouded fields and a scare or two in a well conceived and spooky underground bunker but before anything much happens the movie is over.
That the production team does deliver a few rather cool effects and scenes is a credit to their frugality as this was a very cheap film indeed!
I remember seeing "The Supernaturals" on cable TV during my childhood.The film left some memories,so it was the highest time to check it out after so many years.The prologue starts in 1865.A group of confederate soldiers is captured by the Yankees and forced to walk across a minefield.All of them die with an exception of a young boy.The year is 1986.A group of young soldiers led by Nichelle Nichols is camping in the woods.When the night begins the confederate zombies appear and start killing recruits one by one.It's up to Maxwell Caufield to save his platoon."The Supernaturals" is competently made and well-acted zombie flick.The film is relatively goreless as all the killings are off-screen.Still if you liked Tony Malanowski's "The Curse of the Screaming Dead" you may give this one a try.7 Civil War zombies out of 10..
Sigh
despite my many years of training in horror cinema and countless of previous bad experiences, I still get suckered into watching lousy movies because of their appealing and juicy looking VHS cover artwork!
I knew absolutely nothing about "The Supernaturals", but purely based on that drawing of a toothless skull wearing a civil army soldier's hat, I simply had to see it!
Way to go, Mr. Horror expert
Oh well, at least it isn't the worst genre movie of the 80's, that's for sure.
"The Supernaturals" is a mediocre horror outing with a relatively original concept and setting and a handful of memorably worthwhile sequences, but ultimately it lacks the necessary suspense and panache in order to rank among the better achievements of the 80's decade.
As stated already in numerous other reviews and user comments, the film effectively borrows the settings and characters of Walter Hill's "Southern Comfort" and H.G. Lewis' "Two Thousand Maniacs".
What remains is a nonetheless interesting movie about a platoon of soldiers out on a training excursion in a Southern forest area and suddenly having to battle against seemingly spontaneously resurrected zombie soldiers from the Civil War. Ironically enough, the supernatural elements in "The Supernaturals" are the only ones that don't work.
The promising flashback at the beginning hinted that a kid soldier saved his mother thanks to a sudden outburst of supernatural powers on this exact same location during the year 1865, and now he Jeremy - as well as his mother and the long-dead members of the platoon he was part of still guard over the place.
The middle section is plain dull and I simply cannot comprehend why Armand Mastroianni decided it would be a good idea to make an 80's zombie movie with only a minimum of gore..
I had seen "The Supernaturals" the year it was released as part of a triple feature at a Times Square grind house and thought for a top billing movie it was pretty bad.I've been pointedly watching a lot of eighties movies that I missed and ones that I saw and decided to watch again.
For the most part, I had been pleasantly surprised to discover many of the awful eighties movies I'd re-watched were better than I had recalled them.
"The Supernaturals" is not one of these.Avoid this turkey and save your time with something else.
This movie is just badly done and not at all in a "so bad, it's good" way.
Not that it was badly shot, it was all done in a proper way but it takes too long before the zombies arrive.
The zombies themselves looks really okay and the effects used as they are dismembered are also really well done.
It's even a bit funny with a hacked off hand keeping attacking ones throat and one soldier being killed by the remains of a slashed arm of a zombie.
A group of Army recruits (led by STAR TREK's Nichelle Nichols) head into the Kentucky woods for a weekend of training.
What they don't expect to run into are some zombie Confederate soldiers led by the ghost of a lady who just happened to be married to Pvt. Ray Ellis (Maxwell Caulfield) in an earlier life.
While the set up of Confederate zombies seems great, don't get your hopes up as director Armand Mastroianni decides not to go all out.
Probably the most interesting thing about the film is seeing Nichols alongside future STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION star LeVar Burton.
There was this sad, short period after the first Good Trek films came out and before we got saturated with bad Star Trek TV shows that the actors of Star Trek tried to cash in on their names in cheap films.This was one of them.Nichelle Nichols plays an Army Sergeant bringing a small group of troops out to the middle of the woods.
They immediately encounter the zombies of Confederate Soldiers who proceed to pick them off like nice plot device monsters.And that's kind of it.Nichols is the only thing anyone can remember in this movie, and the word we are looking for is "miscast"..
This opens with a scene from the civil war as a unit forces an enemy unit through a minefield where most of them die.
These horny dope smoking fools are lead by Sgt Hawkins (Star Trek's Nichelle Nichols) and are really just a bunch of misfits in uniform.
After a long period of time, the dead regiment is stirred awake as zombies/ghosts and begin their revenge on the group of army fools.
The slow going plot and idiot characters make the first part of this movie challenging to stay with.
Special effects artist Mark Shostrom does provide some cool looking zombie/ghosts and there is some gore to speak of.
There are some touches of atmosphere and a few creepy moments but they come way too late to save this mediocre horror film.
The intrepid Phil Hardy nails "The Supernaturals" (1986) when he calls it a "bland zombie movie" ("Encyclopedia of Horror Film" 410).
The plot is simple (much like 1964's "Two-Thousand Maniacs!"): a group of Yankee soldiers force some captured Confederates to walk through a minefield.
Again we have Hardy's accurate summary: "Sadly (director) Mastroianni makes little of the Southern setting, the rising body-count or the 19th-century zombies." Nichelle Nichols of "Star Trek" fame plays an unbelievably annoying drill sergeant.
I didn't like this movie although the premise is really good.
These post-war zombie movies are very popular and this one is very decent.
The cinematography is really good and plays a key part in the most important scenes, for example, the ending.The f/x are really are cheesy but work for the movie's purpose.
in fact, it's a boring movie with a lot of wasted potential.Watch it only if you get it for free.
I catched it on late cable many years ago and I can't say that I regret about it, but I wouldn't watch it again!Try "Stryker's War" for a more entertaining movie in the likes of this one..
1865: A sadistic Union army commander forces several Confederate soldiers to walk across a minefield, brutally slaughtering the whole luckless lot of 'em in the process.
The kid's beautiful, still alive mother (the strikingly comely Margaret Shendal) falls for nice guy GI Ray (hunky Maxwell Caulfield of "Grease 2" and "The Boys Next Door" fame) while the other less lucky squad members get stiffed by the shambling undead Civil War ghouls.Although the seemingly can't miss premise -- a genuinely inspired fright film amalgam of "2000 Maniacs," "Southern Comfort" and "Night of the Living Dead" -- promises a good, spooky "high concept" horror movie outing, "The Supernaturals" alas qualifies as a humongous letdown due largely to a terribly dry and rudimentary execution.
Caulfield, Nichelle Nichols ("Star Trek" 's Lt. Uhura), Levar Burton, Bobby Di Cicco, Talia Balsam, and "Bad Ronald" 's Scott Jacoby all contribute excellent, creditable performances, but not even their considerable acting skills can inject any much-needed vitality into this lifeless, lethargic loser.
The nifty, scarcely seen zombie make-up by Mark Shostrom, a typically nice, moody score by the great, grossly under-appreciated B-movie composer Robert O.
Here, he combines a cast of people who will make you say, "Hey isn't that..." and puts them up against an army of undead Confederate soldiers.During the Civil War, a Confederate town is taken over and all of the soldiers are ordered to walk a minefield, including young Jeremy, who is forced to do so because he has on the uniform.
Only he and his mother survive.Fast forward to 1986, where the Army's 44th division - the same one that screwed over the southern soldiers in the past - are conducting war games under the command of Sgt. Leona Hawkins (yes, that's Nichelle Nichols from Star Trek).
There's also Pvt. Ellis (Maxwell Caulfield, Rex Manning himself from Empire Records), Pvt. Lejune (Talia Balsam, Crawlspace and the first wife of George Clooney, as well as the daughter of Psycho's Martin Balsam), Pvt. Osgood (Levar Burton, uniting the original and TNG Star Trek casts), Pvt. Cort (Bobby Di Cicco, The Philadelphia Experiment), Pvt. Mendez (Scott Jacoby from Bad Ronald) and Maurice Gibb in a cameo as a Union soldier (he also wrote a soundtrack that wasn't used).Of course, someone screws around in the woods and the undead rise to claim the living.
Everything feels rather low rent, which is fine, because the actual zombies look rather good and the reveal of who is behind the actual return of the dead is rather interesting.This is way better than it should be and in the hands of a better director would have been pretty interesting.
boring and dull flick has lots of bad dialog some headache inducing scenes and most of all it's just boring nothing particularly interesting happens until the neat finale the acting is terrible Maxwell Caufield does okay here but was kinda wimpy for my tastes Nichelle Nichols was the only good actress here she gives a good show with her tough performance Talia Balsam is so so here and is not given much to do all the rest of the actors suck!
there isn't much left to say here i just wasn't paying all that much attention to it because it was so dull i was doing other things at the same time NOT WORTH IT!
|
tt0473188
|
The Death and Life of Bobby Z
|
Don Huertero (Joaquim de Almeida) is a Mexican drug lord. His daughter committed suicide because a drug dealer known as Bobby Z broke her heart. Consequently, Don Huertero is out for vengeance.
In trepidation Bobby Z seeks shelter in an American embassy. From there he is handed over to federal agent Tad Gruzsa (Laurence Fishburne).
In order to get hold of Bobby Z after all, Don Huertero takes a colleague of Tad Gruzsa as hostage and proposes an exchange.
Bobby Z knows Don Huertero won't rest until he believes him dead. Being worried sick, he bribes Tad Gruzsa. Now Tad Gruzsa conceives a plan to deceive Don Huertero. He wants to make Don Huertero believe Bobby Z was dead without harming the real Bobby Z.
When the exchange is supposed to take place, Tad Gruzsa replaces Bobby Z. In his stead the clueless doppelgänger Tim Kearney (Paul Walker) crosses the border. During the exchange Tad Gruzsa incites a gunfight and tries to shoot the doppelgänger dead.
Even so, Tim Kearney scarcely survives. But Tad Gruzsa keeps on trying to kill him. But he fails time after time. Despite all his efforts it is the real Bobby Z who is taken down. Tim Kearney on the other hand finds love (Elizabeth, played by Olivia Wilde as a kind of it girl).
|
revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
While it's no worse than much of the action movie junk that makes it to theatres, Bobby Z, originally entitled The Death and Life of Bobby Z, is a action thriller with Tim Kearney (Walker) as our hero.
This gives director John Herzfeld, whose own career hacs been on less than an up-tick since the appropriately named 15 Minutes came and went in about that long, a premise for having a good guy hero who still fits the label of a tough convict.The slightly convoluted storyline sees Kearney whose life is in peril since he killed a biker gang boss in prison (self defence, of course) offered an opportunity to walk free, as long as he's willing to impersonate a drug kingpin who happens to look just like Kearney, and who has just died.
Fishburne plays the Drug Enforcement Agency cop who puts Kearney up to this task.Before you can say 'gunfights are fun', Kearney is being shot at by the cops, manhandled by Mexican drug thugs, pursued by the bikers, and generally in demand by everyone, regardless of whether they think he's Kearney or Bobby Z.
Our hero, of course, dodges the bullets, battles the bad guys, befriends Bobby Z's son (who has never met his dad) and romances a beautiful woman (Olivia Wilde) whose relationship with the bad guys is a bit hazy, but clearly quite intimate.Filled with head scratching twists and cornball dialogue, this is not exactly a brilliant film.
Wilde also does a passable job as Kearney's conflicted love interest; she's mainly called upon to look good (which she accomplishes rather easily), but also doesn't muff her lines when she does have something to say.Movie was funny, entertaining and I enjoyed it..
Bobby Z is definitely a good B movie, with a rating of 5 overall considering everything listed above.
I originally thought he was only cast for his looks, but can see he has good acting abilities.Movie was funny, worked well and I enjoyed it.
He's a solid actor and his role as the DEA Agent worked perfectly.Paul's pretty love interest (Olivia Wilde from the OC)chemistry was lacking.Chuck Liddell, although was only in the beginning of the movie was convincing.
Not sure where I've seen him before, but he may have a promising career.I liked the sequence of the movie - it starts with a mystery and the flashback kept me trying to figure out what was going to happen next.
The plot: Kearny, a loser convict,is pushed into impersonating Bobby Z, a larger-than-life drug dealer, in a hostage trade, only to find both his own and Bobby Z's enemies trying to kill him.Herzfeld previously directed 2 Days in the Valley, a Tarantino ripoff if ever there was one.
Unfortunately, it's not all that great, but it did manage to keep my interest for the runtime.Bobby Z is built up as a small-time celebrity in the local surfer scene, as well as a rising star in drug distribution.
In fact, I'm really at a loss as to why they even opened the movie with such a dark and disturbing bit of character development if they were just going to completely ignore it for the rest of the film.
Still, it's always fun to see him, even if it's in such a small and clichéd role.If you're looking for an action movie, this will probably satisfy you, but I'd be surprised if you remembered it later or recommended it to your friends..
But there is much more promise in this film with action star Paul Walker, and the ever popular Laurence Fishburne.Walker is playing this drug dealer and is trying to get Fishburne's partner back.
Never bet against the Marines.Don't expect anything more than fast action and you will not be disappointed.Joaquim de Almeida, who you should remember as Bucho in Desperado, is the bad guy here.I can forgive anything director John Herzfeld does in this film as I am forever grateful for his introduction of the hot Charlize Theron in 2 Days in the Valley..
Although it feels good to see movie that doesn't use the much common and enough-seen style of today's action flicks, the way this film shows the action seems out-dated.
I rented this movie thinking, "Hey, Paul Walker wasn't too bad in the fast and furious films and Laurence Fishburne is just awesome so why not get it?" Well friends, looks can and are deceiving, and I learned the hard way last evening watching this film.
The whole 'syking everyone out to think I'm Bobby Z' script work got old really quick, Paul Walker's acting was sub par (I haven't seen a lot of his work but I've been told by many that he's not that great of an actor).
There are way too many close up shots of Paul Walker (for absolutely no other reason than to show off his "Good Looks" and play some really lame music along with it).
I suggest this film to people who only like Paul Walker and his close ups and not action flicks, because thats about all you get.
Let me just start off by saying that i am quite an admirer of Paul Walker even thou he is not such a good actor i kinda like his style, this particular film had in my opinion a horrible script and a lot of pieces that didn't fit at all but it was really entertaining at least for my part.
I gave it a 7, even thou i think i might have over rated it,the actress thou that played Elizabeth, i don't know her name yet but i will check it out after i post this comment, is a complete knock - out and i would see this film again just for another glimpse at her beauty-full face.In an other of business i was quite surprised by the distribution of Lawrance Fishbourne in a secondary part like the one he had, i consider him a pretty good actor, a lot better than "macho man" Paul Walker.In the end i'm just gonna say that i think they casted P.
Walker just because he is a good "moaner" seeing him doing almost the same "battle sounds" in every film he had played in GrrrAAaarRRr (watch and listen closely).
I am sure he loved the book, which rights for were purchased for a considerable sum.The story is that DEA agent Tad Gruzsa, played by Laurence Fishburne, provides former Marine Tim Kearney, played by Walker, with a way out of his prison sentence.
I felt it was a little too convoluted, slow in places (read 'quite boring'), stupid too in others, and don't think Paul Walker, or (surprisingly) Fishburne clinched their characters in what should have been an action, reasonably fast paced thriller.Please do not watch this movie.
Forget it...I was looking forward to seeing this film on the power of Laurence Fishburne primarily, Paul Walker, and secondly the author of the source (book) material, Don Winslow.
I'm sure this book was great, like the one I have read 'The Winter of Frankie Machine' which is being turned into a movie with Robert De Niro starring, 'The Winter of Frankie Machine' by Scorcese...But 'The Death & Life of Bobby Z' is one of the most woeful films, sloppy piece of celluloid dross, I have had the misfortune to see in a very long
See it at your own peril..
Paul Walker delivers to us a great action film once again!!!.
I was expecting some good stuff from this movie because I am a Paul Walker fan, plus he has never been in a horrible movie and Running Scared was one of the greatest action dramas ever made.
Like I said I expected some good action from this and I was more than pleased by the storyline, the numerous action scenes, and the load of stars that follow Walker in the film such as Lawrence Fishburne, Olivia Wilde, Jacob Vargas, and more.
Paul Walker has delivered good entertainment to the audience every since The Fast and the Furious and he's a great actor if you ask me.
Bobby Z is probably one of the best straight to DVD movies I have ever seen, it delivers good action along with a tricky side that you never see coming.
I give this movie a 9 out of 10 because of the tremendous action and simply macho portrayal of it by Paul Walker.
He's a great actor and no one thought this movie was going to be good before they seen it so I hope they believe me now.
I highly recommend this movie if you are a Paul Walker fan like me or if you are an action junkie like me.
I quite like Paul Walker, just the way he did in Running Scared and Into the Blue.
Bobby Z wasn't something that was high on my list of things to see, but it was streaming and fit my mood, so I watched it and what a surprise, a well written, Action film, with a pretty good plot!
The clever folks at the FBI decide to find someone who looks like Z and send him in, that man is Tim Kearney (Paul Walker), and his life depends on how well he can trick people into believing that he is Bobby Z, a man he's never met.
Paul Walker is the star of this clever film and he does a tremendous job.
Bobby Z was really a lot of fun to watch, and it will keep you guessing while at the same time showing you some terrific action sequences, I was more than impressed by this film and by Paul Walker for that matter.
So obviously I have no idea why this audience-tested badly or why people think Paul Walker can't act.
Plus he's got a great cast to back him up...The mystery of why this was going down hooked me early & I cared about what happened to these people (at least the good guys) For the girl-watchers out there ~ Olivia Wild is jaw-droppingly GORGEOUS!!
It's starring Paul Walker & Laurence Fishburne, but features appearances by a gang of MMA fighters.Chuck Liddell, Tim Sylvia, Pat Miletich, Robbie Lawler and others all are in various fight and chase scenes etc.
The film which stars Paul Walker, Laurence Fishburne, Olivia Wilde, J.R Villarreal, Jason Flemyng, Keith Carradine, Joaquim De Almeida, Chuck Liddell and Jason Lewis is also absolutely brilliant and has some excellent acting by these actors.
I loved watching the film because it had so many great things about it and I love Paul Walkers acting as well as some of his other skills such as his fighting skills.
I have 17 of Paul Walkers films on DVD and I love to watch his films which shows him fighting because he is an excellent fighter.
The film is awesome, has some great fight scenes and Paul Walkers fighting was awesome and powerful.
He was charged and convicted of murder, yet he and a Mexican kid can go easily across the US/Mexico border with no id, wallets, cash - after being ragged looking and Bobby Z being known as a convicted murderer and drug dealer.I had a hard time going across the border into the US with unpaid parking tickets and a small charge of theft under $100 from when I was 18 years old.Now Bobby Z can go with a child and himself - who have been beaten and are ragged looking, as well as Bobby Z wanted by both US and Mexican police for murder charges - and in addition, they can do it with no ID papers - unless they happen to have them stuck up their butt-holes.This story loses credibility 5 minutes after it starts 0 and it just gets worse and worse.After watching plenty of movies with Paul Walker in them, he seems to take them - even though they lack a story or any thought into that story.This is just dumb on every level.The 2 star rating is for camera work, locations and for the extras who weren't paid enough to work in this crap fest..
The plot suffers from stereotypical characters like the bad cop, loser-turning-into-an-honourable-"doing-the-right-thing"-man, evil latino mafia boss, and cynical drug dealer.
Not a bad movie that I would ridicule people for participating in but it is definitely a straight to DVD B-Grader.How the mighty have fallen, from the Matrix to this for Laurence Fishburne, who would have to recognize he is on the way down if he is taking on projects of this caliber.
Olivia Wilde on the other hand is stunning, although more than a little lacking in emotive range and is hopefully using this as a vehicle on the way up as she develops.I am beginning to suspect Paul Walker only has one character in his range and I just hope he makes enough money off that before the gravy train derails.
Comparing Paul Walker to Jean Claude Van Damme may seem a tad harsh at this stage in his career but if he wants to avoid the same level of career it might be an idea to employ someone else to pick film roles for him.
I like a good action movie as much as anyone and I've certainly nothing against excessively pretty people escaping from tough situations with never a facial blemish.
This tired, poorly acted, hyper kinetic desert film wastes the talent of some good actors, gives plenty of killings to watch, and then introduces counterfeit kindness as a reason for making the film, is a movie to avoid.Paul Walker is the released Bobby Z look-alike who will be freed from his life in prison by Laurence Fishburne's cop image if he merely shows up in Mexico as bait for drug lord Joaquin de Almeida's hostage demands for Fishburne's partner.
Walker overall is a rather poor actor, and his straight-man face and actions pull his role off only with generous intimations on the part of the viewer.
I'd point out specific moments, but if you've seen Walker in the Fast and the Furious movies, I have a feeling you didn't pick this one for the plot.The redeeming features, if there are any, are that there's a fair amount of eye-candy (no outright nudity, though, if that's what you're looking for), and you can sit and cheer as a sadistic woman-beater gets chained up and drug behind an SUV..
Paul Walker, Laurence Fishburne, and Olivia Wilde definitely earned their keep in this one.The most random and unlikely of situations land Paul Walker in the drug cartel with 3 different groups of people out to kill him and no one thinks he is the same person.The only questionable acting in this movie was from the kid (Paul Walkers kid).The action is heavy, the plot good, and the ending very unlikely.I think it was a great movie though and if you have a chance to see it, please do..
"15 Minutes" director John Herzfeld's "Bobby Z" rates as an above-average action thriller with double-crosses, shoot'em ups, and surprises, but everything seems a little too routine in the long run.
"Fast & Furious" star Paul Walker plays three-time loser Tim Kearney.
Herzfeld and scenarists Bob "4 AM: Open All Night" Krakower and Allen Lawrence recount Kearney's career in an amusing series of flashbacks that may be the funniest thing about "Bobby Z." In short, "Bobby Z" is a tolerable beer and pizza movie with an R-rating and about 90 minutes worth of mayhem.
D.E.A. Agent Tad Gruzsa (Lawrence Fishburne of "The Matrix" trilogy) offers former Marine and three-time loser Tim Kearney a quick and easy way to get out of prison.
Meanwhile, Kearney learns that Bobby Z has a child, eleven-year old Kit (Juan Villareal of "Harvest of Redemption") and the two bond when Kearney escapes from the hacienda with the bad guys hot on their trail lead by Johnson (Keith Carradine of "The Long Riders") who likes to spit every time that he meets somebody of whom he disapproves.
You will be amazed at how this obnoxious character buys the farm."Bobby Z" is complicated enough to be interesting, but it remains altogether a little too smug to be attain the greatness of something like "True Romance." Happily, Walker doesn't play a dual role.
The whole thing is the idea of a corrupt law enforcement officer who thinks he will use the former marine to get at the kingpin of the drug empire who supplied the original Bobby Z with his merchandise.The movie is not totally horrible, as action films go.
The credibility gap is huge when the people involved asks us to accept things that don't make too much sense.If you can buy the fact that Elizabeth would not know who the impostor was right away, then there is no problem enjoying this film that from all indication went straight to video.Paul Walker is the action hero.
Paul Walker is a great actor who gets bad roles.
Paul Walker's acting is at its low in this movie.
I think Paul Walker did a better job in Running scared than this movie..
The story is silly and convoluted, involving a usually lack-lustre Paul Walker impersonating a legendary Drug Dealer, played by the deliciously floppy haired Jason Lewis.
Laurence Fishburne plods along with a by-the-numbers bad guy role and Olivia Wilde as the love-interest, female lead is dull and mediocre.
Tim Kearney(Paul Walker)is a former Marine, and a three time loser and is serving his time in prison.
His life has the chance to change when a scheming DEA agent, Ted Gruza(Laurence Fishburne), needs somebody to impersonate drug lord Bobby Z(Jason Lewis), who has died of a heart attack while in a prison in the Philippines.
This story's writers have invented a lot of messy situations in which corrupt people and criminals try to fool each other, and the one who gets away with it is, obviously, our nostalgic actor Paul Walker.
i loved the novel by don winslow, and i was disappointed in the movie.first the positives: i liked paul walker.
|
tt0047041
|
Gorilla at Large
|
Cyrus Miller's circus has come to the fairgrounds, where barker Joey Matthews invites the crowd to come see the great gorilla, Goliath.
Trapeze artist Laverne Miller flies over the gorilla's cage. She tells husband Cyrus that she wants a few changes made, demanding that the animal's handler, Kovacs, be fired, and that Joey join the act. Inside a gorilla costume, Joey would be waiting to catch Laverne when she drops from the trapeze, the crowd shrieking as it believes him to be Goliath.
Cyrus refuses to dismiss Kovacs, who is the only one able to control the gorilla. Going through with her new act, however, Laverne and Joey practice, incorporating some judo moves in their routine. Joey tells fiancee Audrey Baxter that the additional money he makes will help them raise enough money to be married and leave the circus life for good.
A concessionaire, Morse, is accused by Cyrus of robbing from the receipts. Morse is found dead near Goliath's cage with a broken neck and a gin bottle nearby. Detective Garrison of the police speculates that the victim got drunk and ventured too close to the dangerous gorilla. Cyrus' right-hand man, Owens, argues that Morse never drank alcohol due to an ulcer.
Joey becomes a suspect, having once threatened Morse for bothering Audrey. But it is Joey's hunch that Cyrus is behind this. He could be out to frame Joey, who has been the object of Laverne's flirtations. Or the killer could be Kovacs, who once was married to Laverne before an accident led to the death of Kewpie, her partner on the trapeze.
While cop on duty Shaughnessy falls asleep, Goliath is set free by someone in a gorilla suit. Audrey begins screaming. Cyrus and others rush to rescue her in the hall of mirrors. Owens says he knows who the killer is, but then he is found dead. Kovacs leads the gorilla away.
To the surprise of the police, Cyrus confesses to both murders. He says both men were involved in Kewpie's death. Joey is not convinced. He still feels Kovacs is the killer, believing Cyrus's lame arm made him incapable of breaking anyone's neck.
Laverne is about to do her drop from the trapeze, but expecting Joey in the costume, she falls to the real gorilla. It turns out Laverne is the killer. Using her own judo skills, she overpowered Morse, who was blackmailing her over Kewpie's death, then Owens, who had deduced her guilt.
Goliath carries a screaming Laverne to the top of the roller coaster. The gorilla dies in a hail of bullets, and the murderer is placed under arrest.
|
revenge, mystery
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
For one thing, it has an amazing cast: Anne Bancroft, Cameron Mitchell, Lee Cobb, Lee Marvin and Raymond Burr.
Men dress in garish suits in this one, and smoke cigars, and there is, as always seemed to be the case with films with a circus or carnival setting, the air of an alternate reality just around the corner, in a sideshow or a funhouse.
This picture was an oddity even when it was new, feeling at times more like an episode of Superman than a movie.
The gorilla looks exactly like what it is, a man in a gorilla suit, yet somehow this is acceptable, the way painted backdrops in silent movies are acceptable.
Method actors Mitchell and Cobb deliver fine B movie performances that give no hints that they were in fact classically trained, not to mention that they had once played together as father and son in the original Broadway production of Death Of a Salesman.
His occasional moments of smiling and bonhomie remind me a little of Peter Lorre at his most forlorn, as he comes off like a grim, serious man trying awfully hard to be a good sport, which in turn makes him a perfect red herring.
Lee Marvin plays a dumb cop named Shaughnessy, a good indication of the cleverness of the script.Yet the movie works on its own terms.
This sort of stylized, non-realistic movie was, like amusement parks, going out of fashion at the time it was made, and yet it has its virtues, notably a commitment to artifice rather than a representation of the real world, which freed the imaginations of the men behind the camera, allowing them to make little experiments with color, space and lighting.
Here's a film, beautifully photographed in Technicolor and processed by the Technicolor laboratories (not Deluxe DeLousy) with images as sharp as the proverbial pin, with plenty of 3-D thrills provided by both the intriguing murder thriller plot and its colorfully atmospheric circus background, with excellent acting from a top-flight cast, neatly directed and most entertainingly produced, yet seemingly everyone hates it.Why?
Two reasons: (1) Anne Bancroft has spent her whole life rubbishing the film; (2) A technically inept TV presentation in murky color in the United States in the 1980s has given the movie bad word-of-mouth.When I saw the movie on its first release, the audience loved it, despite the fact that we seeing the picture in a flat version in which the 3-D thrills were robbed of most of their impact.Gorilla at Large does not pretend to be some pompous dissection of American life along the lines of The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit, but a simple slice of entertaining escapism with some interesting characters (forcefully enacted, as said, by a first-rate cast, including the much self-maligned Miss Bancroft) caught up in a fascinating, pacily directed thriller with A-1 production values.What more can a movie-lover ask?If I had a choice between seeing Gorilla at Large and any Fox film (except The Gunfighter) featuring the studio's number-one star, Gregory Peck, I'd unhesitatingly say, "Bring on the gorilla!".
From what little I can find on the internet about Gorilla at Large, it seems that Anne Bancroft viewed the movie with disdain and wasn't at all proud of her appearance.
You can look down on Gorilla at Large, but I'd rather watch it any day over either The Miracle Worker or The Graduate.
Call it cheesy, call it campy, call it whatever you want - bottom line, Gorilla at Large is one entertaining movie.
A Technicolor 3-D (though I saw it in 2-D) murder mystery where a gorilla is one of the prime suspects - how cool is that?
Two gorillas for the price of one - can't go wrong with that.In addition to the dismissive Anne Bancroft, Gorilla at Large has a very impressive cast.
The resolute Raymond Burr, the cigar-chomping Lee J.
Cobb, a baby-faced Lee Marvin, genre favorite Cameron Mitchell, and the most famous man in a gorilla suit, George Barrows, are all on hand for the fun.
Overall, I had a great time watching Gorilla at Large.
It's too bad Anne Bancroft never saw the fun in this movie..
I had heard about "Gorilla at Large" for years, but avoided watching it because of the campy title and brief clips I had seen, usually of the gorilla swinging on a vine.
To my surprise, I found "Gorilla at Large" to be an entertaining movie.
"Gorilla" has a very good cast and interesting story.
The sexy Anne Bancroft is the main star....although some might claim it is the gorilla..
The opening sequence of Raymond Burr walking through the carnival is some of the most effective 3-D photography I have ever seen.The story...yipes!
Anne Bancroft vamps up a storm in some scenes and Raymond Burr plods thru his role.
It's not so much that there's more than meets the eye as it is whatdoes meet the eye that makes this picture worth a look-see.Sure, if you want to be all serious, then you could easily object to arather predictable plot, or some wooden performances (though I'dhave something to say about that), or a delightfully inept gorilla suitthat looks more like an animated swatch of shag carpet (the eyesare so...human!).
Firstly, it does offer the sorts of thrills thatB-movie fans relish: the lurid carny life, cartoonish violence,trapeze artists in skimpy costumes, emotions writ large andunambiguously (at least ostensibly).In fact, I'd say that many of the performances are great, notbecause they are especially moving or "realistic," but rather,because the conventions of the genre frame them in such a wayas to be quite effective, and not least of all, gratifying.
Youreally get a sense of what an entirely watchable performer he is inthis picture, and personally I think he's better here than he is in "Onthe Waterfront" (gasp!).Camp values aside, the technical aspects of the film arebreathtaking.
I'd say that its use of technicolor and3-D are perhaps more impressive than even "House of Wax," andcertainly more accomplished than such unnecessarily 3-D'dfeatures such as "Dial M for Murder" or "Miss Sadie Thompson."Color, violence, a beautiful girl and a gorilla--and in not one, nortwo, but THREE dimensions.
Anne Bancroft, looking sensational in Technicolor, is as good as the script allows-meaning she manages to keep a straight face during the ridiculous contrivances that the movie presents.
Cobb also put in professional performances, although Lee must have been longing for the days of the Group Theatre during production of this lulu.
But with a cast including Anne Bancroft, Lee Marvin, Raymond Burr, Cameron Mitchell, Lee J.
But there is no question that shortly after this film all of them began to appear on a regular basis in more important roles and in more important films and television, the most successful examples being Anne Bancroft, Lee Marvin, Raymond Burr and Lee J.
And this film is a perfect example of Lee Marvin's early work where it was obvious he was emblazoned with "Star".
After having previously directed such notable efforts as, Paddy Chayefsky's "As Young as You Feel", the popular biopic "The Pride of St. Louis", "The Silver Whip", "The Kid from Left Field", and "City of Bad Men", Harmon's career seemed from then on to be destined for weekly television episodes.As for production values, script, suspense and action, the film is not bad.
Visually enjoyable in wonderful color, great nostalgia value centering around the old amusement park with the fun house, room of mirrors, dodgems, trapeze act and all the rest.
"Gorilla At Large" is a very good example of a 1950's 3-D film.
That's why.Having said that, 23 year old Anne Bancroft gives an interesting sex-pot performance.
Raymond Burr, known as a bad guy at this time, gives a very offbeat performance.
And a very young Lee Marvin is extremely funny as a cop who doesn't have a clue.The 1950's saw a great many 3-D films that are no longer available in that format.
It is really too bad we can't see "Gorilla At Large", "House Of Wax" and "Dial M For Murder" the way they were meant to be seen..
Although Goliath the gorilla in Gorilla At Large is not a monster like King Kong he does create a whole lot of mischief at the carnival he's a feature attraction at.
Cobb first suspects young Cameron Mitchell who is working at Raymond Burr's carnival for the summer.
Wife Anne Bancroft who is a trapeze artist wants to get Mitchell in the act and she eyes him like a slab of beef.
Her former husband Peter Whitney is the animal handler and the real friend of Goliath.Given the title I was really expecting some kind of schlock film, but Gorilla At Large is a very nicely done mystery with a really good cast of solid players.
Lee Marvin has an unusual part for him, he plays a really dumb uniform cop under whose watch the gorilla escapes and wreaks havoc on any and all.The ending is a surprise, I guarantee you will not suspect who it is..
GORILLA AT LARGE (Harmon Jones, 1954) ***.
I had originally watched this one a long time ago during my childhood days on a now-defunct Sicilian TV channel; in hindsight, it can now best be considered as a guilty pleasure and, besides, the fact that it isn’t really a bona-fide horror film (given that the murders are not actually committed by the titular beast but rather by somebody conveniently donning a simian costume) might perhaps endear it to those film buffs who normally shun the genre.The terrific cast is also a definite attraction here: Lee J.
Cobb and Lee Marvin are particularly fun to watch as, respectively, the cigar-chomping Police Detective heading the murder investigations under the Big Top and a loudmouth but sleepy-eyed cop left to guard the caged gorilla but, inevitably, ending behind its bars himself!
Cameron Mitchell, Raymond Burr and Anne Bancroft – who, arguably, never looked lovelier on screen than she does here as the star trapeze artist of husband Burr’s circus – all have good roles and gleefully enter into the fun spirit of the thing.
Interestingly enough, both Cobb and Burr were about to embark on their signature screen roles that same year in, respectively, ON THE WATERFRONT and REAR WINDOW!
The gorilla keeper (Peter Whitney) is also a noteworthy and malevolent presence, particularly when trapping a victim into his self-designed mirror maze and when offering to teach Mitchell how to raise ex-wife Bancroft over his head for the crowd's pleasure!
The belated identification of the real killer is a big surprise – which makes the sequence of Burr taking on the blame for the circus murders and his eventual revelation as a cripple by Mitchell in front of Cobb a moving one and the film’s highlight.
GORILLA AT LODGE is an oddity--a "B" picture with a distinguished cast of more than competent actors--CAMERON MITCHELL, ANNE BANCROFT, LEE J.
COBB, LEE MARVIN, WARREN STEVENS and RAYMOND BURR--and is filmed in excellent Technicolor using the gimmick of 3D which was just a passing fad at the time.It's a murder mystery with most of the action taking place in a colorful amusement park called "The Garden of Evil", all of the atmosphere fully taken advantage of by the color photography which accents the garish while the story accents the puzzling background of several suspects who might be involved in the shady doings.ANNE BANCROFT was at her physical prime in a part that requires more acrobatics than acting skill, but still there's a glimmer of the actress to be.
COBB is a gruff cigar smoking detective who treats everyone like a suspect, and LEE MARVIN is amusing as an Irish cop whose intelligence is questionable.
PETER WHITNEY (who played those amusing twin brothers in a screwball comedy from the '40s called MURDER, HE SAID), is creepy as the chief suspect and the Gorilla is obviously a man in a gorilla suit.But it's all meant to be strictly lightweight entertainment, a no brainer for the kiddies and nothing that puts a strain on anyone's thinking cap.
It stars Cameron Mitchell, Anne Bancroft, Lee J.
Out of Panoramic Productions and filmed in Technicolor, the music is by Lionel Newman and cinematography is by Lloyd Ahern.An amusement park/circus is rocked when a freshly sacked employee is found brutally murdered inside the cage of the star attraction, Goliath the Giant Gorilla.
Yes it's unintentionally funny at times, and there was never going to be a time when a man in a Gorilla suit (George Barrows) wasn't going to be corny, but it's a very good production (lovely Technicolor) and boasts a super cast of actors into the bargain.
Yet there's enough suspense and iffy character shenanigans to more than lift this above the ridiculous.Anne Bancroft spent the rest of her career denouncing the film, like many others who were tied into studio contracts back in the day, thus "having" to do films they would rather not do, she forgot that this type of film still had many fans.
There's much fun to be had with Cobb's performance as cigar chomping Detective Sergeant Garrison, mainly because he seems to be the only male actor taking it seriously!
Unlike Lee Marvin, who in a secondary supporting cop role plays it with tongue in cheek and appears to be enjoying himself into the bargain.
Nice to see the chiselled features of Warren Stevens (Forbidden Planet) on board as well.Filmed at Nu Pike Amusement Park in Long Beach, California, Harmon Jones (The Pride of St. Louis) makes good use of the funfair location.
3D Movie Going Ape. This film works out to be a mystery film wrapped around a fascination of Anne Bancroft getting pawed by a gorilla.
I mention these because these 3 films were part of a 3D film revival in the late 1980's on television which spurred some new 3D productions after.This film is Raymond Burr's second film with a gorilla.
Burr's next film would be Rear Window which has much more to recommend it than this one..
Apart from the hokie gorilla costume (there are places where you can see the fingers bend backward), it's a fun movie and worth watching.
A mere year younger than amusement park owner Raymond Burr.A delight for fans of Anne Bancroft to see her as a bit of posh tottie!
Great job!If you like Raymond Burr as Perry Mason, this film is a must see.
One of my all-time favorite "corny but great" movies.
****SPOILERS**** The movie "Gorilla at Large" is actually about three not one gorilla all played by human not primate actors.
There's of course the gorilla in the movies title Goliath the biggest gorilla in captivity played by George Barrows in a loose fitting monkey suite.
Then there's circus manager Cyrus Miller played by the gorilla like, before he lost 100 pounds for his role as Perry Mason Esq, Raymond Burr who in fact played a gorilla three years earlier in he movie "Bride of the Gorilla".
As things turn out a number of people working for the circus end up with the necks broken by someone with enormous strength that only a gorilla, not human, could have.
Cobb, to see if, by breaking out of his cage and killing someone, he's in fact the killer.With that going on full-time circus handy man and part time law student Joey Matthews, played by a bleach blond looking Cameron Mitchell, takes it upon himself to single handedly solve the murders in order to show up the police headed by Det. Sgt.
This has Joey uncontrollably fall for sexy trapeze artist Leverne Miller, Ann Bancroft, who's married to her boss Cyrus the manager of the circus as well as have been married to the other gorilla Kovacs whom she left for her trapeze partner the handsome Kewpie known as the human cannonball.
That's until Kewpie died in a tragic accident when the swing he was doing his act with Laverne snapped causing to fall to his death.****SPOILERS**** It turns out that everyone including Goliath are falling all over Laverne with Cyrus who was totally innocent in Kewpie death confessing, like in those Raymond Burr dealt with in the Perry Mason series, to his murder!
As for poor Goliath the innocent victim in all this he paid with his life for a crime or crimes that he didn't commit where at the end of the movie no one at all, but possibly his trainer Kovac, felt a bit sorry for!P.S Check out a young 30 year old Lee Marvin as the "Sleeping Policeman" Officer Shaughnessy who as luck would have it and without realizing it actually proved the very maligned gorilla Goliath totally innocent!
Here, it is future Oscar winner Anne Bancroft, looking absolutely gorgeous as a trapeze artist in a carnival run by Raymond Burr where murder is afoot.
Then comes in Cameron Mitchell (looking hysterically embarrassed with a bad yellowish blonde hair dye job!) who is to add some luster to Bancroft's trapeze act (swinging over the ape) by catching her for some added thrills to the audience.
The result of the film is a nice Thriller/Mystery that is a lot of fun, gorgeously filmed in breathtaking color (a filmmaking technique much missed!) and the chance to see one of our best actresses during the time she was much misused by the studio that didn't see her potential..
A huge and fearsome gorilla named Goliath (essayed with considerable growling'n'grunting gusto by veteran simian thespian George Barrows in a lovably obvious suit) with a bad temper becomes the key suspect after a murder occurs at the Garden of Evil carnival.
The lively acting from the tip-top cast rates as another major asset: Cameron Mitchell as the amiable Joey Matthews, a ravishing Anne Bancroft as sexy and enticing trapeze artist Laverne Miller, Lee J.
Cobb as the hard-nosed, cigar-chomping Detective Garrison, Raymond Burr as no-nonsense carny owner Cy Miller, Charlotte Austin as sweet ticket gal Audrey Baxter, Peter Whitney as Goliath's scruffy handler Kovacs, and a very young Lee Marvin as dumb, but eager flatfoot Shaughnessy.
|
tt0067979
|
Whity
|
In 1878 in the south west of the USA, Ben Nicholson is the richest rancher of the area. A tough man who strikes a hard bargain, he has been outwitted by his second wife Katherine, a flirtatious intriguer. Of his two sons from the previous marriage, Frank is gay and the unfortunate David is a half-wit. There is a third son in the house however, born from the black cook Marpessa, who acts as butler: this is Whity.
Despite his capability, Whity gets humiliated and whipped. His only hope of any decency lies in his friendship with the town's saloon singer and whore, Hanna. She has landed a job back in the east and offers to take Whity with her, but he says he must stay with his family.
To trap Katherine, Ben arranges for a Mexican called Garcia to pretend he is a physician and to seduce her, confiding to her that Ben has not long to live. The plot succeeds but, rather than pay what he promised, Ben kills Garcia. When he learns that Hanna witnessed the murder, he pays her for her silence.
Excited by the prospect of inheriting the ranch, both Frank and Katherine try to get Whity to kill Ben. In the end, after repeated humiliations in a household where everybody is trying to seduce or kill each other, Whity decides he must at last act. He shoots all four Nicholsons and flees into the desert with Hanna, whose money he had earlier stolen and gambled away. Once their water is finished, they dance together as the sun sets behind them.
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0057831
|
Alexis Zorbas
|
The book opens in a café in Piraeus, just before dawn on a gusty autumn morning. The year is most likely 1916. The narrator, a young Greek intellectual, resolves to set aside his books for a few months after being stung by the parting words of a friend, Stavridakis, who has left for the Russian Caucasus to help some Pontic Greeks (in that region often referred to as Caucasus Greeks) who are being persecuted. He sets off for Crete to re-open a disused lignite mine and immerse himself in the world of peasants and working-class people.
He is about to begin reading his copy of Dante's Divine Comedy when he feels he is being watched; he turns around and sees a man of around sixty peering at him through the glass door. The man enters and immediately approaches him to ask for work. He claims expertise as a chef, a miner, and player of the santuri, or cimbalom, and introduces himself as Alexis Zorba, a Greek born in Romania. The narrator is fascinated by Zorba's lascivious opinions and expressive manner and decides to employ him as a foreman. On their way to Crete, they talk on a great number of subjects, and Zorba's soliloquies set the tone for a large part of the book.
On arrival, they reject the hospitality of Anagnostis and Kondomanolious the café-owner, and on Zorba's suggestion make their way to Madame Hortense's hotel, which is nothing more than a row of old bathing-huts. They are forced by circumstances to share a bathing-hut. The narrator spends Sunday roaming the island, the landscape of which reminds him of "good prose, carefully ordered, sober… powerful and restrained" and reads Dante. On returning to the hotel for dinner, the pair invite Madame Hortense to their table and get her to talk about her past as a courtesan. Zorba gives her the pet-name "Bouboulina" (likely inspired by the Greek heroine).
The next day, the mine opens and work begins. The narrator, who has socialist ideals, attempts to get to know the workers, but Zorba warns him to keep his distance: "Man is a brute.... If you're cruel to him, he respects and fears you. If you're kind to him, he plucks your eyes out." Zorba himself plunges into the work, which is characteristic of his overall attitude, which is one of being absorbed in whatever one is doing or whomever one is with at that moment. Quite frequently Zorba works long hours and requests not to be interrupted while working. The narrator and Zorba have a great many lengthy conversations, about a variety of things, from life to religion, each other's past and how they came to be where they are now, and the narrator learns a great deal about humanity from Zorba that he otherwise had not gleaned from his life of books and paper.
The narrator absorbs a new zest for life from his experiences with Zorba and the other people around him, but reversal and tragedy mark his stay on Crete. His one-night stand with a beautiful passionate widow leads to her public decapitation. Alienated by the villagers' harshness and amorality, he eventually returns to the mainland once his and Zorba's ventures are completely financially spent. Having overcome one of his own demons (such as his internal "no," which the narrator equates with the Buddha, whose teachings he has been studying and about whom he has been writing for much of the narrative, and who he also equates with "the void") and having a sense that he is needed elsewhere (near the end of the novel, the narrator has a premonition of the death of his old friend Stavridakis, which plays a role in the timing of his departure to the mainland), the narrator takes his leave of Zorba for the mainland, which, despite the lack of any major outward burst of emotionality, is significantly emotionally wrenching for both Zorba and the narrator. It almost goes without saying that the two (the narrator and Zorba) will remember each other for the duration of their natural lives.
|
thought-provoking, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0083526
|
The Aftermath
|
Hunter (C. J. Thomason) is a young doctor that has found himself stuck in the cellar of a farmhouse while World War III and the resulting nuclear attack unfolds around him. He's accompanied by eight other people, none of whom know one another. Terrified and forced to defend themselves against other refugees looking to use the cellar as their own shelter, the group is frequently at odds with one another.
As the film opens, Hunter meets a young woman named Jennifer and her brother Satchel, driving down the road where they witness several mushroom clouds from afar, destroying two major cities in the process.
Satchel goes blind after watching the explosions. They start looking for supplies at a nearby drugstore, grabbing whatever they could find: food, water, medical supplies, car batteries, etc. They pick up a young woman named Elizabeth who informs them of the devastation of every major city on the east and west coast. Hunter gets shot while trying to find shelter for the others. They find a supposedly abandoned farmhouse, where they hope will be a safe refuge. However, he turns the tables on a farmer named Brad, who threatened to kill him if he didn't leave.
Jonathan, another farmer, decides to help Hunter and the others. Before joining the others, Hunter tends to his gunshot wound, finds medicine, and arms Elizabeth with a shotgun. Everyone begins to wonder whether or not the radiation in the atmosphere is widespread. They receive more news about Europe being destroyed by nuclear bombs. Hunter builds a makeshift radio, where they hope will bring them good news. However, they find a Geiger counter, and use it to measure the fallout of the bombs, causing shock and disbelief among the survivors.
Hunter and the others try to make it to the outside, but Elizabeth and Angie, Brad's wife, become exposed to the radiation, fearing that they might have sickness. Angie realizes that her unborn child may have died because of the exposure. Wendell, Jonathan and Brad's great uncle, dies after he refused to drink and eat anything that is contaminated. Rob, another survivor, promises Jonathan that he will help bury Wendell. Jonathan and the others have an encounter with cannibalistic humans who try to kill the group for food.
After heading back into the basement, Angie has a miscarriage. Without a blood transfusion, Angie could die. Brad becomes distraught and threatens to kill everyone if she is not saved. Jonathan hits Brad with a shovel, allowing Angie to die peacefully. Brad and the others hear the President's Speech, knowing that he has either died of the exposure or that he is in a secure bunker somewhere. All of them realize that there is no help coming. An hour later, Satchel dies from pneumonia. Hunter begins to notice that most of the group are slowly slipping away, because of the radiation seeping through the basement walls.
Hunter, armed with a shotgun, helps bury Satchel with Rob. Rob's fate is revealed that he was killed by the cannibals. Elizabeth proposes that they should kill themselves to put each other out of their misery. However, it is up to Brad to decide who lives and who dies. The next day, Brad and Hunter hear footsteps upstairs and know that the cannibals have returned, forcing the group to fight back. The five of them notice that the cannibals are ready for another fight. Elizabeth suffers and eventually succumbs to a broken rib and punctured lung after fighting with one of them. Hunter kills the cannibal that hurt her, but Brad dies in the process. Jonathan, having gone insane because of the experience, shoots Jennifer and then himself (It is later revealed that Jennifer survived the gunshot). The film ends with Hunter and Jennifer as the sole survivors of the group. A few weeks later, both are rapidly suffering the effects of radiation exposure and are shown to be close to death, while continuing to drink from contaminated water.
|
revenge, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0073822
|
Trollflöjten
|
The opera begins with the overture, which Mozart composed last.
=== Act 1 ===
Scene 1: A rough, rocky landscape
Tamino, a handsome prince lost in a distant land, is pursued by a serpent and asks the gods to save him (aria: "Zu Hilfe! Zu Hilfe!" segued into trio: "Stirb, Ungeheuer, durch uns’re Macht!"). He faints, and three ladies, attendants of the Queen of the Night, appear and kill the serpent. They find the unconscious prince extremely attractive, and each of them tries to convince the other two to leave. After arguing, they reluctantly decide to leave together.
Tamino wakes up, and is surprised to find himself still alive. Papageno enters dressed as a bird. He describes his life as a bird-catcher, complaining he has no wife or girlfriend (aria: "Der Vogelfänger bin ich ja"). Tamino introduces himself to Papageno, thinking Papageno killed the serpent. Papageno happily takes the credit – claiming he strangled it with his bare hands. The three ladies suddenly reappear and instead of giving him wine, cake and figs, they give him water, a stone and place a padlock over his mouth as a warning not to lie. They give Tamino a portrait of the Queen of the Night's daughter Pamina, with whom Tamino falls instantly in love (aria: "Dies Bildnis ist bezaubernd schön" / This image is enchantingly beautiful).
The ladies return and tell Tamino that Pamina has been captured by Sarastro, a supposedly evil sorcerer. Tamino vows to rescue Pamina. The Queen of the Night appears and promises Tamino that Pamina will be his if he rescues her from Sarastro (Recitative and aria: "O zittre nicht, mein lieber Sohn" / Oh, tremble not, my dear son!). The Queen leaves and the ladies remove the padlock from Papageno's mouth with a warning not to lie any more. They give Tamino a magic flute which has the power to change sorrow into joy. They tell Papageno to go with Tamino, and give him (Papageno) magic bells for protection. The ladies introduce three child-spirits, who will guide Tamino and Papageno to Sarastro's temple. Together Tamino and Papageno set forth (Quintet: "Hm! Hm! Hm! Hm!").
Scene 2: A room in Sarastro's palace
Pamina is dragged in by Sarastro's slaves, apparently having tried to escape. Monostatos, a blackamoor and chief of the slaves, orders the slaves to chain her and leave him alone with her. Papageno, sent ahead by Tamino to help find Pamina, enters (Trio: "Du feines Täubchen, nur herein!"). Monostatos and Papageno are each terrified by the other's strange appearance and both flee. Papageno returns and announces to Pamina that her mother has sent Tamino to save her. Pamina rejoices to hear that Tamino is in love with her. She offers sympathy and hope to Papageno, who longs for a wife. Together they reflect on the joys and sacred duties of marital love (duet: "Bei Männern welche Liebe fühlen").
Finale. Scene 3: A grove in front of a temple
The three child-spirits lead Tamino to Sarastro's temple, promising that if he remains patient, wise and steadfast, he will succeed in rescuing Pamina. Tamino approaches the left-hand entrance and is denied access by voices from within. The same happens when he goes to the entrance on the right. But from the entrance in the middle, an old priest appears and lets Tamino in. (The old priest is referred to as "The Speaker" in the libretto, but his role is a singing role.) He tells Tamino that Sarastro is benevolent, not evil, and that he should not trust the Queen of the Night. He promises that Tamino's confusion will be lifted when Tamino approaches the temple as a friend. Tamino plays his magic flute. Animals appear and dance, enraptured, to his music. Tamino hears Papageno's pipes sounding offstage, and hurries off to find him.
Papageno and Pamina enter, searching for Tamino. They are recaptured by Monostatos and his slaves. Papageno plays his magic bells, and Monostatos and his slaves begin to dance, and exit the stage, still dancing, mesmerised by the beauty of the music (aria: "Das klinget so herrlich"). Papageno and Pamina hear the sound of Sarastro's retinue approaching. Papageno is frightened and asks Pamina what they should say. She answers that they must tell the truth. Sarastro enters, with a crowd of followers.
Pamina falls at Sarastro's feet and confesses that she tried to escape because Monostatos had forced his attentions on her. Sarastro receives her kindly and assures her that he wishes only for her happiness. But he refuses to return her to her mother, whom he describes as a proud, headstrong woman, and a bad influence on those around her. Pamina, he says, must be guided by a man.
Monostatos brings in Tamino. The two lovers see one another for the first time and embrace, causing indignation among Sarastro's followers. Monostatos tells Sarastro that he caught Papageno and Pamina trying to escape, and demands a reward. Sarastro, however, punishes Monostatos for his lustful behaviour toward Pamina, and sends him away. He announces that Tamino must undergo trials of wisdom in order to become worthy as Pamina's husband. The priests declare that virtue and righteousness will sanctify life and make mortals like gods ("Wenn Tugend und Gerechtigkeit").
=== Act 2 ===
Scene 1: A grove of palms
The council of priests of Isis and Osiris, headed by Sarastro, enters to the sound of a solemn march. Sarastro tells the priests that Tamino is ready to undergo the ordeals that will lead to enlightenment. He invokes the gods Isis and Osiris, asking them to protect Tamino and Pamina (Aria and chorus: "O Isis und Osiris").
Scene 2: The courtyard of the Temple of Ordeal
Tamino and Papageno are led in by two priests for the first trial. The two priests advise Tamino and Papageno of the dangers ahead of them, warn them of women's wiles and swear them to silence (Duet: "Bewahret euch von Weibertücken"). The three ladies appear and try to frighten Tamino and Papageno into speaking. (Quintet: "Wie, wie, wie") Papageno cannot resist answering the ladies, but Tamino remains aloof, angrily instructing Papageno not to listen to the ladies' threats and to keep quiet. Seeing that Tamino will not speak to them, the ladies withdraw in confusion.
Scene 3: A garden
Pamina is asleep. Monostatos approaches and gazes upon her with rapture. (Aria: "Alles fühlt der Liebe Freuden") He is about to kiss the sleeping Pamina, when the Queen of the Night appears. She gives Pamina a dagger, ordering her to kill Sarastro with it and threatening to disown her if she does not. (Aria: "Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen"). She leaves. Monostatos returns and tries to force Pamina's love by threatening to reveal the Queen's plot, but Sarastro enters and drives him off. Pamina begs Sarastro to forgive her mother and he reassures her that revenge and cruelty have no place in his domain (Aria: "In diesen heil'gen Hallen").
Scene 4: A hall in the Temple of Ordeal
Tamino and Papageno are led in by priests, who remind them that they must remain silent. Papageno complains of thirst. An old woman enters and offers Papageno a cup of water. He drinks and teasingly asks whether she has a boyfriend. She replies that she does and that his name is Papageno. She disappears as Papageno asks for her name, and the three child-spirits bring in food, the magic flute, and the bells, sent from Sarastro. Tamino begins to play the flute, which summons Pamina. She tries to speak with him, but Tamino, bound by his vow of silence, cannot answer her, and Pamina begins to believe that he no longer loves her. (Aria: "Ach, ich fühl's, es ist verschwunden") She leaves in despair.
Scene 5: The pyramids
The priests celebrate Tamino's successes so far, and pray that he will succeed and become worthy of their order (Chorus: "O Isis und Osiris"). Pamina is brought in and Sarastro instructs Pamina and Tamino to bid each other farewell before the greater trials ahead, alarming them by describing it as their "final farewell." (Trio: Sarastro, Pamina, Tamino – "Soll ich dich, Teurer, nicht mehr sehn?" Note: In order to preserve the continuity of Pamina's suicidal feelings, this trio is sometimes performed earlier in act 2, preceding or immediately following Sarastro's aria "O Isis und Osiris".) They exit and Papageno enters. The priests grant his request for a glass of wine and he expresses his desire for a wife. (Aria: "Ein Mädchen oder Weibchen"). The elderly woman reappears and warns him that unless he immediately promises to marry her, he will be imprisoned forever. When Papageno promises to love her faithfully (muttering that he will only do this until something better comes along), she is transformed into the young and pretty Papagena. Papageno rushes to embrace her, but the priests drive him back, telling him that he is not yet worthy of her.
Finale. Scene 6: A garden
The three child-spirits hail the dawn. They observe Pamina, who is contemplating suicide because she believes Tamino has abandoned her. The child-spirits restrain her and reassure her of Tamino's love. (Quartet: "Bald prangt, den Morgen zu verkünden").
Scene change without interrupting the music, to Scene 7: Outside the Temple of Ordeal
Two men in armor lead in Tamino. They recite one of the formal creeds of Isis and Osiris, promising enlightenment to those who successfully overcome the fear of death ("Der, welcher wandert diese Strasse voll Beschwerden"). This recitation takes the musical form of a Baroque chorale prelude, to the tune of Martin Luther's hymn "Ach Gott, vom Himmel sieh darein" (Oh God, look down from heaven). Tamino declares that he is ready to be tested. Pamina calls to him from offstage. The men in armour assure him that the trial by silence is over and he is free to speak with her. Pamina enters and declares her intention to undergo the remaining trials with him. She hands him the magic flute to help them through the trials ("Tamino mein, o welch ein Glück!"). Protected by the music of the magic flute, they pass unscathed through chambers of fire and water. Offstage, the priests hail their triumph and invite the couple to enter the temple.
Scene change without interrupting the music, to Scene 8: A garden with a tree
Papageno despairs at having lost Papagena and decides to hang himself (Aria/Quartet: "Papagena! Papagena! Papagena! Weibchen, Täubchen, meine Schöne") The three child-spirits appear and stop him. They advise him to play his magic bells to summon Papagena. She appears and, united, the happy couple stutter in astonishment and make bird-like courting sounds at each other. They plan their future and dream of the many children they will have together (Duet: "Pa … pa … pa ...").
Scene change without interrupting the music, to Scene 9: A rocky landscape outside the temple; night
The traitorous Monostatos appears with the Queen of the Night and her three ladies. They plot to destroy the temple ("Nur stille, stille") and the Queen confirms that she has promised her daughter Pamina to Monostatos. But before the conspirators can enter the temple, they are magically cast out into eternal night.
Scene change without interrupting the music, to Scene 10: The Temple of the Sun
Sarastro announces the sun's triumph over the night. Everyone praises the courage of Tamino and Pamina, gives thanks to Isis and Osiris and hails the dawn of a new era of wisdom and brotherhood.
|
whimsical
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0821638
|
Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee
|
In the first chapter, Brown presents a brief history of the discovery and settlement of America, from 1492 to the Indian turmoil that began in 1860. He stresses the initially gentle and peaceable behavior of Indians toward Europeans, especially given their apparent lack of resistance to early colonial efforts at Europeanization. It was not until the further influx of European settlers, gradual encroachment, and eventual seizure of American lands by the "white man" that the Native people were shown to exhibit forms of major resistance.
Brown completes his initial overview by briefly describing incidents up to 1860 that involve American encroachment and Indian removal, beginning with the defeat of the Wampanoags and Narragansetts, Iroquois, and Cherokee Nations, as well as the establishment of the West as the "permanent Indian frontier" and the ultimate breaches of the frontier as a means to achieve Manifest Destiny.
In each of the following chapters, Brown provides an in-depth description of a significant post-1860 event in American Western expansion or Native American eradication, focusing in turn on the specific tribe or tribes involved in the event. In his narrative, Brown primarily discusses such tribes as the Navajo Nation, Santee Dakota, Hunkpapa Lakota, Oglala Lakota, Cheyenne, and Apache people. He touches more lightly upon the subjects of the Arapaho, Modoc, Kiowa, Comanche, Nez Perce, Ponca, Ute, and Minneconjou Lakota tribes.
=== Navajo ===
Brown discusses the plights of Manuelito and the Navajo people in New Mexico, who make treaties and other efforts to maintain peace with Euro-Americans despite their encroachment upon Navajo land, stealing livestock and burning entire villages as punishment for perceived misbehavior. The second, third and fourth generation European immigrants occupy land in Navajo country not only to build their own forts, the first of which was Fort Defiance, but also claim rights to the surrounding prized Navajo lands as pasture for their livestock. Various disputes occur between the Navajo and the Euro-Americans, culminating in a horse race between Manuelito and a US Army lieutenant who wins as a result of dishonesty and trickery. The consequence is a massacre of Navajo bystanders.
The US Army General James Carleton orders the Navajos to relocate to a reservation at Bosque Redondo, where the Apaches had recently been moved, but is met with resistance. Employing a scorched-earth campaign, Kit Carson and Carleton force a large majority of resistant Navajos and Apaches to surrender and flee to the reservation. Manuelito and a few other Navajo leaders refuse to surrender but finally agree to relocate to the Bosque in 1866 "for the sake of the women and children", signing a peace treaty on June 1, 1868.
=== Sioux ===
==== Santee Dakota ====
The narrative of the Sioux begins with Brown's discussion of the Santee Dakota tribe. Following a poor harvest and lack of promised support from the US government in the early 1860s, members of the tribe became angry at white people. After the murder of several white men and women by young Dakota, the frustrated Santee tribe, led by Chief Little Crow, attacked Fort Ridgely and a nearby town. When the Santees refuse to surrender their white hostages to Colonel Sibley, they are forced into battle again at Yellow Medicine River. The Santees lose and over three dozen Santee warriors are executed in December 1862. Santee chiefs, including Chief Little Crow, were killed during the following six months, and the remaining Santees are removed to a Missouri River and Crow Creek reservation.
==== Oglala Lakota ====
Brown's discussion of the Oglala Lakota begins with the US Army's 1865 invasion of the Powder River country in Montana. The army is confronted with opposition from the local Lakota and Cheyenne tribes. This and other skirmishes result in heated conflict between the US Army and the Oglala Lakotas led by Chiefs Red Cloud and Roman Nose, forcing the US Army to retreat for the winter. The high death toll among US troops fostered great confidence in the Native Americans who began a journey to the Black Hills.
By the US Army's request, the Sioux chiefs and approximately 2000 other warriors arrived at Fort Laramie in May 1866 for treaty talks. The tribes quickly learned of the army's intent to build roads and railroads through Sioux land. As construction progresses, the Sioux plan an attack on the white men and harass white traffic through the Powder River country. Red Cloud unknowingly leads approximately 3,000 Lakota into an ambush, later called the Fetterman Massacre, at Peno Creek where 81 white men and 200 Lakotas are killed. Conflict continues between the US Army and the Lakota for years despite peace commissioners being sent to Powder River to address differences. In 1868 the US Army retreats upon the signing of the peace treaty with Red Cloud.
In 1869 Red Cloud is invited to Washington D.C. to speak with Donehogawa, a member of the Iroquois tribe who is serving as the Commissioner of Indian Affairs in the US government. Chief Red Cloud and his tribe members express their discontent with the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie which defined their reservation land as bordered by the Missouri River rather than the Powder River. Commissioner Donehogawa corrected this mistake by declaring the Powder River country as reserved for Lakota hunting grounds. Donehogawa's agency was later accused of being like a "savage Indian" and the agency was unable to purchase supplies for the reservations. Donehogawa was subsequently forced to resign his commission.
In 1874, when rumors of gold in the Black Hills were delivered by Custer and his men to the white settlers on the plains, miners and panhandlers flooded the Black Hills, angering the Lakota and Dakota living there. A peace council in 1875 tried to arrange for the US government to either purchase the mineral rights or outright ownership of the Black Hills, but both proposals were rejected by the Sioux. In 1876, a series of battles occur between the Sioux and US troops which initially ends when the Sioux defeat General Custer and his troops at the The Battle of Little Bighorn on June 29. The humiliated US Army sends a peace council to sign a treaty that forces the Sioux out of the Black Hills to the Missouri River. The troops follow this treaty with numerous attacks on Lakota villages.
==== Hunkpapa and Minneconjou Lakota ====
Following the removal of the Lakota from the Black Hills to the Missouri River Reservation, Sitting Bull, in exile in Canada and participating in unsuccessful peace talks, returns to American soil and surrenders at Fort Buford. He is removed to the Hunkpapa reservation at Standing Rock; he subsequently joins Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show. The Lakota were ultimately forced to sign a treaty in 1890 that further divided and limited their reservation.
Sitting Bull is later arrested in an attempt by US authorities to suppress Sitting Bull's endorsement of the Ghost Dance which they considered a religious disturbance. The two Native American policemen sent to arrest Sitting Bull killed him. Following the death of Sitting Bull, a conflict arose that resulted in the Hunkpapas and Minneconjous tribes fleeing Standing Rock. Deciding against further resistance, the tribes join Red Cloud at Pine Ridge where they encounter Major Whitside in late December 1890. The tribes are subsequently directed to Wounded Knee, where a member of the Minneconjou tribe called Black Coyote refuses to surrender his rifle. The US Army reacts with violence which results in the deaths of 150-350 Native Americans and 25-31 US Army soldiers. The Lakota that survived the assault fled to Pine Ridge, and returned to Wounded Knee the next day only to bury their families and comrades.
=== Cheyenne and Arapaho ===
The 1858 Pikes Peak gold rush in Colorado creates a swarm of white settlers onto Cheyenne and Arapaho lands and instigates treaty talks that result in removal of Cheyenne and Arapaho territory to any area between Sand Creek and the Arkansas River. When the Civil War brings the US Army into Cheyenne and Arapaho territory, the resulting conflict endorses the murder of "hostile Indians". The Cheyenne tribe responds with numerous strikes on the army outposts.
In early 1866, the Southern Cheyenne Dog Soldiers are asked to sign the treaty that would relocate them to the south with Black Kettle and his tribe. When they refuse, Roman Nose organizes an attack which is thwarted by the coming of winter. In the following year a peace council is held between the General Hancock's army and the Cheyenne which ends when Hancock's army burns the Cheyenne camp to force their cooperation. After a series of retaliatory assaults, a treaty is signed by the Cheyenne, Arapaho, Kiowa, and Comanche tribes which relocates them to the reservation south of Arkansas River. Roman Nose doesn't sign the treaty. Instead he leads his Dog Soldiers on more war parties and is eventually killed. Generals Custer and Sheridan burn Black Kettle's village and the remaining band of Dog Soldiers are killed.
After the surrender and removal, the Northern Cheyenne tribe led by Little Wolf and Dull Knife are unable to sustain themselves on the poor land at Fort Reno, and they form a hunting party to hunt buffalo north of their reservation. Their hunt was unsuccessful, and the tribe continues to suffer severe losses due to health problems from malnutrition and a measles epidemic. Chiefs Little Wolf and Dull Knife decide to move north but this leads to more violent encounters with the US Army. The tribes are reduced to nearly 10% of their earlier population. Dull Knife and his tribe try to join Red Cloud, and they defy orders to return to their southern, buffalo-depleted reservation. Battles ensue, and Dull Knife's tribe is pursued north until the majority of the tribe are killed. The survivors take refuge at Red Cloud's reservation.
=== Apache ===
The friendly relations between the Apaches and Euro-Americans, that were once signified by the Apaches allowing white travelers to pass through their land unmolested, began to diminish when Apache Chief Cochise was imprisoned for allegedly stealing cattle and kidnapping a white boy from a settler's farm. When Cochise escaped, he and his warriors killed three white men, and the army responded by hanging male members of Cochise's family. Cochise spent the next two years leading attacks on the Euro-Americans. In 1865, after Cochise refuses a treaty designed to relocate his Chiricahua tribe to a reservation, the Apaches successfully avoid contact with white men for a number of years. But in 1871, a group of settlers, Mexicans, and warriors from competing tribes massacre an Apache village, and Cochise and his followers retreat into the mountains. They stay there until the chief agrees to move the Apache to a reservation in the Chiricahua Mountains in Arizona. He dies soon thereafter in 1874.
The Apache nation is divided after Cochise's death, and they soon become infamous for raiding white villages. The Chiricahua Apaches, avoiding attempts to relocate to a reservation, flee into Mexico. Victorio and his Warm Springs Apaches are removed to the San Carlos agency in southeastern Arizona in 1877. The entire tribe is eventually killed, to stop their raids on white settlers. Geronimo and his tribe leave their reservation only to return heavily armed and determined to free their fellow Apaches. This results in the stationing of Apache guerillas in Mexico. Negotiations with Geronimo and the guerillas continue over the next few years as alleged stories of the guerillas’ brutalities and atrocities circulate. In 1886, Geronimo flees once again before being incarcerated and transported to a reservation in Florida with the remaining Chiricahua Apaches.
=== Modoc ===
Captain Jack, the Chief of the Modoc tribe located in Northern California, is described as a Native American friendly to the "white people" who settled in his country. As larger numbers of settlers trespass onto Modoc land and small disputes arise between the Modocs and white settlers, the US government coerces a treaty, over Captain Jack's reluctance, that will relocate the Modocs to a reservation in Oregon and shared with the Klamaths. Conflicts between the two tribes quickly begin, and the Modocs return south to California. Their return is halted by a skirmish between the tribe and an army battalion in 1872, and the Modocs divert to the California lava beds. Another group of Modocs, led by Hooker Jim, murdered 12 white settlers and forced Captain Jack to lead his tribe into a battle against the US Army. A peace commission led by General Canby, conducts peace talks with Captain Jack who eventually, under pressure from Hooker Jim's Modocs, agrees to kill Canby should the original Modoc land not be returned to the tribe. As feared, Canby refuses to return the land to the Modocs, and he is killed by Captain Jack. Hooker Jim betrays Captain Jack to the army, and he is hanged on October 3, 1873.
=== Kiowa and Comanche ===
After the Battle of Washita in 1868, General Sheridan ordered all tribes involved to surrender at Fort Cobb; the Kiowa tribe refused. The Kiowa chiefs are arrested and both the Kiowa and Comanche people are forced onto the Fort Cobb reservation. The Kiowas and Comanches, led by Satanta and Big Tree, decide to attack the white men, and they kill 7 teamsters. This results in the arrest and imprisonment of both chiefs. Lone Wolf, another Kiowa Chief, arranges for the release of White Bear and Big Tree so they can attend the peace talks at Fort Sill. In early 1874, while on parole, White Bear and Big Tree lead the Kiowa and Comanche tribes on an attack against white settlers in order to preserve the buffalo. When both tribes flee their reservations, they are hunted down by the US Army. Upon their surrender in early 1875, they are exiled in Florida.
=== Nez Percé ===
Despite maintaining peaceful relations with whites, the Nez Perces are forced to sign a treaty in 1863 which removes them to a small reservation in Idaho. Chief Joseph and his tribe designated this agreement as the "thief treaty". Being highly offended by the treaty terms, and the sudden influx of gold miners and cattle farmers onto Nez Perce land, the tribe refused to move to the Lapwai Reservation, choosing instead to fight the US Army at White Bird Canyon in June 1877. After winning that battle, the tribe fled to Montana, trying to join Sitting Bull in Canada, but then they lost the battle at the Bear Paw Mountains in August and were forced to surrender. Some members of the tribe managed to find refuge in Canada, but those that surrendered were split between the Lapwai reservation and the Colville reservation in Washington.
=== Ponca ===
Despite having previously signed treaties guaranteeing their ownership of the land on the Niobrara River, the Ponca land was taken from via a subsequent US treaty and given to the Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota tribes just before they were added to a list of tribes to be exiled to Indian Territory following Custer's defeat. Ponca Chief Standing Bear was arrested along with other chiefs for refusing to leave voluntarily. The Ponca tribe was forced onto the Quapaw reservation, where over one quarter of their population died. Standing Bear returned to the Niobrara and takes his case to a white man's court in 1879 arguing that he is a person protected by the US Constitution. Standing Bear won his case but is informed by General Sherman that the case is specific to him and does not maintain validity for the other Poncas, who were forced to remain in Indian Territory.
=== Utes ===
The Utes are a Colorado tribe whose land was gradually overrun by mineral and gold miners. Chief Ouray signed a treaty in 1863 allowing settlers to mine Ute land and relinquishing all mineral rights. He signed another treaty in 1868 that allotted 16 million acres of forests and meadows in the Rockies as a personal reservation that prohibited white trespass. When disputes arose, Nathan Meeker attempted to assimilate the Utes into Euro-American culture, but William Vickers opposed the idea and started "The Utes Must Go!" campaign in 1879. Vickers called on the US cavalry to prevent an uprising by the Utes. The Utes responded by killing all the white men at the White River Indian agency. In 1881, as a result of outrage over the White River Massacre, the Utes were removed to a marginal reservation in Utah.
|
murder, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
And now, in Wounded Knee, it is the white man who destroys what is left of Native American life; a terribly stark (and bloody) reality.The other notables are Adam Beach (FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS) as Charles Eastman, and Aidan Quinn as Senator Henry Dawes.
This surprised me greatly since it was Grant's administration that doomed Native Americans by rounding them up and placing them on reservations.Despite my misgivings about the script, cinematography and acting, this is a vital story that needs to be told, and it isn't something that is normally taught in grade school or higher.
Europeans (us) conquered this land and its people, and pushed them into holding pens where they, to this day, await justice for our multiple treaty violations and massacres of their men, women and children (I will say that the scenes depicting large-caliber rifle bullets ripping through young kids was filmed well and was equally hard to watch).So the story gives this film a higher rating than anything within it, which is unfortunate, as this terrible moment in American history needs to be remembered just as much as Germany needs to remember its holocaust..
The movie does a good job showing a more sympathetic side to some of the Americans who actually cared for the Indian's and their interests.
If you haven't read the book, or knew nothing of the history of this story, you would be completely lost.The cast was great, and the acting was good.
I had high hopes that the story telling would be straight forward, of a relatively well-documented event, based on the well known book.The title is misleading; it is not Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, it is a small excerpt combined with some other story I was not familiar with.
The ending of the movie is really mangled, combining color with black and white for dramatic effect, but it just doesn't work, especially when it never even shows the event depicted in the title.Watch it for good acting, good music, great camera work, but don't expect to be educated, or entertained.
This film seems to have rubbed both history buffs and fans of the book the wrong way, but I thought it was a compelling, evocative film nevertheless.Starting off where most movies end, at a CGI created overhead shot of The Little Big Horn (!), this instead focuses on the final years of the Unions war against the Indian nations, culminating in the massacre at Wounded Knee.There's a really great role for Adam Beach, as a young Souix doctor, who's father turned his back on the native ways and sent him to live amongst whites at a young age, stripping him of his identity.August Schellenberg is excellent here as Sitting Bull, who's determination and pride stokes the anger of the powers that be, including Aiden Quinn, a sympathetic but patronizing Senator who has taken it upon himself to lead the Indians on a path to "civilization".Anyone who watched the myriad Cavalry pictures and Little Big Horn epics should see this and find out how the whole sad story ends..
The movie, however, is a disappointment.I first read Dee Brown's book, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, when I was 10 years old and found out that I was part Cherokee.
While the story of Charles Eastman is worth telling, it is not part of the book and is sloppily woven into the storyline of the Sioux resistance at the Battle of the Little Bighorn to the massacre at Wounded Knee.
That the Wounded Knee massacre should be told in flashbacks rather than as direct action is appalling.So much has been left out of this movie that it does nothing more than commit a great injustice to both the book and the people whose stories are being told.
Must another Hollywood movie strip Indian people of yet another aspect of their culture, namely their stories, their history, and their heroes?
Having just spent the past 18 months studying Native American philosophy and having just returned from a week at Cherokee, learning the language and culture up close, I can say this film does help express the complex and heart-rending story of the relationship between the invaders and the conquered in our years 1870-1890.For those who have been critical of the film (on this site), I should note from a White Woman's point of view, this is about all that Whites can absorb of the "full" story and emotions as a first contact.
The movie focuses specifically on a Sioux (Adam Beach) who takes the name Charles Eastman and studies medicine, but upon seeing what the white people's westward expansion does to his people tries to get Sen. Henry Dawes (Aidan Quinn) to listen.I recommend it just because it shows what happened to the Indians.
It was there where Gen. George Armstrong Custer and over 250 men under his command was slaughtered to the last man, the only survivor of Custer's troop being a calvary horse called Comanche, by the fired up Sioux Indians.Wanting revenge for what turned out to be the worst defeat that the US Calvary suffered in the Indian Wars the "Great White Father" President Ulysses S.
Confronting Chief Sitting Bull, August Schellenberg, and his some three thousand warriors at Ceder Valley Creek Gen. Bear-Coat had no trouble dispersing the Sioux onslaught mowing down hundreds of Sitting Bull's men with volleys of rifle and cannon fire.Dispersed and on the brink of starvation Sitting Bull's rival Chief Red Cloud, Gordon Tootoosis, was forced to sign away his peoples rights to where they became wards of the state living off the kindness and charity of the hated White Man. Sitting Bull wanting none of this took his followers to Canada where after suffering through a number of harsh Canadian Winters, far worse then any of the winters in the Dakota Territories, later came back hat in hand accepting the unthinkable: living under the White Man's both rule and law.
It was the deception and manipulation by the US Government in trying to force Sitting Bull and his people to sign away their ancestral lands that eventually lead to the wild and hysterical events that lead to Wounded Knee.
The story of "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" is told to us through the personal observations of Charles Eastman, Adam Beach, formerly known by his Sioux Indian name of Ohiyesa.
With Eastman's good friend Massachusetts Senator Henry Drew, Alden Quinn,trying to get his people to come to some agreement with the US Government in becoming farmers instead of nomads, which the Sioux were for countless centuries, tensions soon reached a breaking point.It was when out of sheer desperation the Sioux adopted the ancient Indian Ghost Dance, which was only ceremonial and nothing else, that the US Army was dispatched to put an end to what the Federal Government back in Washington D.C perceived to be another potential Little Big Horn.
With tempers flaring on both sides after Chief Sitting Bull was murdered by the reservations Sioux police it was only a matter of time for the lid, that both Eastman and Senator Drew tried to keep on, blew off and the results was the massacre at Wounded Knee.
Technically and legally even now, some 118 years after the Wounded Knee massacre, the historic Black Hills are in the hands of the Sioux tribes still living there.P.S Charles Eastman aka Ohiyesa was to write dozens of books and articles about his people the Sioux Indians as well as practice medicine at the Pine Ridge, as well as other, Indian reservation until he passed away on January 8, 1939 at the age of 80.
Eastman among his many accomplishments in the service of his people was also the co-founder of the American Boy Scouts that improved and enriched the lives of American youths white black yellow and Native American Indian alike..
If they were trying to present the whole story through the eyes of the doctor, I would have understood a back-handed recounting since he wasn't at the creek, but the movie switched narratives multiple times, so the directing and editing and even storytelling decisions don't build any tension at all.
This story covers the period from the battle at Little Big Horn to the massacre at Wounded Knee.It's your typical heart-tugging depiction of mistreatment of Native Americans by the U.S. government and its people.
Indians have even been killed to clear the way for profits.So as you watch this movie in outrage and cry for the poor Native Americans and curse those who did nothing, take a look in the mirror..
Released to HBO in 2007, "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" is a historical Western based on several chapters of Dee Brown's book of the same name and details the last days of the Sioux Nation, culminating in the infamous massacre at Wounded Knee.
His messianic movement inspired the Natives, promising an end of their suffering under white rule.Every movie based on history mixes fact with fiction as filmmakers try to overcome the challenge of morphing complex real-life events into palatable cinema.
So let's get the falsities out of the way: Charles Eastman never lived in the Native village near the Battle of the Little Bighorn as young brave Ohiyesa; Sitting Bull surrendered at Ft. Buford, not Standing Rock; lastly, Charles Eastman was not Dawes' associate in developing the Dawes Act.With that out of the way, what I like about this movie is how balanced it is as it shows both sides of the story.
The Europeans were simply a confederation of several white "tribes" from across the great sea and were merely doing the same thing that Sitting Bull's tribe did – acquiring land from conquered peoples.Speaking of Sitting Bull, he's one of the most interesting and enigmatic Native characters seen in cinema.
The irony is that, while Wovoka's vision inspires the Lakota and it replaces their suffering with hope & happiness, it only ends in death.Two great sequences occur in the final act: The accurately-depicted haunting death of Sitting Bull, which took place on December 15, 1890, at Standing Rock Reservation; and the titular massacre at Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine River Reservation two weeks later.
The firing then became indiscriminate and the massacre entailed.While "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" is a television production, its quality is as good or better than many theatrical pictures.
I have no idea whether this is historically accurate, or, if I were a member of (Canada's) First Nations, to embrace or be offended by this portrayal of the time period, which, though the story of one Americanized Indian, is (given the title) really about the plight of America's first peoples and obviously told from a 21st Century perspective.
I've studied the events that lead up to the Wounded knee massacre, and I have to say you have to give a hand to this film.
Dee Brown's book was also a horror story, and the major horror was that it was real.So knowing absolutely nothing about the movie, I borrowed it, thinking that it would be essentially a documentary.
'Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee' tells the story of this period, and the truth is grim and fascinating; but unfortunately, this is heavy-handed stuff, whose sympathies are always apparent, and marred by wooden acting and lumbering dialogue.
Neither the uncorrupted pseudo-flower children of "Little Big Man" or "Dances With Wolves" nor the murderous savages of a hundred earlier cowboy and Indian flicks, the Lakota-Sioux are shown here to be victims, to be sure, but in the past they have victimized others and they victimize each other at times as the movie unfolds.The White characters also are shown as very varied in character--some stern but fair, others frankly hostile, most well meaning if ultimately unhelpful.
This well intentioned movie did not capture the spirit of Dee Brown's book, alas.Focusing the story largely around the admirable Lakota doctor, Charles Eastman and his White wife tries to give an emotional center to Brown's sprawling narrative but the characters of Sitting Bull and Red Cloud come off as little more than an elaboration of the famous "Noble Redman meets Litter" commercial of the 70's.
All the heart and soul of Brown's book is lost in this movie.And I know Adam Beach is a popular actor if you're casting a movie that calls for young, good looking Native American guys, but he only has two facial expressions: happy or snarly, and that's it.
Showing the reality of Sitting Bull as a leader, as a man, as a captive was eloquent and very real to me.Aidan Quinn was excellent in portraying a Christian man who honestly felt he was doing the right thing, but operating without a full understanding of what was being taken for the people he thought he was helping.
Adam Beach did a great job of playing a young man disillusioned by the world he was forced into and saddened by what was happening to his people.Some of the best moments of the film seemed simple outwardly, but were in fact so powerful that I cried.
However given the medium, it's a compelling film that highlights the plight of the Native American Indian in the dying days of the Old West, and with it, the death knell of a proud warrior people.I recently visited the James Fenimore Cooper Museum in Cooperstown, New York, and at the time, actual Sioux drawings were on exhibit depicting the Battle at Little Big Horn.
Not to mention the hopelessness of Custer's cause.The film can be absolutely depressing at times with it's depiction of outright slaughter, and perhaps even more so once the Sioux tribes are relegated to reservation life.
Movie opens with a recreation of soldiers taking pictures of "Big Foot in Death," one of the disturbing actual pictures in the book, taken on the Wounded Knee battlefield in 1890.When I read Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee over a decade ago, I would never have believed that White America would have the gall to turn it into a film and if it was made into a movie, it would be diluted as a trail of tears
The latter has come to pass.Screenwriter Daniel Giat and director Yves Simoneau deliver a film as watery as any American beer.
The movie opens with General Custer's gruesome defeat at Little Big Horn in 1876 by combined Lakota and Northern Cheyenne Native Americans but we don't see the heads that were just a part of the reason why the slaughter was inevitable and well-deserved.
The movie ends with the grisly massacre of Lakota Sioux men, women and children at Wounded Knee in 1890.
Almost as if the "Indians" got their just desserts for killing them nice soldier boys.I rest my case.(By the way, "Indians" is the White Eyes' name for the Native American races.
When the Natives in this movie call themselves Indians so offhandedly, we realize the film-makers did all their research on Wikipedia.) It was not bad enough to kill off the Native Americans 150 years ago, now a movie is made about that inhuman era not to honor the Natives, but to MAKE MONEY for HBO; to pretend a spirituality, tolerance and political correctness modern Americans have not the depth to comprehend.Before we continue, let us establish that Dee Brown's 1970 book is a disturbing, thought-provoking, well-researched masterpiece; a towering indictment of frontier America of the 1800s; a history lesson from the people who lived it, not the ones who re-wrote it.
Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee is a book that scarred the self-aggrandizing perspective of a nation; recounting Native Americans' extermination at the hands of the White Eyes and their broken promises, cowardly massacres and bloody betrayals; every single treaty between the two factions dishonored by the scoundrels who claimed birthright to a country that they knew was not theirs.Though this gutless filmic re-imagining of Brown's book tries hard to be compelling, it is merely a thin marketing gimmick for whatever Native American fever was doing the rounds in Hollywood at the time.The actors do what they can with the clichéd characters they're assigned: Aidan Quinn as the Good White Man, empowered to carve up land and herd the Native Americans out; the majestic Wes Studi, an old-school agitator; August Schellenberg perfectly cast as Sitting Bull, "the greatest living Indian"; Eric Schweig doing his Steven Segal impersonation; the magnificent Adam Beach (Flags of Our Fathers), one step closer to some kind of acting award; Nathan Lee Chasing His Horse (evocative name, no?
Grant.At first, the White Eyes' grasping at real estate looks like provincialism and ignorance of different cultures ("I still believe that setting the Indians on the course to civilization best serves him") but the Illegal Aliens (i.e. American settlers) knew full well that they wanted the LAND under the PRETENSE of doing a good deed for the Natives doublespeaking it as mendaciously as that Great World Terrorist of the 2000s, George W.
Our only hope is that viewers of this vapid HBO movie will be encouraged to read Brown's book and perform true-hearted research into the buried heritage that the White Eyes are still working so hard to pretend to forget..
Ohíye S'a; or Charles Eastman, who the film makers chose to tell the story through, unlike in the book, was a Santee Dakota.
The film portrays the struggles between the American Indians and the white people.
It was a sad movie to watch, since the native Indians continuously suffered from many things, and there was no true freedom for them.
It was sad to watch Charles being caught up by both sides; the American Indians and the white people.
The film also shows how people are from the opposing sides, and how they feel and act about the situation around the American Indians.
|
tt0235917
|
Dora the Explorer
|
The series centers around Dora, a 7 (Later 8) year old American girl of Indigenous Mexican heritage, with a love of embarking on quests related to an activity that she wants to partake of or a place that she wants to go to, accompanied by her talking purple backpack and anthropomorphic monkey companion named Boots (named for his beloved pair of red boots). Each episode is based around a series of cyclical events that occur along the way during Dora's travels, along with obstacles that she and Boots are forced to overcome or puzzles that they have to solve (with "assistance" from the viewing audience) relating to riddles, the Spanish language, or counting. Common rituals may involve Dora's encounters with Swiper, a bipedal, anthropomorphic masked thieving fox whose theft of the possessions of others must be prevented through fourth wall-breaking interaction with the viewer. To stop Swiper, Dora must say "Swiper no swiping" three times. However, on occasions where Swiper steals the belongings of other people, the viewer is presented with the challenge of helping Boots and Dora locate the stolen items. Another obstacle involves encounters with another one of the program's antagonists; the "Grumpy Old Troll" dwelling beneath a bridge that Dora and Boots must cross, who challenges them with a riddle before permitting them the past that needs to be solved with the viewer's help. Known for the constant breaking of the fourth-wall depicted in every episode, the audience is usually presented to two primary landmarks that must be passed before Dora can reach her destination, normally being challenged with games or puzzles along the way. The episode always ends with Dora successfully reaching the locale, singing the "We Did It!" song with Boots in triumph.
On numerous occasions, television specials have been aired for the series in which the usual events of regular episodes are altered, threatened, or replaced. Usually said specials will present Dora with a bigger, more whimsical adventure than usual or with a magical task that must be fulfilled, or perhaps even offer a series of different adventures for Boots and Dora to travel through. They might be presented with an unusual, difficult task (such as assisting Swiper in his attempts to be erased from Santa Claus's Naughty List) that normally is not featured in average episodes, or challenge Dora with a goal that must be achieved (such as the emancipation of a trapped mermaid). Sometimes, the specials have involved the debut of new characters, such as the birth of Dora's superpowered twin baby siblings and the introduction of the enchanted anthropomorphic stars that accompany Dora on many of her quests.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
In case you are not familiar with this show Dora is a 7 year old Latina girl who travels around with a monkey named Boots.
While there is some repetition in every form of entertainment, especially for children, this is absolutely ridiculous.The second complaint I have about this show is that Dora is not educational.
During that episode Dora teaches kids how to count to eight twice.
I do admit that Dora did teach a Spanish word but children should be learning more about ABC's, counting, etc than Spanish.
The characters don't even have personality so it's not like they could learn about people through the actions of Dora either.My final complaint is that this show has way too much merchandise.
I have tried to like Dora the Explorer, as I am all for educational shows.
For example Tots TV, Sesame Street and Rosie and Jim were educational and all three of them I loved as a kid because they were also a lot of fun.
As an 18 year old girl, I kept in consideration that this was a kids show, but sorry I don't like it.
Another problem is that I for one don't find it educational, there was an episode when Dora I think counted to ten in Spanish.
Kids will definitely find that educational, but for someone who studied Spanish for two years, I couldn't help rolling my eyes at something I already knew.
Then the story lines are unoriginal for the most part, the music is forgettable(to me that is though I do appreciate that they were keeping it simple for kids to remember, but I personally felt they went overboard with the simplicity), the characters are thin, the writing is shallow and for me the voice acting was unexceptional.
I have a 5 and a 2 year-old daughter, and they both enjoy watching Dora very much.
Mostly, it seems like they're trying to teach prepositions (up, down, through, etc.) and they're padding it with a few Spanish words to fill out the half-hour episode.
Shows like Sesame Street want to teach kids about other cultures and languages.
Dora, Boots, the Knapsack, the Map and everybody else talk down to the audience or simply come off as annoying.
There is way too much repetitiveness and it's tiring to see Dora asking for help whenever she comes to an obstacle.
It's full of colors but it won't win any awards for its technical brilliance.Yes, maybe the show will keep kids occupied but I think there are much better shows from the past and even today that can help teach kids when they don't want a textbook or a learning toy.
I think it would appear to be really easy to just criticize a children-show like Dora, but after seeing this a couple of times I felt I should write a review about this.First of all, the version over here is in Dutch so the second language being 'taught' here is English, not Spanish like it says on the IMDb-page.
Second of all, when I wrote 'pointless' in the summary in this review I really meant pointless in every meaning of the word, because every time you (and maybe your children as well) watch this you never have a clue what the true goal of this show is.
Yeah of course; children get to learn some small (in this case) English words every now and then but other then that its the same repetitive things over and over again.The first thing that I noticed was the very poor production.
How is this helping children, by making them think a animated girl and her (pink...?) monkey can hear him/her through the television?
Especially in this day in age thats just wrong.Most of the time I don't bother reviewing children-shows like this but this show lacks in almost every way to be a good show and I think parents have the right to know how much a show is helping they'r children and not.
Even if Dora wasn't supposed to be educational, it would have been even worse as a normal entertainment-show since every episode is practically the same.
And whose parents let there kids do what ever they want and do dangerous stuff like ride in helicopters without there watchful eye!
I wouldn't recommend letting your toddler watch this until they are old enough to know that shouting and demanding what they want is not acceptable.
My little brother LOVES this stupid show though, which is OK for a 3 year old, but I hate this show for a few reasons.One- Dora yells nonstop.
Dora tells your child to say "Swiper no swiping!" and 95% of the time he stops in his tracks and says "Oh man!" If a robber ever tried to steal something from you if you said "no swiping" like they would really stop?
Not every show is great, they are all repetitive however when it comes to small children that helps them to learn.
While it is incredibly annoying for an adult to watch as the songs get quite aggravating however, the kids seem to just love it.
Keep in mind when watching Dora that it is not intended for older kids nor is it intended for adults.
As much as we may hate to watch it, small kids love it and do learn a lot from it..
My son was scared because of Dora because of Swiper the Fox.Also they are giving you bad examples, Should you really be going around and be stealing Easter eggs from other peoples property and ruining their Easter egg hunt!
But still it is kind of educational for example it teaches you counting and matching (i think some preschoolers know counting and matching.) My daughter watched Dora a little in second grade.
I still don't know why little kids like it and why it is that popular..
WHY THE HELL is this piece of dog poop so popular?why,WHY!?!?!?Even my seven year old sister can come up with better ideas.This makes the new episodes of spongebob look like a masterpiece.The writers of this show are probably as dumb as dora.Speaking of dora,she's got to be one of my least favorite cartoon characters,no,scratch that,my least favorite CHARACTER of all time.And boots is no better either.I'd rather watch blues clues and I don't even like that show either.Oh,I forgot to mention that dora and boots sing pointless and dumb musical numbers every episode(if that isn't bad enough, they sing the EXACT SAME SONGS EVERY SINGLE EPISODE!!!!!)And don't even get me started on swiper,who I wish would once swipe dora's clothes.You know what,now I am pretty convinced that this show's writers are DUMBER than dora.So bottom line:dora is a dumb,stupid show that I believe is making our generation's kids dumber.It's sad that kids have to grow up watching these abominations instead of watching classics like tom and jerry,looney tunes etc..
If I got a question wrong, Dora would say, "Good job, you got it right!" And that means there's a chance the kids could think they were right and you would have to convince them their idol was wrong.The whole interaction premises is a rather dumb one in the first place.
I mean, sure, it's good to get kids involved, but do you really need to involve them so much, they'd be trying to climb into the TV to be with Dora?
(Don't even get me started about how THAT show got ruined)So, basically, I'm not saying that Dora will brainwash your children, I'm saying that there are many other shows that are more than just learning Spanish and how to jump over a pit of snakes or whatever..
After I saw the show, I never watched Nickelodeon again unless I turned it off before going to sleep.And also the show need not be for kids.
I understand that it helps a child learn, but what good is repeating "I'm the Map" fifteen million times do for your kid?
To do so requires getting in touch with your wants and desires as a kid, and trying to transplant them into reviews of modern shows.With that in mind, I have to say that I find it unlikely that I would have enjoyed Dora if it were on during my time growing up.
Dora insults its young audience by asking it for "help" identifying objects, and even worse, physical activities like catching a ball bouncing "through" the screen.I grew up watching a lot of "Sesame Street".
In fact, it may even confuse children, as Dora congratulates kids for "choosing" the right answer to questions, even if the kid watching got the question wrong (or didn't answer at all).
It's not an adult show, but it get's the children to learn how to count and to even understand Spanish.
My son loves to watch Dora, he repeats what she says, and he can count to 10 now on his own!I highly recommend this show for children to see!
All three of my kids and their friends aged 2 - 5, absolutely love Dora the Explorer.
Dora is a five year old girl who sets out on a different adventure each episode with her friend Boots the monkey and her talking back pack.
P.S The voice of Dora is done by a 13 year old who's parents are from Peru so there is a connection for my daughter.To those criticising the show go watch "Law and Order" not some cartoon at your ages.
It also tells kids they don't need their parents at the age of five, my daughters 3 yo and its getting harder to have her hold my hand crossing the street without Dora's influence.The worst thing is kids think everyone is friendly.
I know people who spend a good amount of time explaining why their kids should talk to strangers, and my friend is having a harder time because "but Dora does it." If you don't want your kid to have bad habits, avoid Dora like the plague..
They love the consistency of such shows, knowing what will come next as far as the method in which Dora reaches her destination, and what obstacles could arise (Swiper the Fox).
She has learned about helping others, being a good friend, kindness, bravery, adventure, and, at the age of two, has learned a number of Spanish words.One of the great things for me about this show, unlike most other shows for toddlers and preschoolers, is that in an age where children are growing up much too fast it actually is an innocent and age appropriate program.
Because many adults cannot put themselves in the mind of a young child, and because we have been so satiated and jaded with image after image with one demoralizing, titillating, or shocking story after another that we have become immune to, shows like Dora might seem boring or inane.
But parents must be conscientious and vigilante about what their children see on television-while also teaching what inevitably must be learned about the ways of the world as it is AGE APPROPRIATE.
Dora is one of few shows that my young child is able to watch and I'm very grateful for it.
A side note, my 11-year-old niece also enjoys watching Dora if she is home sick from school.
I don't understand the "its just for kids" mentality when people make shows for young children.
I have a 3 year old and a 1 year old and they both love this show, it drives me crazy but I let them watch it because they have learned so many words, colors, shapes, etc.
It's our job as parents to teach them the reality's of this world when there old enough to understand them, so idk about you but I'm going to let my toddlers enjoy telling swiper no swiping without blood and violence.
Trust me, I watch a wide variety of kid's shows, and let me tell you, Dora rules.
I am amazed how people assume the episodes can be educational for overhearing words like "volcano".
Dora the Explorer can be hard to watch for an adult but my 1 1/2 year old loves it.
I am convinced as she gets older, she will pick up on the Spanish words, also.I encourage parents to allow your child to watch this show because it has some educational value.
Especially commercial television (Nick Jr., Noggin, Fox Family), yet Dora the Explorer seems to rise above the standard cute pastels and simplistic animation.Now, by no means am I saying this is a complicated show.
Dora and Boots are constantly asking the kids to help them or to find various objects on screen.
If you're going to make your kid watch TV and you don't like Sesame Street, this is the way..
My two year old loves Dora, the concepts and values presented are solid, so that should be enough.
Yes, it is clearly not cool for adults to like Barney and Dora, but those that denegrate the programs need to regress back to two years, and see the joy of these programs from a kids perspective.
I have a 16-months-old girl and she LOVES Dora.
Your child won't read any better if he/she knows the ABCs by the time he/she is 2.To sum this up, I think Dora is great for kids from 1 to 3.
I love how many people give it a low score , not realizing that this show is not for them.The show was made for people younger than 7 years old.and it doesen't do a bad job on teaching spanish.
My five year old loves Dora .
Dora does teach a lot I think you need to watch more closely .
Dora The Explorer is a fabulous show that is both educational (the children get to learn a few words of Spanish) and interactive (there is plenty of opportunity for the children to SHOUT at the TV screen to make things happen) + it is very, very colourful which is very important for children.The songs are catchy and each show centres on a different theme.This is a highly respected show, and I throughly recommend that parents with young children take time to experience, and understand, the magic that is Dora The Explorer..
I like that just by telling Swiper not to steal he actually listens (another quality I want my kids needs to learn).I like the songs.
Kids love and need repetition.
If you've ever read anything or even watched something by a child expert (I'm thinking SuperNanny) they will all tell you that kids like consistency.
I watch this show with my kids all the time and I love it.
It is nothing like the "Teletubbies." My children who are 2 years and 3 years old love to try and say the "Spanish" words with Dora.So again this program is a must watch..
Dora is far less annoying than many other children's shows available today..
The show is aimed at preschool children and repetition is needed for them to learn anything .
And to someone who wrote that a whole 16 seconds was dedicated to counting to 8 .sorry but they get numbers and letters shoved down their throat every else so it's refreshing to have a show that's not the same old repetitive stuff So I think if you look a little further in to what this cartoon displays you will see there is a lot of educational aspects to the show .
I think this Dora The Explorer show (and all the others) are wonderfully entertaining and educational for the pre-schoolers.
My daughter learnt to count to 10 by 16 Mt's of age, all through watching Dora.
I also recommend parents take a little time to watch an episode with their child.
I watch children's programming with him, and this is among my favorites."Dora the Explorer" is a cartoon designed to look like an interactive computer game.
Dora and Boots help kids learn that by following logical steps problems can be solved and goals can be reached.
Yes many, if not all the episodes are are basically the same thing with a small change but something you should do is ask your children if they enjoy it.I simply say this because it seems like so many people are being harsh on the show even though it was made for YOUNG children between the ages of around 3 - 5.
And yes I know there are much better children's shows but honestly Dora is NOT a bad show.
Overall, I would say that it's a good show for young children and toddlers, but a drag for parents who have to watch it too..
Actually, we were up, dancing and singing and interacting with Dora a lot of the time.The choice of language, the amount of repetition and pauses for interaction are all excellent for learning English as a foreign language, for this age-group.
It helps for the adult to watch it and interact together to help pull your toddler into Dora's world.
Don't get me wrong, it is helpful, and is a great learning tool for kids.
It also teaches kids Spanish along the way.
It gets worse because Dora teaches Spanish why the hell do are children need to learn Spanish when were in America.
Your young kids will scream at the TV by watching Dora.
More like "Dumb Dora the Explorer!".
i can't believe they force children in to this non-educational excuse for a monkey to destroy younger viewers minds but there is one good episode with Donkey Kong and some anime kids.
I admit that it gets annoying but it helps little kids to learn.
Plus, to everyone who talks about how useless the "Swiper, no swiping" thing is, if you want young kids to know about the experience of being mugged, have them watch CSI.
Overall, I used to really like Dora and while it's not as good as I remembered it still hated on far too much.
|
tt0259685
|
Tremors 3: Back to Perfection
|
Adventurer Burt Gummer returns to his hometown of Perfection, Nevada, after a hunt for Shriekers in Argentina. Since the original Graboid attacks, the town's preventative equipment for tracking Graboid activities has fallen into disrepair due to the neglect of native residents Miguel, Nancy Sterngood, and her daughter Mindy. Walter Chang's market has been taken over by his niece Jodi, and the town has gained a new resident, Jack, who creates mock-attack tours for visiting tourists. One afternoon, during one of Jack's tours, his assistant Buford is eaten by an actual Graboid. Jack, Mindy, and Jack's customers manage to escape to warn the town, and Burt determines there are three Graboids in the area.
The residents begin to take action to kill the Graboids, but they are stopped by government agents Charlie Rusk and Frank Statler and a paleontologist, Dr. Andrew Merliss who claim the Graboids are an endangered species, preventing the humans from hunting them. Jack manages to reach an agreement with the agents that if they capture one live Graboid, Burt and the residents will be allowed to kill the remaining two. Burt grudgingly agrees, and he and Jack set out to trap a Graboid while the agents go after another out of their own accord. Melvin Plugg, a fellow survivor from the original attacks, approaches Burt in the hopes of buying his land and developing it into a town. After Burt refuses, a Graboid attacks and swallows him whole. Jack lures the Graboid to Burt's home, having it fatally collide with the underground concrete barriers surrounding the building. He then uses a chainsaw to free Burt from its belly.
Burt, Jack, Jodi, and Miguel later find the badly wounded Merliss; he explains that he and the government agents were ambushed by Shriekers from the Graboid they were chasing, before dying. While tracking the Shriekers, an albino Graboid—later named El Blanco, meaning "The White One" in Spanish—traps them on rocks for the night. After drawing El Blanco away, they find that the Shriekers have molted their skin, becoming winged creatures capable of jet-propelled flight. Miguel is killed by the creature, which then crashes on a metal fence, killing itself. Burt realizes that chemicals in their stomachs react explosively, enabling their flight. Finding them able to carry Graboid eggs, they surmise that they evolved to spread them through flight. Jodi dubs the new species Ass-Blasters. Meanwhile, Nancy and Mindy are attacked by an Ass-Blaster in town and hide in a freezer.
Using a mattress as cover from the Ass-Blasters' infrared vision, the group gets to Burt's house, but are forced to flee when an Ass-Blaster attempts to break in. To keep it from multiplying like its predecessors, Burt rigs his house and his stash of MREs to explode, killing it, however it is only after that they learn Ass-Blasters do not multiply but fall asleep after eating. The group flees to a junkyard, where they build a potato gun from everyday objects to ignite the combustible materials in the Ass-Blasters' stomachs. After they kill four, Burt is attacked by El Blanco and pinned down. Realizing that Burt's ultrasonic watch is repeatedly drawing El Blanco to them, Jack takes it and sticks it to the final Ass-Blaster. El Blanco devours it, saving Burt and Jodi's lives in the process.
In the aftermath, Nancy manages to sell a captive Ass-Blaster, while Jack pursues a romantic relationship with Jodi, depressing Mindy who had a crush on him. Meanwhile, Melvin tries again to approach Burt about selling his land, but Burt informs him that since El Blanco is an endangered species and illegal to hunt—and formed a mutual unspoken friendship with Burt—the residents have decided to take precautions in order to live safely alongside it, thus turning Perfection into a federally protected Graboid reserve and barring Melvin from developing a town. Burt then leaves Melvin standing on a rock with El Blanco circling below.
|
psychedelic, entertaining
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The movie isn't anything great, but it's got some cool stuff in it.I thought it was funny that they managed to work in a mention of just about every character from the first film as they could, and if they didn't mention them, they actually showed them in the film.
In the third installment of the Tremors series, survivalist Burt Gummer (Michael Gross) returns to the desert town of Perfection, Nevada, to find that the subterranean terrors are back and wreaking havoc once more.
This time the beasts evolve a stage further: from the 'Shrieker' (seen in Tremors 2), they transform into flying creatures, nicknamed 'Ass-blasters', because of the unusual manner in which they propel themselves into the air.Tremors 3 is another fun dose of B-movie monster mayhem, albeit one slightly marred by the notable absence of the main stars of the first movie (Kevin Bacon and Fred Ward) and the inclusion of some rather ropey CGI effects.Bacon and Ward may be missing, but several of the supporting characters from the first Tremors film make a welcome comeback: Mindy Sterngood (Ariana Richards, who is all grown up now and looking rather foxy!), Nancy Sterngood (Charlotte Stewart), Miguel (Tony Genaro), Melvin Plug (Robert Jayne) and, of course, good old Burt, loaded to the nines with firepower.The script won't win any awards, but fans of the Tremors series don't expect Shakespearethey want 'Graboid' action, and 'Graboid' action is what they get!
An exciting showdown in a junkyard between the 'blasters and three of the Perfection residents is the highlight of the film.This episode definitely has enough laughs, monster action and gloopy effects to keep fans of the series happy.
Michael Gross returns as Burt, who in turn returns to Perfection to find it a tourist haven of Graboid fans.
The formula remains the same, with Burt the paranoid saviour of Perfection getting some good lines, while the return of characters from the first film is a splendid bonus for the fans.
After returning home to Perfection Burt must deal with new graboids, new shriekers and another metamorphosis...The shriekers turn into Ass-Blasters, flying creatures with rocket propelled farts.
Turns out he's okay in the end.Fred Ward is definitely missed tho his abscence is explained (Earl and Grady went to make a Graboid amusement park) but Michael Gross is simply irreplaceable as the eccentric and paranoid Burt Gummer.
So the production team for Tremors 3 took things back to the small, quirky town of Perfection, Nevada, in the hopes of getting back the interaction that made the original such a classic.In all honesty, this was a smart move, although it is not a hundred percent successful.
The effects were just as good, it had two major characters returning, and the script was a lot of fun and had a few suprises.When I heard that there was going to be a Tremors 3, I was kind of excited but a little concerned too.
In Perfection Valley, Nevada, Burt Gummer (Michael Gross) is paranoid with the Graboids and their evolution Shriekers.
When the deadly worms return to the town, Burt is forced to team-up with Jack and the trader Jodi Chang (Susan Chuang) to fight back and save their lives."Tremors 3: Back to Perfection" is a lame sequel straight to video of the franchise.
Michael Gross returns for the role of Burt Gummer, and so does some of the original cast including Ariana Richards, Tony Genero, Robert Jayne and Charlotte Stewart as the townies of Perfection, which has become famous all over the world as habitat of the giant graboids.
The creatures look just like a couple of cartoons on a real background.Anyway, it's not one of those bad sequels, "Tremors 3: Back to Perfection" is still fun, even for the young viewers.TV movie rating: *** out of 5..
Each film is little more than pure fun for fans of monster and suspense films, but with TREMORS III, the whole package is nearly complete.There are many of the characters from the first film and, of course, Burt Gummer...but unlike any other sequel I have seen to date, this one actually builds from the continuity of all the other films, from the books being sold to the bottle of booze in the wall to the closing scene, and the tone of the film is absolutely pure to the originals...something that can be said of only a very few sequels.I would *strongly* recommend screenwriters, persons who adapt from prior works, directors and producers to see these films as a guide on "how to do it right".I agree with another reviewer...it was a big mistake not to have released this to theatre.
The fundamental particularities the 'tremors' series are the following: A lonely place called Perfection where live a misfit group with usual actors, Charlotte Stewart, Ariana Richards, Tony Genaro,among others; the people confronting the amazing Graboids into the houses or desert; and the usual presence of the sympathetic Burt Gummer-Michel Gross who using diverse weapons and intelligence battles the horrific predators.
Third Tremors movie takes us back to the small Nevada town of Perfection where local resident and adventurer Burt Grummer returns after traveling abroad and killing carnivorous worms called "Graboids" (introduced in the first movie) and their offspring "Shriekers" (introduced in the second movie) to life in his home town and must deal with some crooked land developers, a thrill-seeking guy named Jack Sawyer looking for wealth in this potential tourist town, and eventually dealing with a new strain of Graboid worms that metamorph into their second Shrieker phase, and whom unexpectedly morph into their third stage for another harrowing battle against Burt and Jack in the desert surrounding the town.
Michael Gross is still good as gun-ho burt gummer and the new supporting cast (As well as some familiar faces from the first tremors film) all give 150%.
Michael Gross returns as survivalist Burt Gummer, and boy does he do it in a big way,, in the opening scene,, he is in a tank with a 50 mm gun on the turret killing shriekers..
The film is about another Tremors attack in Perfection,and paranoid Burt Gummer wants to kill them all.
Third movie in the Tremors series returns back to the town that started it all: Perfection, Nevada.
This is a mostly enjoyable monster flick but not as good as the second movie and not even on the same planet as the highly entertaining first Tremors.
Michael Gross is back as Burt Gummer(the only returning cast member) who returns to his hometown of Perfection Nevada(from the first film) after more "graboids" surface, only this time, they undergo a further metamorphosis enabling them to fly!
Burt is now a seasoned monster hunter, and leads a new group of people in the perpetual battle against this threat.Third film doesn't have the charm of the first two, despite Michael Gross's good performance, he is the only memorable thing about it, further hampered by silly and crude humor resulting from the new type of "graboids" that have evolved.
This new Tremors is just as much fun to watch as the first two, although much sillier and even more unbelievable than underground man-eating worms, and their offspring the "shriekers." If you only thought the first two movies were "ok" then don't even bother with this one.
One of the things I liked most about Tremors 3 was the return of most of the original cast from the first movie, most of which didn't appear in the second.
In Argentina, munitions master Michael Gross (as Burt Gummer) blows away a herd of second stage "Graboids" - if you've been watching the "Tremors" films, you'll know these critters are called "Shriekers".
I guess some people didn't like this movie because ya it didn't have the have to stay off the ground excitement but if they had put the cant be seen or cant be heard together there's a great film.
I have to say the movie is quite different returns to the old town we know called perfection and see the people from the first witch i thought was good.
One of the worst movies ever the characters are such bad actors they all give me a bad gut pain all the c.g fx were all done a 1987 computer only 2 people got killed in this ass of a film one was eaten and the other a good actor from the first Tremors movie fall down a hill oh there were three other people FBI or something were killed when the Graboids turn into the Shrieker but they were to damn cheap to show it they just said they were deadTremors 1 gold Tremors 2 art tremors 3 a two dollar high school moviebut no matter how bad this movie gets every time I watch it, it is still better than Lord Of The Rings 2.
In a way, other than "Stumpy" in the first Tremors movie, we have a creature with personality.Well, great film overall, can't wait for the next one, hope to see more "El Blanco" next time.
In the world of cult-classics, there are few films that come close to matching the high quality and even higher entertainment value of the 1990 release "Tremors." A creature-feature like no other, that original movie thrilled audiences with a keen and clever combination of old-fashioned creeps and a surprising sense of humor as it told the tale of massive underground worms that devour hapless victims in a small desert community.
it's just not quite up to the standard set by previous installments.It's been a couple years and good-old paranoid survivalist Burt Gummer (Michael Gross) is still out there hunting Graboids and Shriekers for pay.
Expert Graboid killer Burt Gummer (Michael Gross) returns to the tiny desert community of Perfection after some time away.
The creature designs are still impressive, but some people will take issue with the copious use of CGI.Gross got boosted to star of the franchise after the departure of both Kevin Bacon and Fred Ward, and he certainly has made Burt Gummer a very entertaining character.
Sure, there are some funny moments in the film, but not many.This movie is a tremors sequel, but I'm sorry to say, very average.5/10, let down..
But if you're a fan of the Tremors series, remember how fun and funny the first film was, and can keep yourself in that mind-set, then you'll enjoy this one.It's a bit slow to get started, but when they introduce the latest evolutionary phase of the graboids, the film moves into overdrive, with action and comedy galore.Sadly, the script has a few plot holes and the acting is merely so-so, so it's only a 6/10 in my book, but on a boring evening when there's nothing decent on, it's a great alternative to re-runs..
Michael Gross returns for the third time as Burt Gummer, expert 'Graboid' fighter.
He now returns to his home town to find that the monster worms are now back and spawning (another) new strain of their lifecycle.Now, Tremors 3 will never be perfect and definitely not a patch on the original, but, for a sequel, it is fun.
i guess this installment of the Tremors series is not bad.it wasn't really funny,but it was amusing.there's a running joke involving Burt Gummer(Michael Gross)that's funny the first time,and maybe the second.but after that,not so much.incidentally,Gross is the only major actor left from the original movie.his character is really treated as a buffoon here.i'm not sure if that's good or bad,but it is a change from the first two movies.i didn't think the special effects were all that special.in fact,i found them kinda cheesy.as for the movie itself,it's not something i would actively look for,but if you have nothing else to do on a lazy day,this will pass the time for you,or at least 90 odd minutes.my vote for tremors 3 is a 5/10.
Burt Gummer is better than ever with the leading role in the film which see him take on Graboids, Shrieker and Ass-Blasters.
This movie start of with Michal Gross who is killing the creatures from Tremors 2.Then we go back to the dessert when were to young guys are conning people to the fake tremors tour and get there money but then they wish come true when really Grabolids turns up.They had to call Michal Gross the only person to return to this TV sequel from the last two movies to save the day again, As they go to kill this creatures they find out that creatures of changed yet again.Which I did find really funny and I did like how changed into something new and total different of the last two movies.There is one thing that did not not like won't say cause it contains spoiler.I did like the movie but it not as good as the last two movie, it's still a lot of fun to watch with the whole family.I give this 5/10.
Tremors 3, as it sits, is a film made for hardcore fans of the franchise and those who don't mind a little Sci-Fi (capitalized for a reason) treatment to their beloved franchise in the respect of look and feel.The low-budget is evident by the limited human interaction with these beasts, be them Graboids, Shriekers, creatures with that hatch from Graboids that can walk on land and sense any kind of nearby heat with thermal sensors, and the new "Assblasters," which are pretty much Shriekers with the ability to soar thanks to butane gas in their hindquarters.
This time, instead of a Mexican oil field, we return to Perfection, Nevada to find Burt Gummer (Michael Gross) residing in a heavily armed and secured bunker, despite no Graboid sighting in the valley for the past eleven years, and residents from the first film, such as Miguel (Tony Genaro), the Mexican rancher and Nancy (Charlotte Stewart) and her daughter Mindy (Ariana Richards), also still residing in Perfection.
Earl and Grady have moved on to start their own theme-park in Bixby after making a fortune killing Graboids in the Mexican oil refinery so, much like Val in Tremors II, their significance in this film is reduced to a sidenote.Burt's closest friend in town besides Miguel is Jodi Chang (Susan Chaung), who know owns and operates the general-store-turned- tourist-shop of her late uncle Walter Chang.
Burt, "Desert Jack," and Jodi, however, still to take matters into their own hands in combating the uncommonly advanced Graboid species even as they continue their metamorphic state.Tremors 3 directly appeals to fans simply by the genial and nostalgic sentiments it summons by reintroducing us to characters from the first film, all of whom played by the same actors they were originally played by.
The limited interaction with these monsters shows the serious cutbacks of the film, and while the new "Assblaster" creatures initially seems juvenile, the fun continues when we see, again, what Tremors has really been about from the start: thinking of intuitive ways to hunt and kill subterranean behemoths that are almost always finding ways to outsmart the human characters.Aside from one serious biological attribute about the Graboids at the end of the film, which, I feel, is simply a sign of screen writing laziness on part of S.S. Wilson and Nancy Roberts, Tremors 3: Back to Perfection works to give us down-home nostalgia, as we return to Perfection, and provides in several ways the kind of suspense and silliness we've come to expect with this franchise.
Michael Gross returns and some of the original cast members from the first film do aswell.In my opinion the film isn't as spooky or scary as the other two prequels but is it a good film and I recommend it for the people who enjoyed the other two Tremors in this great trilogy and horror and science fiction films fans alike!.
Maybe it was the terrible acting, or the new monsters that light thier farts to fly, or it just might be that thier is no story?Nowhere near as good as the first or even the second film, but still a great movie to watch when theres nothing else on.
I wonder if the creators of this movie actual seen my comments on IMDB under Tremors 2 when I said that I hope there's a 3rd installment and this time have flying graboids.
Overall Tremors 3 looks like a B-grade movie from the cover but its a good entry in the series..
This movie is as good as the 2nd movie but the first movie is still the best movie out of all 4 Tremor movies and its good that Michael Gross stars in this film playing Burt Gummer once again.There are some other OK actors and actress in this movie like Shawn Christian,Charlotte Stewart,Susan Chuang,Ariana Richard and Tony Genaro.And there are heaps of good scenes in this movie the best one is in the end of the movie when Burt Gummer and two other people are in a junk yard and they are trying to kill the new Monster that can fly and they have no guns so they make a potato gun and shoot out metal arrows from it.Over all this movie is good with some flaws and my rating is 6 out of 10..
It's not even as good as the second movie in the series, and really the only thing that keeps it watchable is the fact that many cast members return from the original.
Silly humor (like Burt being eaten by a Graboid only to return unscathed) does little to further the film as well.All in all, "Tremors 3" is the least enjoyable one so far.
Michael Gross gets to finally star in his own Tremors film, again as Burt "Overkill"(..my own personal nickname for him which I felt fits) Gummer, returning home to Perfection, Nevada and finding that the graboids have returned, transforming into "shriekers"(..the "Whatsit" walkers with infrared sensor organs of the previous sequel, Aftershocks), and finally ending their cycle, turning into winged monsters whose asses ignite(..I'm serious!)providing speed in flight.
|
tt0425253
|
Mini's First Time
|
Mini Drogues (Nikki Reed) is a clever and adventurous high school senior who is bored with her life. Mini prizes her "unique experiences" (she calls them "firsts"). For excitement, and to add to her list of firsts, Mini decides to try being a call girl. Her first client, however, has a guilty conscience and can't carry through with the act, which disappoints Mini. Her second client is decidedly more exciting: her stepfather Martin (Alec Baldwin). Martin is initially shocked when he learns of her identity (he initially blindfolded himself during intercourse per Mini's request), but soon a torrid love affair blossoms between the two.
In order to be together, Mini and Martin concoct a plan to have Mini's mother Diane (Carrie-Anne Moss) declared insane. When their plan fails, Mini convinces Martin to murder Diane, despite his initial resistance to the idea. They attempt to make it appear that Diane committed suicide, but they soon attract the attention of a detective (Luke Wilson) who believes that Mini and Martin killed her. A nosy neighbor, Mike (Jeff Goldblum), is sexually obsessed with Mini, and when Martin learns that Mini had gone to Mike's house and had received sexual pictures from him, he and Mike get into a fight. Mini arrives to find Martin standing over the neighbor, ready to beat him into unconsciousness, and when the police arrive they arrest Martin.
Mini visits Martin in jail and admits that the sexual pictures sent were actually from her in order to get Martin to think that the neighbor sent them. She also reveals that she assumed the police would eventually believe he killed Diane (since he was the more likely perpetrator). Mini, therefore, ends up getting away with murder, and inherits her mother's fortune. The film ends with Mini giving a valedictorian speech, even though she is a C student; the school gave her straight A's out of sympathy for her mother's death. She offers advice to the graduating class about how to live a good life, that perversely alludes to her crimes without making her look too suspicious. The detective is present at the speech, clearly still suspicious of Mini, but knowing that he will probably never be able to prove that she was guilty of murdering her mother.
|
comedy, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Baldwin gives his best performance in years and that's saying a lot because he's been doing great work.
Part vixen, part little girl lost, the glee with which she sets about her goals, takes a character who is, in fact a sociopath and makes you respect and like her.
Her intellectual honesty is actually refreshing.Her performance works in part because of Carrie Anne Moss' willingness to deliver one of the most chilling and hilarious performances in years as Mini's mother.
Mini is an inconvenient appendage in Diane's life and Diane lets her know it whenever she can.Jeff Goldblum is spot on perfect as their TV producer neighbor, whose lighthearted, Dionysian life is a constant thorn in Baldwin's side.
The look of muted terror on Baldwin's face when he realizes how he's been the recipient of Wilson's own PR play is priceless.I'm sure some parents groups will attack it as encouraging teenagers to turn on their parents and to indulge in the darkest parts of society, but it really felt like a cautionary tale about what happens when kids know in their bones that they aren't loved..
Alec Baldwin (always good) gives one of the best performance he has in years and Carrie Anne Moss is hilarious as the mom.
Goldblum's role as the TV Producer neighbor is so damn funny and Luke Wilson gives a really subtle performance as the detective.The twists and turns are a a blast.
Definitely not a film for those who don't like black comedy, but those with more sick, twisted senses of humor should love it..
The energy and excitement kept me on the edge of my seat and the performances were outstanding, especially the wonderfully wicked Nikki Reed, who was superb in "Thirteen." I was especially impressed with Carrie Ann Moss' performance in a very different role, reinforcing her 'A' list status and demonstrating her wide range as an actress.
Other outstanding performances were turned in by Jeff Goldblum, Alec Baldwin and Luke Wilson.
The dialogue was fresh and funny, and I enjoyed going on the wild ride with Nikki Reed and Alec Baldwin as their antics became more and more outrageous.
If you love a great dark comedy, this film is for you..
It's a shame that this is a small independent movie and will probably not be released in many cinemas - as far as I know, there's not even a release date for the UK right now (although it's been out in the US for a while).Nikki Reed absolutely steals the show in this.
Carrie Anne Moss also did a brilliant job as Mini's mom, a true bitch but for who you can't help but feel a little bit sorry for as well.I loved the combination of a dark story line with all the humour, and laughed out loud several times, something I don't do very often while watching movies!
Mini's First Time is great dark comedy in the same ballpark as Bad Santa.
I just saw this film's world premiere at the Tribeca Film Festival.The movie starts off with Mini, played by Nikki Reed as a spoiled and manipulating child of a wealthy actress (Carrie Anne Moss).
Anyway, Mini decides to work as a call girl for the heck of it, and one of her first clients is her step-father (Alec Baldwin).
And "then" the movie gets really dark.The first half of the film was really good as the various scenarios devised to make Moss go crazy are inspired and original.
Also, the "twist" at the end is somewhat obvious throughout the film.Finally, I still cant figure out why Jeff Goldblum is in this movie.
Nikki Reed & Alec Baldwin along with Jeff Goldblum are an unforgettable mix.
I have never heard of Nikki Reed before this, but I do have to say, I will never forget her.It was great to see Alec Bladwin & Jeff Goldblum together in an excellent story.
I would actually like a sequel to this one(with the same characters of course)You could start the story right from where it left off.
Gotta like the darker side to enjoy it, but the ending is one of the funniest/sickest ones you'll ever see.Nikki Reed is turning into an awesome young actress.
Luke Wilson has the courage to underplay a role that could have been really cheesy and ends up driving the second half of the movie as the calm, methodical detective.Don't know when exactly it's coming out.
My advice to anyone would be save your money, don't waste your time and don't watch this dreadful movie as you will surely feel cheated..
The relationship between father Martin and stepdaughter Mini, on which a great deal of the movie builds, somewhat reminded me of the tension between Kathryn and Sebastian in Cruel Intentions.Plot twists like in Mini's First Time, Wild Things, Dead Mans Curve..
Nowadays the unpredictable twist are getting rather predictable to the regular movie viewer.And let's be fair maybe looks like Mini's can get you out of trouble in the movies but the writers should have drawn the line somewhere and instead of looks let the whole plot support on more realistic excuses for her to come up with..
All of the character's in this movie, save for the persistent detective played by Luke Wilson, are deviants to a society that created them.
The acting was precise and enjoyable and any movie that kills off a Carrie-Ann Moss character is a good one..
Mini's First Time, starring Alec Baldwin, Nikki Reed, Jeff Goldblum and Carrie-Ann Moss rehashes the same old dark humor American Beauty made mainstream.
Other than the excellent performances by both Baldwin and Moss, the film is bereft of any originality and seems to take itself to seriously for its own good.
Nikki Reed, although young and annoying at first becomes more and more bearable as the film progresses, and towards the end is actually acceptable.
This film does portray the rich of the Hollywood hills very well, so well that after 10 minutes or so you feel like part of the group (morning drinking, promiscuity, and infidelity).
These attributes have become so mainstream in todays wealthy, dark humor, family films that it does not seem to affect me anymore like it did the first time I sat down to watch Less Than Zero or American Beauty.
Unfortunately the amateur narration, by Reed, takes away from some of the realism and leaves the film feeling dull at times.
a well of rich-guy Alec Baldwin is married to Carrie Ann Moss who constantly finds herself with a bottle and a bunch of pills, partying all the time, he is a lawyer in his firm, Nikki Reed plays Mini, a sexy young teen girl in High School who thinks she's got to have it all.
the daughter feels neglected i guess and decides to turn tricks at the local escort agency,, at first she gets a client who is so remorseful he cries in her lap,, so she requests customers who actually have no regrets and want to do her,, so next client comes in ,, guess what,, it's her stepfather,, no he has no idea it's her at all,, she sees him,, makes him turn out the lights, and does a southern drawl to throw him off,, only after they get to the parking garage do the finally see each other,, she tells him,, oh you were so great..
Afterward, they begin a secret relationship, and soon try to get Reed's mother out of the way (Carrie-Anne Moss, whose career has been sinking rapidly since The Matrix).
Seriously, this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen, the only consolation is Mini is wicked hott.
I would really like to see this remade with Rachel Leigh Cook, or Rachel Bilson, or Avril Lavigne, pretty much anyone but Nikki Reed really, in the part of Mini.
Even heavyweights like Baldwin, Moss, Goldblum, and Wilson, every single one of them normally reason enough to see a movie, are reduced to slapstick zombies.
Mini (Nikki Reed) is bored with her life.
The movie is not quite dark enough to push the envelop of black comedies.
Alec Baldwin is solid as always, and Carrie-Anne Moss gives the best performance of t...(read more)he film as the incredibly shallow alcoholic mother of Mini.
The other high-profile actors in the film such as Luke Wilson and Jeff Goldblum seem to just be in the movie for window-dressing.
There's not anyone in it with any real redeeming qualities and Reed plays her part to a tee.Unacceptable: Unfortunately, it isn't a huge amount of fun either.Summary: There are some movies that are so mean they're a kick to watch, and there are some good spots in this movie, but most of it is too bitchy to be very enjoyable.2/5.
With Alec Baldwin, Jeff Goldblum, and Luke Wilson on board, this should have been a far better film.
Alec Baldwin must have simply been on an ego trip, pairing up with Nikki Reed, while Jeff Goldblum acts like he is in a completely different picture.
Parts of the movie having to do with the demise of Reed's Mother, Carrie-Anne Moss, border on sadism, and seem highly unlikely.
The movie tells its story from the viewpoint of the Nikki Reed character mostly, which makes it odd that we as a viewer never get to know or see what her characters true intentions with the things she does are throughout the movie.
Actors like Alec Baldwin, Nikki Reed, Jeff Goldblum, Carrie-Anne Moss and Luke Wilson all make appearances in this movie.
Martin (Alec Baldwin) played such amazing roles, wealthy man, a stepfather, a 'fallen-for' and Mini's 'actual father'.
And I was really amazed at Mini's character (Nikki Reed), I really felt that I was watching her previous movie, Thirteen.
She also has one of the comedic horror roles like some killer in "I Know What You Did Last Summer" or "Scary Movie".
Mini's mother, Diane (Carrie-Anne Moss), was so entertaining.
Mini's internal side at one scene was displayed dramatically awesome when her stepfather really got under her denial exterior of the real world.I recommend this movie for teenagers and parents who would like to actually understand more of their daughters and other teenage girls in the real world who really experiences parental, social or life problems.
I've recently seen the movie "Pretty Persuasion" which is a bit similar to this and liked that a lot.
It was very well acted, actually amazingly so, featuring superb performances from all the cast and wonderful direction but the movie was so incredibly mean that it was very difficult to enjoy it.Since I generally enjoy these type of pictures (I count 'Heathers", "Cruel Intentions", "Wild Things", "Election" and "pretty Persuasion" as good movies) I did ask myself why I had such a hard time with this one.
Alec Baldwin did a great job with his character but this story was just to twisted for me.
It's got some positives, number one as mentioned the performances but also is the way the movie sticks with you-way more then other similar films.
Alec Baldwin is excellent as is Reed, Glodblum, Moss and Luke Wilson in a small but surprisingly effective role.
The twist was obvious to me, considering the character in question; but probably not to all, but it did try to tell a moralistic tale without all the heavy lecturing narratives or sudden change of heart.The acting was all first rate, Carrie-Anne-Moss was stunning both to look at and to watch at work as the hopeless self-indulgent mother, Baldwin was brilliant and expertly brought a refreshing duality to the step-father character: seemingly both apprehensive in some scenes & prepared to do what it took in others, which I would imagine is not an easy thing to do when reading the text on a page when getting into character.
The young star Nicki Reed was great for a newbie, I have seen "13" in the rental store but I never felt like actually picking it up, but after seeing her performance in this I may decide to check it out; one to watch following in the footsteps of Christina Ricci etc playing the young but totally savvy & remarkably inventive Mini.
Goldblum plays himself; almost aping himself at times & Luke Wilson follows with another underrated performance ala Royal Tennenbaums & steals the show as the doggedly determined cop who does a performance in his best "Columbo" mode.As I stated earlier; each will see this from a different perspective, many religious people may see it as glorifying the "get rich quick by doing whatever you have to" mentality of modern people (both young and old), but remember that story is told by a character who had no real father at all (Baldwin only started acting like one during the film by the lead characters own admission 20 minutes or so into it) & a mother who takes every opportunity to dig at her with snide remarks and even use her daughters bed for her own carnal needs, without a second thought.
Mini's First Time is about a rich screwed up teenage girl (Mini) whose mother had her to get money from the father.
When Mini accidentally gets hooked up with her step father while doing the call girl thing, it gets kind of wild.
It's a little funny in the beginning as Mini and her step father do the nasty under her mother's nose.
Things get a little carried away as Mini and dad finish mom's suicide and of course dad takes the fall for it.
Great acting all the way around, an A+ movie.
Contains spoilers.......................Nikki Reed, who was so great in "Thirteen" as the femme fatale corrupting Evan Rachel Wood, is even better as the totally twisted Mini who takes delight in doing anything to get what she wants.
She's not a bad girl, just misunderstood-and she makes Dede from "The Opposite of Sex" look like a girl scout.Jeff Goldblum gives an awesome performance as a sleazy TV producer who had Diane at one time, and now has his sights set on bagging Mini.
Owen Wilson is perfect as a hard-nosed detective who is trying to prove that Diane's death was not a suicide, and Mini has him wrapped around her finger-or so she hopes.It's a dark comedy about a girl gone wild, and it's worth the ride.
One positive note about the film however is Carrie-Anne Moss.
Yes, those two made the movie, too bad one gets killed off early into the film, while the other one ends up in a coma.
I had to watch the whole wretched thing to confirm that it was going to end with the obvious "plot twist." It did.There's nothing to redeem this film.
Through a series of convoluted plot mechanisms, involving murder, blackmail and all too obvious twists, the audience is taken on a tedious journey through a movie that isn't half as clever as it thinks it is.The main problem with Mini's First Time is that almost every character is completely reprehensible.
A fact that the writer/director tries to excuse by having Mini's last line of the movie be "Don't be worried that you had no one to identify with but me," (or something like that).
Despicable, manipulative characters like Mini only work if they have enough depth to sustain an audience's interest.
Mini's First Time should be shown in screen writing seminars and film schools to show how not to use voice-over.The plot was obvious and hopelessly contrived.
But luckily I cared so little about what happened, the painfully obvious twists and unrealistic relationships and character actions didn't bother as much as they would have in any other movie.
Anyone who couldn't see the 'photo twist' coming, really needs to sit down and have a look at themselves.As I sat and watched the movie, all I could think of is "I really don't care what happens," and neither should you.
Worst movie I have seen in a long time.
Last time I saw a disaster like this it was Very Bad Things, and this is worse.
How the hell do you manage to cast Alec Baldwin, Luke Wilson, and Jeff Goldblum, all of who are excellent comedic actors, and end up with such a turd of a movie?
For certainly the leading actress, Nikki Reed, gives a first year acting course job.
And why would the likes of Alec Baldwin, Jeff Goldblum and Luke Wilson have anything to do with this trite story and badly directed and written scenario.Best performance way above the entire cast was given by Carrie-Anne Moss as the mother who unfortunately is wiped out early in the film.
Moss, Baldwin, Goldblum and Wilson could and would have given this loser some class.Oh, by the way, someone ought to wipe the tons of lipstick this little loser wears in the film.
This movie looks good.
She kills her mother just like that.In the second part of the movie, you could say that her objective is "getting away with murder".
So why should we care?What makes us care even less is that most of the characters are really unappealing (but gentle on the eyes) and very two-dimensional.All in all, a great lesson in how NOT to make a movie, but to its credit, it looks good, and I liked the score..
The editing is very television-like, very "movie of the week." The movie does not "play" like a feature film, and I hope Goldblum and Baldwin are deeply embarrassed..
I found this movie very interesting and fun and i love Nikki Reed in this.
I didn't think i was going to like it but surprisingly it was a really good movie.
Put it like this, Mildred Pierce would have appreciated Veda if she had a daughter as shown in this film.With stepfather Alec Baldwin, she plans diabolically to get rid of her mother, his wife.
And also embarrassing to witness such bad performances from Alec Baldwin and Jeff Goldblum.
|
tt0382028
|
Fat Slags
|
The film chronicles the (mis)adventures of Sandra (Fiona Allen) and Tracey (Sophie Thompson), the famously vulgar and crass Fat Slags of the title. The pair leave their home town of Fulchester for London, shagging and boozing their way to fame and fortune. On the day the Fat Slags arrive in London, internationally renowned billionaire Sean Cooley (Jerry O'Connell) suffers a blow to the head, rendering him temporarily insane. When he spots Sandra and Tracey on a daytime chat show he falls for their larger-than-life outlook. A media sensation is brought about when Cooley forces fashion designer Fidor Konstantin (James Dreyfus) to base his upcoming collection on the Fat Slags. In a whirlwind turn of events, Sandra and Tracey take the United Kingdom by storm, hitting #1 in the record charts and inadvertently winning the Turner Prize. As far as the press is concerned, fat is the new black. Throughout their journey into the world of fame, the Slags maintain their unique and endearing vulgarity, coupled with an innocence that draws the British public to their cause. However, in private, jealousy is driving a wedge between Sandra and Tracey as they vie for Cooley's attentions. Only when he regains his mental faculties and turns on the girls do they realise that their friendship is the only real thing they have in the mad world they have become a part of.
|
humor, satire
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0264357
|
Ammoru
|
Bhavani (Soundarya), a lower-caste orphan and devotee of Goddess Ammoru (Ramyakrishnan), is responsible for the arrest of the evil Gorakh (Rami Reddy). Gorakh is released from prison, vowing to revenge. Bhavani is married to a doctor, Suria (Suresh) who happens to be relation to Gorakh. Suria goes abroad to study, leaving his wife unprotected. When Gorakh's mother Leelamma (Vadivukkarasi) tries to kill Bhavani, with the help of a leelama's creditor, the Goddess Ammoru (Ramya Krishnan) descends to earth, kills leelama's creditor and the takes the form of Bhavani's small maid servant in order to protect her. Bhavani's maid servant tortures leelamma, her husband and her daughter. One day suria returns to India after his foreign business and leelama tries to blame bhavani that she is having an illegal relationship with another man in his bedroom. But goddess servant saves bhavani and keeping leelama's daughter instead in her bedroom. Daughter is married to that man by ammoru. Gorakh released from jail due to gandhi jayanthi and decides to take a revenge against bhavani who was the reason of his arrest. First he tries to kill bhavani by giving poison when she was pregnant. But goddess ammoru who is in the form of girl saves her. At last gorakh finds who is that good spirit who make his power useless. Gorakh finds it was a girl who is with bhavani as a servant is goddess ammoru who saved her and child which is in her stomach. At last after the child's birth gorakh plans to dismiss the servant in the way of soundharya to say that if she keeps a pottu in forehead of her servant until she should not come. Gorakh kills Bhavani's infant daughter and tortures her husband, with the help of evil spirit Chenda. Bhavani prays goddess ammoru to save her but goddess doesn't react to it. At last she keeps her hand in soolam and she bleeds. Gorakh pulls her at last some drops of blood spills on pottu of goddess ammoru and she returns in the form of ramyakrishnan and kills gorakh. Ramyakrishna changes her form to goddess servant. At last suria and soundharya realised it was goddess ammoru and she(ammoru) return her child to bhavani and blesses all of them.
|
good versus evil, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
interesting..
Okay, obviously this is a Bollywood movie, a genre which I have no experience or knowledge in, but as it was on TV I thought I'd give it a go.
The plot centres around Bhavani, a young girl who is the carer to the shrine of Ammoru, the mother goddess.
She falls in love with a man of high standing, whose family object and do all that they can to stop the union in some violent and bizarre ways.
Bhavani must call on Ammoru to save her from her plight.
That's a rough idea of the plot, which seems to be just a set up for the amazing special effects around which the film was touted.
Unfortunately, compared to western special effects they are not that amazing at all.Typically with Bollywood, there is much singing, and for me, they were the highlight.
There's one very dramatic action filled scene at the end, all hell breaking loose, and suddenly it bursts into song.
It sounds ludicrous, but I thought it was fantastic.
You'll understand if you see it.All in all an interesting little movie.
I would recommend this to anyone who fancies something a little different.
It's not for everyone, but as someone who had never seen a Bollywood film from start to finish, I rather enjoyed it.
Nice re-working of South India's mythological stories.
To be honest, I'd not heard of the goddess Amorru.
This is a nice little story about good triumphing over evil.
Bhavani is a simple village girl who gets her dream hubby (Doctor, US work permit) in the village of her birth.
She faithfully worships the goddess Ammoru.
Unbeknownst to her, she is the target of a vengeful village harridan and their oddball family, including a villain who has sold his soul to the Demon Channda in order to gain immortality, as one does in these films.And so she is faced with all manner of trials and tribulations, including an attempted rape, etc.
But Ammoru always saves the day and there is finally some top-notch ultra violence at the end where the Devi does some baddass actions to make sure the right ending happens.
South Indian film often gets ignored or brushed over when people talk about Bollywood.
It's a pity, because the stories are at least trying to be different from the usual mush of inept romantic family dramas produced by their northern counterparts.
A distinctly different slice of Bollywood.
AMMORU manages to combine all the usual Bollywood pre-occupations (marriage, familial bonds, hinduism) with an amazingly wild mythological fantasy storyline, some great CGI special effects, and quality production, to form one of the most interesting films to come out of India in a long time.The prologue, as we watch a Shiva-style goddess become Ammoru, the protector of a village, sets the tone well, with the actress giving an engaging Brigitte Lin style performance.
Unfortunately, she has little else to do for much of the film.The central drama concerns a girl who witnesses an evil sadhu attempting to bury a virgin alive, in a bid to gain magical power and riches.
The sadhu's mother, unhappy he has been jailed for life, vows to get her revenge on the girl, and proceeds to make her life a misery.
This first half of the film works well, with great performances by the evil family, and the special mystical effects used sparingly but effectively.It shifts tone for the second half, with Ammoru manifesting herself as a child to save the girl, and the sadhu himself being released early and seeking his own revenge.
The film eventually begins to submit to standard Bollywood conventions, but redeems itself by upping the fright-factor and the crazy special effects, and bringing back the original adult incarnation of Ammoru to kick some ass!AMMORU will be of interest to world viewers, as it gives a fascinating insight into the strange culture of southern India, a world where demons, goddesses walk among us as avatars, and it manages to do it without resorting to lowest-common-denominator movie-making as in 99.9% of the other movies coming from the sub-continent..
This film shows the relationship between Dravid and Aryan Hinduism.
***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Ammoru offers the Western student of Indian religion a fascinating glimpse into both traditional Dravidian religion, its relationship with orthodox Aryan thought and the way that Indian Cinema developed its unique flavours from traditional mythological drama.The Aryans, the top three castes of India, are believed to have invaded India around 2,000 BC.
They brought with them a religion similar to that of Greece, Rome, Persia and even Ireland, with whom Sanskrit shares a common linguistic origin.
The lower castes originated from the earlier Dravidian people, who built the cities of Mohenjo Daro and Harappa, and possibly ancient Elam as well.
Dravid now means Southern, because in the wake of the invasion these peoples fled south, but there may be a link with the words Dryad and Druid, because these peoples had a nature religion similar to ancient Greece and Ireland, and these words come from the same root as `tree'.
Over 4 millennia, Dravid thinking influenced the development of Hinduism considerably, but there is still tension between the two traditions.
All Hindus now believe in reincarnation, for example, not an original Aryan notion, and methods of meditation in the forest seem unique to the earlier peoples.
Now, however, they have been incorporated into orthodox Hinduism, and local, tribal, non-Aryan customs are often viewed with distrust and contempt by the Brahmins.Ammoru is a Telugu movie, a language which, like Kannada and Tamil, is not Indo-European.
In it we see a Dravid girl recognise her village Goddess as an aspect of the universal feminine force, known in Tantra and Shaivism as Shakti.
There then follows a series of miracle-stories, no doubt from traditional sources, but updated to the modern day.
Between significant stories, or at significant moments, songs intervene.
This is not a reflection of Bollywood directly, but a return to the traditional myth dramas that have been performed in India for Millennia.
These lasted for hours, and individual portions of a myth were shown, then a song would allow explanation (and time for costume and scenery changes).At the end of the movie the magnificent special effects prove that Ammoru is the same as Saraswati, Kali, Lakshmi and others.
This justifies the vision of the original village girl and, importantly, places Ammoru as an equal with Aryan Goddesses.Above all, it has led me to worship Her!
The final scenes, as the Goddess kills the black magician and then transforms into various Goddesses before becoming the little girl again is stunning.
Ditto the earlier procession and dance in which the little girl sings the revelation of the true nature of Ammoru while dancing in a wild trance.
Quite frankly, for Pagans this is the best movie I've seen since, well, since, well, there must have been, well........
Hindu fantasy spectacular.
Overlong, episodic and very much a cultural item that will no doubt lose something in the transition to a Western audience, AMMORU is nevertheless an impressive attempt at a Hindi "mythological" epic, packed with imaginative special effects, colourful sets and costumes and all of the traditional song-and-dance routines that we've come to expect from our Indian cousins.The story is that classic tale of good vs.
evil, and gods and demons taking over human forms and battling out their war upon the Earth.
The film tells the tales of a whole number of characters, weaving in and out of different situations, and gets rather bogged down in the middle section with soap-opera theatrics and a lack of action all round.
However, things largely pick up for the fiery finale, which offers some genuine shocks and surprises you won't see in the West, plus a smattering of gore as the final outcome of the battle offers an extremely nasty end for the villain of the piece.Generally, the budget of the film is high, with a large cast, and the actors all do solid jobs with their roles.
Especial mention goes to Ramya Sunayana, convincing as the powerful Goddess Ammoru, the girl playing the lead, Bhavani, and of course the excellent boss-eyed bloke who gets in on the action too.
The special effects are of the computer variety, relying on the then-popular method of 'morphing' for all of the transformation sequences; the finale in particular is a culmination of all of the effects in the films and is genuinely impressive, more so than in a lot of Western films I could name which deal with the same idea.
Elsewhere, we get people being possessed, mercilessly beaten and abused, walking over burning coals and levitating, all in a day's work for fantasy lovers really.
However the film's impressive highlight is undoubtedly in the huge hand that emerges from the lake to transport our Goddess to safety; a particular image that stands out as the very best moment the film has to offer..
I liked this movie.
I liked this movie i have not seen many movies of this genre and I agree that buy western standards the special effects are not great but I think it is charming never the less!
I have watched about four times now.
It's style made me think of old Hammer Horror films!
I was shocked to find that the main female actress died in a aeroplane crash with her brother in India 2004, I thought see was very beautiful, and had a great on-screen presents.If I had to criticise one aspect it would be the rapist character who is asked in to rape the main female character to discredit her as immoral to her husband, the goddess of the village Ammoru substitutes her with the daughter of the head of the house, this character then has to marry him after he raped her!
This was not an issue at all in the movie!
but maybe the meaning is confused in the English sub-titles or there is a large cultural difference in attitudes to rape?
|
tt0483786
|
Ram Aur Shyam
|
Ram (Dilip Kumar) lives with his sister Sulakshna (Nirupa Roy) and niece Kuku in his family estate. His brother-in-law Gajendra (Pran) looks after his factories and controls his property with an iron hand. Ram is shy and coward in nature. He is always abused and brutally beaten by Gajendra. Sulakshna and Kuku try to protect Ram from Gajendra whenever he whips Ram. Everybody decides to get Ram married for his well being. Gajendra finds a rich girl Anjana (Waheeda Rehman) with the aim of getting a huge dowry. Anjana dislikes Ram after he spills tea over her due to nervousness. Gajendra angry at Ram's behaviour, conspires with the support of his mother and cunning Munimji to kill Ram and take over his property. Ram overhears this and escapes to the city to save his life. Meanwhile, Ram's long lost twin brother Shyam (Dilip Kumar) lives in a village with his adopted mother Ganga whom he believes to be his birth mother. No one other than Ganga knows the truth about the twin brothers. Shyam is strong, brave and mischievous, unlike his brother. He has a love hate relationship with Shanta (Mumtaz). Shyam escapes to the city, after a mischievous conflict with Ganga, and meets Anjana, who is impressed by his personality. Anjana and her father confuse Shyam with Ram. Ram meets Shanta who thinks he is Shyam and takes him forcefully to his mother. Ram and Shanta develop feelings for each other. Meanwhile, Shyam decides to take the place of Ram to face Gajendra. Shyam refuses to sign his property after which angry Gajendra attacks him. Shyam retaliates and whips Gajendra hard, shocking everybody. Sulakshna stops her brother to protect her husband. Gajendra is startled after being beaten up by Shyam, whom everybody believes as Ram. Shanta and Anjana meet and both claim the picture of Ram as their fiancé. Gajendra learns that Shyam has taken the place of Ram. He abducts Ram and Shanta, and plans to kill Ram. He frames Shyam for the murder of Ram though Ram is alive. Shyam is arrested by police. Anjana and her father learn from Ganga that Ram and Shyam are twin brothers lost in a village fair. Shyam escapes from police custody and battles Gajendra and his henchmen. Gajendra tries to shoot them but both the brothers and Shanta manage to defeat him. At the end twin brothers are happily married and the family reunited.
|
revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0119313
|
Hope Floats
|
Birdee Pruitt (Sandra Bullock) is a Chicago housewife who is invited onto the Toni Post talk show under the pretense of getting a free makeover but instead is ambushed with the revelation that her husband Bill has been having an affair with her best friend Connie (Rosanna Arquette). Humiliated on national television, Birdee and her precocious daughter Bernice (Mae Whitman) move back to Birdee's hometown of Smithville, Texas, with Birdee's eccentric mother Ramona (Gena Rowlands) and young, imaginative nephew Travis (Cameron Finley), to make a fresh start. As Birdee and Bernice leave Chicago, Birdee gives Bernice a letter from her father, telling Bernice how much he misses her.
Birdee struggles to make a new life as a working single mother and deals with the growing attraction between herself and a former high school classmate, Justin Matisse (Harry Connick, Jr.), who Ramona hopes that Birdee will get together with. She also tries to rebuild her relationship with her estranged mother, her ailing father (who suffers from Alzheimer's Disease), and her daughter, who wants desperately to be with her father and blames her mother for the breakup, even trying to sabotage the romantic overtures Justin makes towards Birdee. Meanwhile, Bernice is not happy that she left Chicago and is having difficulty adjusting to life in Smithville. Her negative view of the small town is worsened when she is bullied by a classmate known as Big Dolores.
Adding to Birdee's heartache is her former status as the school queen bee and a beauty pageant winner, which alienated many of her former classmates. They also haven't forgotten Birdee's high school snobbery and rub her nose in her televised embarrassment.
Ramona tries to mend the gap between her daughter and granddaughter by telling a childhood story of her own. She asks Bernice what she's wishing for her upcoming birthday. Even though Bernice says she doesn't have a birthday wish, she secretly wishes for her father to return.
That night, drinking a cup of tea before she could sleep, Ramona suffers a massive heart attack and dies. At the funeral, Bill arrives at the church. Bernice believes her father's presence is a sign her wish has come true...that her father wants them both to come home. However, it soon becomes clear to her that her parents' split is permanent when Bill asks Birdee for a divorce. Wanting to be with her father, Bernice runs up to her room, packs a suitcase, and follows Bill to his car. She is devastated when her father tells her that even though he loves her, he has no room for her in his new life with Connie. Bill turns his back on Bernice and drives off, leaving her sobbing and screaming for him to come back and take her with him at the end of the driveway. Birdee comes to pick Bernice up and carries her into the house. As Birdee comforts Bernice up in her room, Bernice learns the letter was actually written by her mother, and not really by her father.
One day at work, Birdee finds Justin outside waiting for her with flowers. As she walks to him, she says, "Ok, Mama, stop pushing". After they kiss and embrace, he picks her up, places her in his truck and they drive off together.
The final scene shows Birdee, Justin, Bernice, and Travis at a big town event. Birdee is now taking care of Travis and dating Justin, but isn't planning on getting married again for a really long time. Bernice welcomes Smithville as her new hometown, ultimately accepts Bill's departure from her life as a full-time parent, and begins to accept Justin as her mother's new love interest and a father figure. She and Birdee are much closer because of everything they've been through, as Bernice finally realizes it wasn't her mother's fault that her father left them and that Birdee really did love her. They share a tender, yet humorous moment when Bernice asks Birdee if she's going to marry Justin. When Birdee asks her if she doesn't like Justin, Bernice says her only real concern is being known as "Bernice Matisse".
|
revenge, romantic, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
While it has to be said that Sandra Bullock does not avoid exploding buses, or have to hunt down any cryogenically frozen bad guys in this picture, "Hope Floats" is a better movie than most give it credit, and Ms. Bullock and the supporting cast put in fine performances of their own to make a very touching and poignant film.Forest Whitaker (acting in such films as "Blown Away" and "Phenomenon" sits in the Director's chair on this one and crafts a tale that deals with many different emotional themes, carried earnestly by sensitive and character revealing performances from his leading lady and the supporting cast.While it must be said that Ms. Bullock provides some very memorable scenes in this film (especially when drunk) the casting of Gena Rowlands, Harry Connick Jr, and Michael Pare provide more ballast with fine performances delivered from all.But the highlight for me in this film - young Mae Whitman and her performance as Ms. Bullock's on-screen daughter.
At the conclusion of one very moving scene near the end of the film I could only watch her and wonder at just how bright this young actress' future will be.So, if blood, bombs and action is your scene, then "Hope Floats" may not be your scene, but if you are into drama with solidly acted and well crafted characters by very fine actors, then "Hope Floats" is for you.
Himself an actor, the director pulled bravura performances out of his main cast.For the real star of this show is the acting: from Harry Connick Jr's solid performance to the great Gena Rowlands spot-on delivery, it's all good.
Fearless, engaged and precise, Bullock's performance is a virtuoso piece that makes watching HOPE FLOATS a real treat; I have never seen her more bold or more beautiful (even as a vamp in MISS CONGENIALITY) - she is absolutely gorgeous here.Manipulation and honesty mixed in an effective, emotional pressure-cooker, HOPE FLOATS may just make you sick like a roller-coaster.
It's more of a character drama about Birdee (Sandra Bullock) moving back home and the main story line being a romance with Harry Connick Jr.Birdee, and the film, are very down-to-earth.
But the natural drama that Birdee goes through in trying to rebuild her life after a public divorce is done well enough that it makes "Hope Floats" worth watching..
Neither because of the slow development nor of the fair acting of Bullock/Connick Jr. The brilliant performance of Mae Whitman as Bernice made this whole movie worthwhile.
Sandra Bullock is a smart, very sensitive, very good actress who can show her talent and deepness as much in dramatic roles (Hope Floats, Love and War, Divine Secret etc.) as in the comedies.
Sandra Bullock learns that her husband has been having an affair on an afternoon talk show, and she moves back home to Texas to start anew, and she finds new love while she's there.
There was a lot that could have worked for this film if only they had developed more of the story lines that looked like coming up and then were just pushed under the carpet.I was very disappointed.
Although normally my preference is not for romantic dramas, seeing this film left me a little short.It had promise, the characters and relationships could have been explored much deeper than they did, yet the story seemed not to understand the direction it wanted to take.The comparisions and parallels within the story, especially the three generations of women in the family, had a lot of potential, but somehow didn't fully extend itself.
It could have made the film much easier to relate to and attach to which is the aim of any film about lost-love and life regained.IMHO, I think the film suffered from a lack of direction in the writing, although Harry Connick Jnr and Sandra Bullock did try desperatly to breath a little life into otherwise flat character outlines.It's not that this is a bad film, some parts leave you understanding the reasons for various plot developments, its just that this film is underdone, and a little flat overall..
As it was, both husband and best friend were simply paper doll characters labeled "The Bad Guys", and the audience is left wondering why they were there to begin with.The constant interruption of boom mikes - in the bathroom, over the stairs, in the bedroom with the daughter - was extremely annoying, and distracted from an already weak film.This film is not a winner.
The big debit in this film is the character of Sandra Bullock's daughter.
Hope Floats with Sandra Bullock is a real disappointment.
Sandra's kid, played by Mae Whitman, gives the best performance here, although she's around possibly too much (I did love her little glasses though).
The only actor who really looks great in this movie is the Michael Pare character, who we are supposed to hate, but at least we know he is a slime ball.Another problem I had with the movie is the plot, which starts out strong, in which a woman movies back to her home town.
I mean, after this everything that will happen is instantly obvious and happens quickly, none of what we call a story.In the end, "Hope Floats" turns out to be a slow-moving, uninspiring, dual, made for TV movie that is bad, bad and BAD.
"Hope Floats" is another Sandra Bullock film where she is the only real asset.
Sandra Bullock plays Birdee Calvert, a Chicago wife who returns home to her small Texas hometown after her husband reveals on a talk show that he's (been) having an affair with her best friend.Bullock is as always likable and I enjoyed watching her (get drunk) trying to put her life back together again with the help of her eccentric taxidermy loving mother (Gena Rowlands) and a yummy (in an awkward sort of way) Harry Connick Jr. All the performances seem authentic and this doesn't really fall into romantic comedy genre(which may be why I like it).
Such great acting by all involved: Sandra Bullock, Harry Connick Jr., Gena Rowlands, and the kids (Mae Whitman and Cameron Finley).
He genuinely woos her in the real old-fashioned way which is quite a pleasant change from most so-called romance movies these days.And Mae Whitman as Birdee's 9-year-old daughter, Bernice shows her to be the star that she has, since Hope Floats was made, become.
Full marks to Mae!Of course, a true queen of the silver screen, Gena Rowlands as Birdee's mum, is everything we have come to expect of her - a tender, all-knowing matriarch who holds everything together.All in all, a fine movie that, in my opinion, is worth more than the 5.8 that viewers have given it.
I have watched Sandra Bullock several times before and feel she almost didn't even want to be in this movie.
Watch other Sandra Bullock movies; this isn't her best..
It was as if they'd taken the clips left on the cutting room floor from the really good Bullock movies and made a new film of them.
Sandra Bullock, Gene Rowlands, and Mae Whitman were totally wasted talents in this badly scripted and edited movie..
I keep wondering what might have been, what could have been, what SHOULD have been given the premise: Former small Southern town beauty queen returns home after national dumping by her philandering husband and her "best friend" on cheesy TV talk show..No wonder Rosanna Arquette didn't want her name in the credits as the homewrecker Connie!Being from a small Southern town, I found the gossip and lasciviousness to be pretty true to form (if Birdie(Sandra) developed any nudies in the photo shop, she was to make an extra copy for the old geezer that owned the place).
Other than a few acid-dripping remarks that were on target, the rest of the movie was a horrible disappointment.Sandra's character is accused of drinking several times in the film, and although no alcohol consumption is seen or hinted at except for one bar scene, it certainly would have explained the zombie-like shadows of characters.We are left hanging with a bare bones plot, husband and his lover humiliate wife on T.V., she packs up small daughter and heads for the comforts of home with mother.
Heck, he can't even find steady employment in Smithville (too slow, they rightfully say).The only bright spot was little Mae Whitman, the small daughter, whom many will recognize as Casey from "When A Man Loves A Woman" (GREAT MOVIE!), Sara from "Chicago Hope", and Patricia from "Independence Day".
I hope to see Mae again soon in a good movie..it's a sad day when the only actress in a star-filled cast doing much acting is knee high to a grasshopper.I am a woman, and usually like touchy, feely, humanistic stories about everyday life, but there was very little life here.
I heard Sandra Bullock in an interview say she was tired of picking stinkers like "Speed 2" but felt vindicated with her latest movie titled, "Hope Floats." On her own recommendation, I purchased the movie and shared it with my relatives at Christmas.
It was as if it were placed there to give life to a hopelessly boring movie.The daughter was the only redeeming character of the film.
I may be going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing the writer of "Hope Floats" watched "Something To Talk About," shortly before he started to write this "masterpiece." It's too bad that he couldn't have at least equaled the quality of that film, because it was MUCH better!.
And hope.Returning to her roots with her daughter Bernice (Mae Whitman) in tow after a nasty marital split, Birdee Pruitt (Sandra Bullock) is able, in spite of a few reality checks from her past, to put her life and needs into perspective and to find for herself and her daughter acceptance and contentment.
It's a clear message to Bullock that great films like "While You Were Sleeping" only work with humor and interesting characters.
Very much a film by, with and for the ladies perhaps and superficially is a romantic story; under the surface `Hope Floats' examines some of the difficulties of human relationships, above all between Birdie Pruitt and her husband and new-found love back in her home town, on the one side, and between Bernice and her parents and her new school-mates, on the other.
a man among the crowd!) at the helm, Ms. Bullock did not simply try to make an interesting little film, but actually succeeded.The film starts off the worse possible way in one of those ridiculous reality TV chat shows, where poor Birdee finds out her husband is having an affair with her best friend.
Mae Whitman as Bernice offers an incredible performance here, in great part due to good chemistry between her and Ms. Bullock; only a couple of times did her rôle seem a little forced and only very briefly, as for the most part her natural interpretation is surprisingly successful.
It was a such great film with a wonderful performance from Sandra Bullock who really shines in this movie.
Sandra Bullock is totally unbelievable playing a mother - no matter how old she gets, she'll always have that high school look that makes her so pretty.
My message to anyone who (disturbingly) thought this film was 'powerful', 'gripping' 'well acted' and to anyone who wants an uplifting film about hope then for gods sake go out and rent something like the Shawshank Redemption - don't waste your time with this drivel you'll just be left with the feeling of being robbed of the rental fee and also wondering why exactly you took 2 hours out of your life to watch this....
Hope Floats begins with a Ricki Lake-like talk show where Birdee Pruitt(Sandra Bullock) finds out her husband and best friend are having an affair.
Hoping she can rebuild her life in the town where she was three time Queen of Corn, Birdee soon finds out the whole town saw her life destroyed on national television.This sets the scene for the rest of the film.
However, by the end of the movie when she asks Birdee if she is going to marry Justin, it isn't because she hates him, it's because she doesn't want to be known as Bernice Matisse.Although the script could have been fine-tuned into a truly great film, "Hope Floats" nonetheless has reinstated Sandra Bullock as one of the top actresses of her time..
The only good thing worth watching this movie are the two kids who perform their parts better than the entire cast together..
I didn't have any sympathy for Sandra Bullock's character and found myself hoping that the guy would give up on her and find someone more worth his while..
Any movie becomes promising just by having her name in it's cast.Plot In A Paragraph: Birdee Pruitt (Bullock) is an housewife whose life is turned upside when her husband Bill (Michael Pare) reveals his infidelity (with her best friend Connie) to her on a talk show.
Released in 1998, "Hope Floats" is a likable drama about Birdee Pruitt (Sandra Bullock) who flees with her daughter (Mae Whitman) back to her small home town in Texas to live in her mother's mansion while her father is in a nursing home (Gene Rowlands plays the mother).
A peripheral issue is that Birdee was the beloved prom queen in high school and her husband the popular quarterback.I was expecting a great drama with "Hope Floats" but it wasn't to be.
It is too bad that the director Forest Whitaker, who himself is an Oscar winner, didn't cast proper actors.The plot made me felt awkward many times, as Connick's romantic courtship of Bullock borders on stalking on numerous occasions, and he has no problem making moves on her when she is clearly not ready and even says so to him.
Sandra Bullock, Harry Connick, Jr., and Gena Rowlands star in "Hope Floats," a 1998 film directed by Forest Whitaker.Bullock, who 13 years ago looks exactly as she does now, plays Birdee Pruitt, a small town beauty queen and cheerleader who married the star of the football team, Bill (Michael Pare) and left for the big city.
She's in love with her husband and wants him back.This film seems to have low scores on IMDb, giving validation to my theory that a) reviewers on IMDb are mostly men; and b) young men; who c) like action, special effects, futuristic, and science fiction films."Hope Floats" is actually a very sweet movie with lovely performances from everyone involved.
This film has two: an irritating, whiny daughter who wears owlish glasses, and a little boy whose presence in the story is never explained.You get the feeling that the film's target audience is older women, viewers who can sing the praises of those two "darling little children"; who can drool over Birdee's hunky new suitor (played rather poorly by Harry Connick Jr.), and who can cry along with Birdee over her self-centered misery."Hope Floats" is mostly a Sandra Bullock acting vehicle; and she does give a nice performance.
This is one of my all time favorite movies, I don't care if others bash it, they just don't have the appreciation for a film like this.
Sandra Bullock commands the screen in HOPE FLOATS, a surprisingly effective comedy-drama about a former prom queen turned single mom, who, upon learning of her husband's infidelity, returns to her hometown with her daughter in tow and moves in with her mother and learns life is not so easy for an aging prom queen.
However, those of you expecting a regular light-hearted rom-com might be disappointed as this is actually a bit of a downer movie and hankies might be needed by the end.Sandra Bullock plays southern belle Birdee Pruitt, former Texan beauty queen and married to former college quarterback star and high-school sweetheart Bill (Michael Paré).
As Birdee becomes ever more despondent, her life is held together by her eccentric mother and the affection of her old school buddy Justin Matisse (Harry Connick Jr).While considerably better than the last Bullock movie I saw (the woeful "Fire On The Amazon"), I wasn't expecting much and I wasn't disappointed.
The acting of Sandra Bullock and Harry Connick Jr. was a 9..
go to any other Sandra Bullock movie.
This was a really good movie.I loved it.It makes you laugh and then it makes you cry.It is beautiful and heart-warming.I would highly recommend it.Sandra Bullock is superb.She really makes the role believable,and the chemistry between her and Harry Connick, Jr. is amazing..
As a Sandra Bullock fan, I especially like this movie.
my boyfriend sits down with me to watch it and i cry everytime, i love sandra bullock and they did an awesome job with this movie, so if you havent seen it, go rent it..
So the reviews weren't the best, but i listened to what everyone else thought i would have never seen a lot of the films i love today.Which brings me to "Hope Floats" starring Ms. Sandra Bullock and Harry Connick Jr. How does one prepare for a movie that was universally bashed and generally disliked?
If anything, watch "Hope Floats" for Sandra Bullock's performance, which i felt was terribly underrated but incredibly inspired.
It's far from being a truly awful film even though it induces the odd groan or two, and it only just manages to stay afloat as it desperately treads water in a sea of sappy sentimentality.Birdee Pruitt (Sandra Bullock), apparently has it all, but when her husband, Bill (Michael Paré), announces on a national television talk-show that he is having an affair with her best friend, Birdee's world comes crumbling down around her.Birdee and her daughter, Bernice (Mae Whitman), head back home to Smithville, a small town in Texas where they move in with Ramona (Gena Rowlands), Birdee's mother.
Real life (well, most of the times, that is) is not anadventure or a thriller, it's more like this movie.Someone in his comment accused Connick's character of being "slow".
Its sweet and wonderful with incredible performances by Sandra Bullock, Mae Whitman, and the always perfect Gena Rowlands.
|
tt0181288
|
American Movie
|
In 1996, Mark Borchardt, a blue-collar suburbanite, dreams of being a filmmaker. However, he is also an unemployed, deeply indebted, borderline alcoholic who still lives with his parents and is estranged from his ex-girlfriend, who is threatening to revoke custody of their three children. He acknowledges his various failures but aspires to one day make more of his life.
In an attempt to jump-start his amateur film making career, Mark restarts production on Northwestern, a feature-length film Mark has been planning for most of his adult life. Initially, the project attracts some interest from the group of amateur actors with whom Mark produces radio plays, but by the fourth production meeting, almost no one shows up and Mark is forced to acknowledge that he currently lacks the resources to ever move Northwestern past the pre-production phase.
In an attempt to drum up the attention and financial resources needed to film Northwestern, Mark decides to finally complete Coven (which Borchardt mispronounces with a long 'o'), a horror short that he began shooting on 16mm film in 1994 but ultimately abandoned. Mark receives financing from his uncle Bill, a wise but increasingly senile eighty-two-year-old retiree who lives in a dilapidated trailer despite having nearly $300,000 in his bank account. Bill hesitantly agrees to invest in Coven with the goal of selling three thousand VHS tapes, which he hopes will raise enough capital to finance Northwestern.
Mark restarts production on Coven but suffers numerous mishaps. Although he is hard-working and knowledgeable about film making, he is also poor at planning ahead and inarticulate as a director. Additionally, Mark builds his production crew out of friends and neighbors, many of whom are incompetent at the tasks to which Mark assigns them. Particular attention is given to his best friend (and one of the only adept members of the crew) Mike Schank, a recovering alcoholic and drug addict who is in charge of scoring Coven. Although the two bonded over their shared alcoholism, Mike has coped with his own addictions by joining Alcoholics Anonymous and by becoming a compulsive gambler; in between work on Coven, Mike goes to the gas station to buy lottery tickets, sometimes accompanied by his AA sponsor, who then drives them both to Gamblers' Anonymous meetings. It is Mike's hope that by winning money on the lottery, he can help Mark finance his movies
As production goes forward, Mark faces the skepticism of his family and his own burgeoning alcoholism. At Thanksgiving dinner and, later, a family party to watch Super Bowl XXXI, Mark gets drunk and becomes aggressive to his family and friends, and his girlfriend briefly leaves him. Later, a wistful Mark watches amateur footage he shot of Northwestern in 1990 and contemplates whether or not he is a failure.
Mark finally wraps production of Coven and it premieres at a local theater in 1997. Mark's family and friends are happy that the project has finally been completed. In the final scene, Mark goes to visit Uncle Bill and discusses the prospects of future fame and wealth. Bill responds by advising Mark to focus on spiritual matters and bringing happiness into other people's lives.
The closing text reveals that Bill died shortly after in 1997, and left Mark $50,000 in his will to help finance Northwestern.
|
cult, home movie
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Now I don't think Mark writes the best dialogue in the world, but looking just at his photographic eye I'd say if the guy had any kind of schooling he might be shooting movies for someone right now.
Hence, the making of Borchadt's film, "Coven", goes from 6 months to 3 years and the movie suffers a bit from being drawn out."American Movie" is rife with memorable supporting characters and Mark is an able lead.
Don't Let This Happen To You. Praised by some, loathed by others, this Chris Smith documentary tells the real-life story of a twenty-something, amateur filmmaker named Mark Borchardt who sets out to complete his thirty minute film "Coven", as a first step toward what he hopes will be a lifelong career in feature film-making.
Certainly, that is one interpretation, and along with it the conclusion that the film is a sad commentary on the impossibility of achieving Hollywood's idea of the American Dream, when you have no money to work with.But other reviewers find the film to be inspiring, a cinematic pep talk for the underdog, and brutally honest about the realities of indie film-making.
These viewers point out that despite the fact that Mark had no money to speak of, he still completed his film "Coven", and got it shown at the local theater.My own conclusion is that "American Movie" is a well-crafted documentary useful for first time indie filmmakers.
This movie, about supremely untalented American film-maker Mark Borchardt and his attempts to make a short film in order to make a small amount of money which will launch him into fame and fortune as a film-maker, is riveting.
American Movie is a documentary following the unforgettable Mark Borchardt (pronounced "orchard", I believe), a highly articulate & charismatic Wisconson lad, as he struggles to write, direct and produce "MidWestern", a gritty, low-budget Horror movie on which he has been working for years.
The camera captures wonderful moments of human behavior and just like project Greenlight, it shows what happens when people get in over their heads with trying to just film a simple scene (or a scene where someone's head has to go through a cabinet, or an old man has to clearly say ONE line and can't, etc.) BUT, a much better documentary about the same world is the much earlier 1975 documentary Demon Lover Diary - where someone tagged along as these Michigan guys tried to make their horror film.
I have a friend who met both Mike and Mark and he told me that, in real life, these guys are just exactly the way they appeared in the movie..
He makes films with his friends and family using any equipment and money that he managed to get his hands on, in particular from his elderly Uncle Bill.The thing about Mark is that he is certain that he is one of the great film-makers of our time.
His screenwriting, which he seems to think is worthy of a Pulitzer, is laughingly bad: "It's alright, it's ok, there is something to live for; Jesus told me so.""American Movie" is, contrary to what people might think, a documentary that anyone can enjoy(even though my sister, who watched some scenes, seemed to think it was downright bizarre).
No Hollywood hasn't got this lazy yet that they just tell you what it is and where it was made, American Movie is a documentary about a man with perhaps the greatest divide between ambition and ability currently working in film, and his efforts to make his debut film.As a digression though I have found altogether too many films that just say "whack American in front of something and there's your title!", maybe it's familiarity, maybe misplaced nationalism, but these films always seem to make a few bucks, leading to more and more.So we have "American
Pie / Gangster / Psycho / Beauty / History X / Splendor / Dreamz All in the last decade off the top of my head, with dozens more out there.Back to Mark Borchardt the subject of this American Movie.
He has grand plans to become an established filmmaker in his own right, he just needs to make his debut short film to drum up some money so that he can make his name with a full length feature.The film will be called NorthWestern, and while early goings of this documentary introduce us to many people already associated and indoctrinated into the process it is clear early that this won't be a tale of cinematic triumph against the odds.Even Mark's most ardent supporters admit that years have passed with little or no progress.
But it seems only one true friend in Mike Shenk (who deserves his own movie – I'll get to him) and dear old Uncle Bill.Bill is an elderly man who Mark nags incessantly for money *ahem* film financing capital, with tales of future Scorcese style glory and Snyder sized box office returns until poor old Uncle Bill gets exhausted and relents
again
fully expecting never to see a penny for his outlay.It seems Mark's unerring sense of self belief and endless optimism convinces others to get involved without the slightest assurance or inkling that anything will ever eventuate.But even Mark has doubt at times, it is obvious to all that when he drinks his resentment of authority and a more hardworking existence rise quickly to the surface, and he lacks the ability to say "no" to alcohol, allowing it to set himself further and further behind, both financially and cinematically.But enough with the serious stuff.
It takes a lot of attempts to get this money shot for 'Coven', while Tom's head steadily gets softer on top.Yet that cupboard scene moment is actually a good indication of why 'American Movie' is a real good 'un.
Borchardt is a bit of a jerk when he's drunk, but he's got a dream and he's going for it.But the star of the movie is Uncle Bill, a curmudgeonly 83 year old who fronts the money for 'Coven' and occasionally busts into a song about his life: "Goodbye dear, hope you're in heaven where you belong / I was wondering if they had cigarettes in heaven, I don't think so / I still love you, I'll visit your grave every day / Not every day, but I'll visit it sometimes if I ever find it".And...
Set in the confines of Wisconsin, Mark Borchardt sets out to capture the American Dream, by filming his movie "Northwestern." But sidetracked instead to film a short subject named "Coven", pronounced long o, not like oven, this is an important distinction.
Very inspiring !!!The underlying foundation of the movie is the love and support of the Borchardt family and friends, in spite of some dysfunction, they conquer the elements,and provide true inspiration for anyone who has aspirations...Get the DVD of "American Movie", which has "Coven" on it.The name "Coven", gives the film the Directors signature !
Mark has been trying for years to raise money - and talent - for a full-length low budget horror film production called "Northwestern" but as the film opens in 1995 he's having a hard time getting it together.
Early on he realizes that the feature project just isn't going to happen soon, so he decides to finish off a short film he has been sitting on, "Coven", and to put his hopes on video sales of this work getting him enough money to get going on "Northwestern." Most of the rest of the film alternates between Mark filming, editing, and post-dubbing Coven, with many scenes being both funny and rather sad or pathetic - like his attempts to have his uncle Joe, the "executive producer" recite a very simple line - and his generally despondent personal life, including jobs as a paper deliveryman and a groundskeeper/janitor at a cemetery, the same cemetery (I think) that provides him with fond memories of childhood escapes from his ever-fighting parents.
A lot of people have commented on his obnoxious, overbearing attitude, and it certainly isn't something that appeals to me - I'd probably hate the guy if I knew him in real life, at least if he kept making condescending statements to me about life and dreams like he does to his family - but somehow it's endearing when you're not right there and you're just seeing how he - somehow - manages to get his project through to completion, over two more years.
It's in a lot of ways a very hopeful and invigorating film about taking chances, and as somebody much like Mark (only older, even) who has frittered away a lot of my life, I can only take heart.One odd element to the whole thing that I haven't seen anybody mention is the interplay between the filmmakers of "American Movie" - themselves working on a very low budget and scrabbling around a bit - and Mark and his family and crew.
Sure, after seeing the movie so many times, and working on a very similar level as Mark, I connect with him as a character and I know a few different guys like Mike, The real brilliance here is Chris Smith.
As already mentioned, this film really needs to be seen by every wannabe filmmaker out there and also those who work hard to make a dream to come true, but for whatever reason never make it.Also other comments have mentioned the whole mocking attitude that this doc is having at Mark.
Okay I'm getting personal here....I've read that since American Movie was made, Mark and his buddy found small time success in the Industry...guest appearance on some TV show or whatever...
On top of that, Mark Borchardt, the focus of the documentary is clearly desperate to be recognised for his film-making, but ultimately seems destined to be remembered, perhaps unfavourably, for being the subject of somebody else's successful film.American Movie director Chris Smith was teaching a film-making class when the eccentric enthusiasm of pupil Borchardt caught his eye.
Meanwhile, his friends and family (and at the same time, cast & crew) are introduced.And it's these extra's that make it an enjoyable movie, as Mark isn't the most likable guy around.
Which is not easy since the guy, Mark Borchardt, is an beer-guzzling factory/cemetery worker who has three kids with an ex-wife he barely sees, a mountain of debt, an executive producer Uncle who is half-senile and half never supportive (despite giving up the thousands for the film-making), and, obviously, gets very depressed.
But it's a story, in spite of everything that happens, funny or tragic, is hopeful and inspiring about the future for Mark.And it's also about something else, how making a movie takes time, and money, sometimes both in equal measure.
As he's making this movie we get to know who Borchardt is- or at least what Chris Smith gets to know him as or reveals- and his family and friends, including his old and not-all-there Uncle Bill, his friend Mike who is an ex drug addict turned gambling addict, and his colleagues and girlfriend who all comment about Mark's ways as an artist and as a human being.A marker of a truly knowing and superb documentary is how close a filmmaker can get to the subject and make it into a story, make it into a story that is absorbing and true to something in the human condition, and can be just told well through the usual means of film-making itself.
As Smith's film is about such a subject that he's making, one might think back to other documentaries on directors with a super (and I mean SUPER) passion for the story they're telling, almost to the point where they might not know when to let go (Herzog and Coppola docs come to mind like Burden of Dreams or Hearts of Darkness).
Speaking of which, make sure to watch Borchardt's movie Coven on the DVD of American Movie - ultimately, when all is said and done, despite what the few clips in the documentary might suggest, he's a really good director.
This documentary tags along as independent filmmaker Mark Borchardt struggles to make his own cult-quality film.
At times, you may think this film was setup to be absurdly funny (like Spinal Tap), and yet Mark Borchardt's world is what you see on the screen, nothing more or less.
It is too easy for a viewer to separate himself from most movies, because almost all movies are fictional.The difference between a fictional movie and a documentary is that if the main character in your documentary is fascinating and inspiring, you have the option of believing in him.Mark Borchardt, the subject of "American Movie", has more passion and drive to create his movie "Southwestern" than most people have about anything.
As Ed Wood showed us, it is possible to love film without really understanding it; more often than not, though, these people are simply dodging reality by occupying themselves with pipe-dreams.I felt that American Movie did a great job of portraying the life of such a person accurately...
i hope mark borchardt keeps making his movies - not my kind of films, but clearly he has a passion for it...
What started out as a quirky and colorful (if filming Milwaukee for three years is colorful) chronicle in the life of an amateur filmmaker, Mark Borchardt, trying to complete his 35 minute horror shtick called 'Coven', becomes instead a non-film.
A documentary following the dream of movie director Mark Borchardt to finance and direct independent horror movie Northwestern.
However without good planning and management skills, Mark struggles to get things moving and doesn't seem entirely sure what he is doing other than doing a lot of talking in a production that seems as ambitious as the small town he lives in.I tuned into this film expecting to see a documentary about making a (very) low budget film but it quickly becomes a car crash of a movie that is less about that subject and more about just gawking at the white trash, small-town characters on display here.
Perhaps it is a real "Jay & Silent Bob" movie, which is all I could think as Mark and Mike bumbled around on screen.Overall, a documentary it is pointless and rather dull; it doesn't look at the making of a film very well at all, nor does it explore the idea of the American Dream (something it could easily and fascinatingly done).
The lead character Mark is a self-absorbed redneck who manipulates everything and everyone in his path to achieve his dream of making the Great American Movie.
His perplexed but indifferent mother, his long-suffering actors, his alcoholic drug-f***ed best friend, his depressive rich uncle who lives in a trailer park, the girlfriend who through denial has imbued herself with the patience of Job, and finally the only real victims in this film - Mark's children.
Two years in the life of Mark Borchardt, independent film maker somewhere in Wisconsin, and his American Dream of becoming rich and famous by making THE movie of his life.
The film, although a documentary, has a lot of love for its real life characters such as Borchardt himself and his passion or his buddies Kenny and Mike, who have been on drugs way too long.
"American Movie" (1999) is a documentary from the perspective of aspiring filmmaker Mark Borchardt as he attempts to achieve the American dream.
Documentary about an aspiring filmmaker's attempts to finance his dream project by finally completing the low-budget horror film he abandoned years before.If the question is asked "does Mark Borchardt have talent", we run into a strange barrier.
American Movie is a delightfully humorous documentary about the making of a short film over a three year period.
That's the problem faced by Mark Borchardt, and this movie is about him trying to overcome those obstacles.To that end, the film is fascinating and intriguing.
AMERICAN MOVIE is a documentary about Mark Borchardt, a man who wants to be a filmmaker.
But, AMERICAN MOVIE is the following of Mark's life and dream to be a successful filmmaker (I understand what he goes through).
This is a very funny and witty documentary about the life of Mark Borchardt, a man who isn't a scholar, who isn't making art, but just a film that is suppose to be entertaining.
This film ranks as one of my favorites of the year, and one of my favorite documentaries of all time (right up there with "Cane Toads" and "Vernon, Florida").Mark and Mike are the real-deal, and are some of the most engaging characters your likely to meet on the big screen.
But the plain style just gets you closer to the life and personality of the characters, and with such a cast there is no need for "artificially" generated humor.Even though neither Coven nor Northwestern became the blockbusters Mark Borchardt hoped that they would (has the latter even been made?), this movie more than makes up for it!
Moving portrait of Mark Borchardt, a rural American filmmaker who struggles to finish (and make) his movies.
So eccentric were some of the characters I questioned whether they were real people!My thoughts are that the documentary filmmakers behind "American Movie" were very astute to pick their subject matter.
This movie/documentary was a little slow at times, but I have to admitt that I really felt for Mark Borschardt as he tries to make movies and follow his dreams.There were a few times in the film that were laugh out loud funny.
It's a situation that I think worked more successfully in the independent/unreleased documentary "Driver 23" (essentially the same story, only this time the "visionary" wanted to be a heavy metal star), but the crackpot cast of people who populate "American Movie" (Mark's burnout friends, his emotionally distant parents and poor, pitiful uncle Bill) make it a hilarious and occasionally poignant film that's definitely worth a rental..
Smith's "American Movie" is the true-to-life record of filmmaker wannabe Mark Borchardt, a loser intent on milking his elderly uncle for cash to complete his horror short.
|
tt0031762
|
Only Angels Have Wings
|
Geoff Carter (Grant) is a pilot and the manager of Barranca Airways, a small, barely solvent company owned by "Dutchy" Van Ruyter (Sig Ruman) carrying airmail from the fictional South American port town of Barranca through a high pass in the Andes Mountains. Bonnie Lee (Arthur), a piano-playing entertainer, arrives one day. Joe Souther (Noah Beery Jr), a pilot who had been planning to have dinner with her, crashes trying to land in fog on her first day at the air base. Bonnie becomes infatuated with Carter, despite his fatalistic attitude about the dangerous mountain flying, and stays on in Barranca (not at Carter's invitation, as he insists on telling her).
The situation is complicated by the appearance of pilot Bat MacPherson (Richard Barthelmess) and his wife, Geoff's old flame Judy (Rita Hayworth). MacPherson is revealed to be an alias; his real surname is Kilgallen. He is infamous among the pilots for having once bailed out of a plane, leaving his mechanic — the brother of "Kid" Dabb (Thomas Mitchell), Carter's best friend — to be killed in the resulting crash. When Geoff is forced to ground the Kid because of failing eyesight, he is short on pilots and agrees to hire MacPherson on the condition that he fly the most dangerous missions. MacPherson understands and accepts the setup: none of the other pilots would shed a tear if he were lost.
Dutchy will secure a lucrative government mail contract that would put the airline on a solid financial footing, if he proves he can provide reliable mail service during a six month trial period. On the last day of Barranca Airways' probation, bad weather closes the mountain pass. Geoff plans to fly a new Ford Trimotor over the mountains at an altitude of 17,000 feet. The Kid asks to go with him, as co-pilot. When Geoff refuses him, the Kid suggests letting the toss of a coin decide the matter. Geoff tries to grab the coin in mid-air. However, it lands on the floor, and he picks it up and finds that it has two heads — which would insure the Kid’s being on board. Realizing how important it is to the Kid, Geoff agrees to take him along. Just before leaving, Bonnie tries to talk Geoff out of going. As they hug, she takes his gun out of his holster, points it at him and tells Geoff that she won't let him go. Knowing that she really can't stop him, she lowers the gun. However, when she drops the gun on the table, it accidentally fires, hitting Geoff in the shoulder.
Unable to fly, Geoff agrees to let Bat and the Kid try flying over the mountains instead of threading the pass. However, they are unable to climb above 15,600 feet before the plane stalls and falls off. The Kid radios Geoff and tells him that the plane could not get enough altitude to go over the mountains. Although Geoff tells them to turn around and return, the Kid and Bat decide to try to fly through the fogged-in pass. On the way through, they encounter a flock of condors. One crashes through the windshield, injuring the Kid; another tangles with the No. 1 engine, setting it on fire. Later the No. 2 engine also catches fire. The Kid tells Bat to bail out but Bat refuses, turns the plane around and manages to land the burning Trimotor back in Barranca. The Kid dies from a broken neck, but not before telling Geoff of Bat's valor. As a result, Bat is finally accepted by the other pilots.
Bonnie is torn between leaving and staying, and confronts Geoff in the hope he will ask her to stay. However, Geoff is quoted earlier as saying that "he would never ask a women for anything," and doesn't make the request she is hoping for. Then the weather clears and Geoff is about to rush out to secure the all-important contract. Before he goes, he offers to toss a coin to decide: heads, she stays; tails, she leaves. Bonnie is unwilling to decide her life so haphazardly, saying with tears "I'm hard to get, Geoff — all you have to do is ask me!" As he leaves, Geoff gives her the coin as a "souvenir." At first she is distraught, but then she's thrilled when she discovers that the coin has heads on both sides and realizes it was Geoff's way of asking her to stay.
|
melodrama
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
In this film Cary Grant, who is one of the greatest "Hawksian" actors, plays Geoff the head of the air mail airline who has sworn off women because they just don't seem to deal with his dangerous lifestyle.
A Notch Above The Rest In Its Era. To quote to the movie cliché on the back of the VHS cover, this is old-time adventure, "the kind they don't make anymore."Well, they've always made good adventure stories through the years but you get the message: it's simply a good, solid story done well on film .What puts this a notch above other adventure tales of its day are: 1 - excellent cinematography; 2 - interesting aerial scenes with neat-looking planes flying in the fog and around and above the treacherous Andes Mountains; 3 - a top- notch cast featuring Cary Grant, Jean Arthur, Rita Hayworth, Richard Barthelmess, Thomas Mitchell, Allyn Joslyn, Sig Ruman, John Carroll and Noah Beery Jr., and 4 - a story that is generally interesting.I say "generally" because there are a few dry spots, mainly Arthur's continued pining over Grant, but most of it fun to watch and it gets you involved in the story.
The story revolves around not just Cary Grant's Geoff leading the pack in the Andes, but also Thomas Mitchell's brother gone, Richard Barthelmess' past recur, Rita Hayworth's nostalgic fear, and the spunky, sentimental Jean Arthur's Bonnie wraps it all up.
Only Angels Have Wings is both a good character study and has a lot of drama as well.And Cary Grant was far more successful at a Bogart type role than Bogey was in doing Sabrina..
This movie makes much more sense when you put it in the context of early talkie World War I flying movies like Hawks' Today We Live or The Dawn Patrol orDieterle's The Last Flight (starring, not coincidentally, Richard Barthelmess).
The reviewers who say Grant doesn't play it serious enough here are exactly missing the point-- his seemingly breezy, actually brittle facade IS the Lost Generation attitude, straight out of The Sun Also Rises.This is one of the great tough romances, whose real romance is with death itself, which needless to say makes it several steps darker than Hawks' superficially similar To Have and Have Not, let alone Rio Bravo (which reproduces its maincharacters almost exactly-- Grant as John Wayne, Arthur/Angie Dickinson as the woman trying to get into the boy's club, Barthelmess/Dean Martin as the guywith a guilty past of failure, and Mitchell as the guy who age is catching up with/ Walter Brennan, old age fully caught up).
For a remarkably compelling story about a fly-by-the-seat-of-their-pants airmail service in South America, director Howard Hawks has assembled a cast that includes Cary Grant as the airline's owner and Jean Arthur as a tourist stranded between boats who catches his eye.
Great flying sequences, some marvelous special effects, and a great cast are the highlights of "Only Angels Have Wings," directed by Howard Hawks and starring Cary Grant, Jean Arthur, Thomas Mitchell, Richard Barthelmess, and Rita Hayworth.
Geoff Carter is the head of a small run down air freight company in Barranca, one of his best pilots (and friend) is killed, but this is merely only one of the problems he has to deal with as ex flames, potential new sweethearts, and dissension in the camp, all fuse together to test him to the limit.Howard Hawks was the perfect man for this film because of his aviation background, the result is a very well crafted character study set in a very small locale.
Therefore, when sexy Jean Arthur shows up on a stop-over and gets a hankering for boss Cary Grant, the sexual tension rests in whether or not Grant will be alive long enough to make forming a romantic attachment worthwhile.With a second world war looming on the horizon, one can see how this story was both relevant and irrelevant at the same time: relevant as a parallel for the many American men who would soon be in the position of not knowing whether or not they would be alive from day to day; but sort of irrelvant too, since we're talking about delivering mail here, not going to war!!
Rita Hayworth shows up in an early role as another love interest for Grant, and one-time silent film star Richard Barthelmess struts in playing Grant's mail carrier arch rival (!), looking for all the world like he's still acting in silent films.Director Howard Hawks creates an authentically foggy and sweaty South American atmosphere, and for all the surface silliness of the plot, he fashions a pretty compelling movie about the instinct to challenge death that dominates these characters' lives.
Howard Hawks' surprisingly dark film about mail pilots in the Banana Republic and their often dangerous lives is one of the great "lost" classics of Hollywood's golden era.
The film is uncommonly unsentimental and realistic when compared to other films from the same era, and is all the better for it.Cary Grant and Jean Arthur, both of whom are cast somewhat against type and in complex roles, deliver sensational performances that should have won them both Academy Awards (the fact that neither actor was even nominated is inexplicable).
If this film was made today, it would no doubt involve a great deal more sex and a great deal more CGI - it would be a terrible filmFortunately, this film was made in 1939 and is a superb example of the era - I won't go into the details of the plot (its not that important) but rather i will describe the people involved (more important) - Grant is cynical, distant and seemingly unemotional, he doesn't want to be tied down, he simply wants to get the job done - Arthur is sassy, talented and independent, she knows what she wants or at least she thinks she does - one kiss from Grant changes her mind (as it would)Then there's the pilot carrying the guilt of another mans death (we never find out how responsible he was) no one likes him and he's given the hardest flying jobs that no one else will take - on the up-side, he's married to Rita Hayworth but she doesn't know what his secret is (oh....and she used to have a thing with Grant) The new pilot finds redemption, his wife finds happiness, Grant finds a woman that can handle him, Arthur finds a man that deserves her and some people die along the way Fabulous stuff - i recommend watching it late at night (preferably when it's raining).
1939 is often called the best year in Hollywood history, but this superb, and superbly-original, movie gets overshadowed by THE WIZARD OF OZ, GONE WITH THE WIND, DARK VICTORY and other classics from that year.ONLY ANGELS HAVE WINGS can be enjoyed as a terrific, fast-paced action/adventure movie, but beneath the surface there's much more going on.The story deals with big themes -- honor, character, love, guilt, redemption -- in profound ways worthy of Tolstoy or Shakespeare.
The nail-biting drama and suspense are leavened with just the right amount of comedy.Here you see Rita Hayworth's star quality emerging for the first time, while D.W. Griffith's early-silent film leading man Richard Barthelmess underacts brilliantly as a man haunted by a guilty secret.The first time I saw OAHW, I remember thinking the scene with the condor was far-fetched, but after the bird-caused plane crash in the Hudson River recently, I realize I was just ignorant about aviation.
Cary Grant wasn't at his best but Jean Arthur was the star of the film along with Thomas Mitchell.
By the end of his career, Gary Grant was well known as an actor who did comedies and lighthearted dramas, where he played characters that were very different to his tough guy pilot in this film.
It features a top-shelf cast of stars and character actors, has some surprisingly well constructed special effects and flying sequences, and the action and drama and romance fit altogether with barely a hitch.If there's maybe one minor criticism, and it's so minor I feel nitpicky mentioning it, the real 'adventure' plot is a little more engrossing than the romance, with Cary Grant's chief flier Carter leading the missions for this group of pilots on missions delivering mail through dangerous terrain, and having to deal with a bitterness at hand with the pilots as an old wound is opened with the re-emergence of Killian aka Mac Pherson (well cast in underplayed Richard Barthelmess performance) and his new wife played by Rita Hayworth.
This goes without saying I don't see why Hawks and Arthur had a problem working together, as she seemed to be cast spot-on as a strong-but-tender female presence in the midst of all these men (and, you know, Rita Hayworth who needs no explanation), who is the only one aside from Kid to get emotionally close to Carter.
While Grant and Arthur's scenes are good, even very good at their best (loved the transition from tenseness with the coffee and then to the admission of love), they're nearly overshadowed by the power and effectiveness of those surrounding the missions and the pilots.And those scenes involve the kind of male camaraderie that Hawks is known and admired and even loved for, in expressing the story so well that these characters and personalities come through clean and clear.
But with Cary Grant, Jean Arthur, Rita Hayworth, and this cast and rousing story, it's believable and excellent work.
Jean Arthur, (Bonnie Lee) meets Geoff and falls in love with him and does her very best to calm him down, because Geoff was a ladies man and then his ex-wife appears after many years who is Judy, (Rita Hayworth).
This film has many great veteran actors who all gave great supporting roles and Thomas Mitchell, (Kid Dabb), Cary Grant and Jean Arthur put their hearts and soul into their roles.
Cary Grant's second of five films with director Howard Hawks is the story of pilots in South America risking their lives flying in hazardous conditions.
Hawks infuses every shot with the realism of the jungle and weather, which affects every move the pilots make, and Grant is terrific as the stern and callous leader Carter.Both are up to their game here and are boosted by a great supporting cast including Jean Arthur as a showgirl who keeps missing her boat, Rita Hayworth who has some history with Cary, and Thomas Mitchell as his best friend, The Kid, eager to help him out in any way.
I can't imagine anyone other than Ms. Arthur in the role of Bonnie Lee. Throw in Cary Grant, Thomas Mitchell, Noah Beery, Jr. and Rita Hayworth and you know you've got a winner.
Cary Grant is often said to be miscast, but isn't the combination of his great good-looks and charm tempered by a genuine amusement at and indifference to the wiles of the female the very quality that gives his portrayal of "Geoff Carter" its special Hemingwayesque character?
Howard Hawks directed this entertaining drama that stars Cary Grant as Geoff Carter, manager of an air freight service stationed in a remote trading post in South America, where his pilots routinely deliver the mail in dangerous and often foggy conditions between the mountains.
Terrific Howard Hawks feature which I hesitate to term action-adventure as the real meat here is in the psychological studies of an out-there bunch of people, living a life about as far removed from the ordinary as you could get.Cary Grant is brilliantly cast against type as the seemingly cold-blooded, hard-hearted leader of a crack bunch of misfit fliers charged to get mail in and out of a remote jungle location in all types of weather.
Into this Men-Only world come two quite different women, both of whom either fall or have in the past fallen for Grant's brand of tough love, wandering spirit Jean Arthur and a young "old flame", Rita Hayworth, who are required to adopt the same masculine, devil-may-care approach to life as the men or get cast aside.
Considering that this film was directed by Howard Hawks and featured Cary Grant, Jean Arthur, Rita Hayworth and a star-filled supporting cast, it's not a big surprise that the film worked so well.
Cary Grant & Jean Arthur star in this Howard Hawks adventure film from 1939.
Cary Grant plays a Clark Gable type role, a no-nonsense leader under extraneous pressure in the part of Geoff Carter while silent era star Richard Barthelmess uses his greatly expressive face which carries the baggage of his character.
Given the circumstances in a world apart, as well occurs on an adventurous love story between Jean Arthur and Cary Grant, also with the radio transmission guiding people, "Only angels have wings" (1939) directed by Howard Hawks, for consumption now, it is delicious as keen mix between comedy and action gray movie, located on a scale for planes mailing on the top of Andes mountains.
Is it the correct way, by such a dramatic nightmare, to bring the mailing post over the mountains and risking his life for nothing more than only winning for civilization the experiments of first communications, along a continent so exploited in its resources by the sellers of technological inventions, situated as owners for the most in the North of this same world of adventurers and happy few ?Hawks in this movie put the symbolically wings in such an imaginative flux of talking from this guy as pilot of high experiments, risking the good name of this company of aviation - as matches over the soil like lamps illuminating the night - competing with such a terrible birds of high mountains.
Most natural performance among the males in the supporting cast comes from John Carroll, a breezy, natural actor who never received enough recognition in later films of the '40s.Jean Arthur fans will like her in this one--she uses all her standard mannerisms to great effect but without too much help from the lumbering script.
Cary Grant plays Geoff Carter, a pilot and a manager of a small airport in South America.The beautiful Bonnie Lee (Jean Arthur) stops at that airport while waiting for her boat.She stays there longer because she fancies the handsome pilot.But he's too fond of flying.And then his old flame, Judy MacPherson (Rita Hayworth) appears on the scene with her flying husband Bat (Richard Barthelmess).All that and much more happens in Only Angels Have Wings (1939).It's regarded as being among the finest films of its director Howard Hawks.The charismatic Cary Grant was a true star.He shines in this movie in the air and on the ground.Jean Arthur makes a perfect female lead.And then Rita Hayworth with her sex appeal.Richard Barthelmess is brilliant as the man who's not the most popular person among other fliers.The fantastic Sig Ruman plays Dutchy.This movie contains some exiting flying sequences.It seems pretty amazing what goes on in the air..
The basic premise of the movie is that of a female musician Bonnie Lee (Jean Arthur) who arrives in a South American port and ends up meeting a bunch of pilots headed up by the head of the airline Geoff Carter (Cary Grant) and gets involved with them as they fly their missions through a life threatening mountain pass.
That's what I love about these old movies: you can always tell that the directors spent more time talking with the actors and writers than worrying about the special effects, which is what make the special effects truly special.Many note that this was Howard Hawks' most personal film of his career--he frequently associated with pilots, and he knew the characters inside and out.
The story is weak, but the Howard Hawks-produced aerial climax is nicely done.****** Only Angels Have Wings (5/12/39) Howard Hawks ~ Cary Grant, Jean Arthur, Richard Barthelmess, Rita Hayworth.
With Cary Grant it has a great leading man and with Jean Arthur and Rita Hayworth the movie also has two more than great female actresses.
The cast is excellent; Cary Grant, Jean Arthur, and Thomas Mitchell are at their best, with wonderful support.
Doesn't hurt that a young Rita Hayworth is in here to.High Drama/Adventure along with a nice little love story and lotsa plane crashes make for a good film.
Nevertheless, Jean Arthur begins falling in love with Cary Grant, who runs the flying operation...despite the fact that he repeatedly insults her.Many see this as one of Howard Hawks' best directorial efforts, and perhaps it is, once you accept the rather boneheaded premise.
A group of bush pilots fly through rough weather and mountain passes to deliver the mail and win a contract in Howard Hawks' "Only Angels Have Wings." They're led by the crafty Geoff Carter (Cary Grant), who's attracted the attention of a wandering American woman, Bonnie Lee (Jean Arthur).
Only Angels Have Wings is directed by Howard Hawks, has a screenplay by Jules Furthman and stars Cary Grant, Jean Arthur, Thomas Mitchell, Sig Ruman, Richard Barthelmess and Rita Hayworth.Only Angels Have Wings is a story about a group of emotionally damaged people.There's Geoff(Cary Grant)the tough as nails pilot who is the head of the flying department that delivers the mail and any other things(like medical supplies etc).Bonnie(Jean Arthur)the young American girl looking for love and adventure and who is as tough as Geoff is.The Kid(Thomas Mitchell)Geoff's best friend and fellow pilot who may be growing blind and who's mourning for his brother, who was killed in a plane crash when his co pilot bailed out.Dutchy(Sig Ruman)the hotel and airfield owner where the pilots are based, who is running out of money to keep it running.Cary Grant gives one of his best performances here as the cynical tough guy who can't afford to get sentimental, if he gets sentimental he thinks he'll get weak and that's a risk in the job he does.
Grant proves here and in Notorious how good he was at playing darker characters, it's a shame he didn't get more roles like this.The flying scenes look quite realistic and you get a sense of how dangerous this job is.
|
tt0064406
|
Hard Contract
|
CIA assassin John Cunningham (James Coburn), a cold-blooded killer with nerves of steel and no conscience, kills a man on election day, votes in the local election and spends the rest of the afternoon with Ellen (Karen Black), a prostitute. The next day, Cunningham goes to see James Ramsey (Burgess Meredith), his mobilizer, a CIA man whose cover is a job as a college physics professor.
Ramsey offers one final, lucrative job, or "hard contract" as he calls it, that can allow Cunningham to retire from the business for good. This consists of three hits, two in Spain and Belgium, with the last victim to be revealed after the first two are dispatched.
On his way to Spain to make the first hit, Cunningham meets two women who will change his life: American tourist and jet setter Sheila Metcalfe (Lee Remick), and her naive but good-hearted friend, socialite Adrianne (Lilli Palmer).
He does kill the first two victims, but later, as remorse slowly takes hold over him, Cunningham can't bring himself to knock off his third target, former top CIA hit-man Michael Carson (Sterling Hayden). A more vicious and effective hit-man in his day than Cunningham is now, Carson has become so passive, he wouldn't even defend himself.
Ramsey flies to Spain to persuade Cunningham to complete the job, and promises Cunningham that if he does not do so, he will himself be killed, and so will Sheila. Cunningham drives Ramsey, Sheila, Carson, and everyone else who knows about him back down a mountain, and is close to deliberately causing a car crash that would free him for all time, only to relent at the last moment, telling a confused Ramsey afterwards that murder is obsolete. Ramsey is then romanced by Adrianne, much to his bemusement, and it's unclear if he has also weakened in his resolve.
The ending is enigmatic, with Cunningham and Sheila running off together and beginning to make love, as Cunningham tells her that the worst deeds can be done for the best motives. The final image of them narrows to a circle around their heads, reminiscent of the image one would see in a rifle scope.
|
romantic, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0196158
|
Ticker
|
The film begins with a SWAT team going into the house of a United States Senator. Someone is holding the Senator hostage. The bomb squad arrives in a helicopter and they rappel down into the house. Frank Glass (Seagal) is in charge of the bomb squad. Glass finds a bomb in the basement and works to disarm it while the SWAT team is in a shootout with some of the hostage takers.
Glass disarms the bomb but he thinks it was too easy, that it was designed to mislead him into thinking he had he disarmed it. Everyone is ordered out of the house. The elaborate bomb is shown just before it explodes.
A year later, in San Francisco, two narcotics cops—Ray Nettles (Sizemore) and his partner Art "Fuzzy" Rice (Nas) are driving around talking. Nettles's wife and son were killed by a bomb and ever since then he has lost his enthusiasm for his job, hygiene, and life in general. Fuzzy has been trying to cheer Nettles up, and "talk out his demons". They stumble upon something suspicious and decide to investigate, ending up in an apartment building arresting a suspect. They then go to a warehouse where Nettles runs into a scientist named Claire Manning (Pressly), and Fuzzy is fatally shot by Swan (Hopper), the IRA-connected terrorist who bombed the Senator's house. Nettles and Swan have a stand-off until Swan and his men just leave. Nettles arrests Claire but she refuses to say anything about Swan. She is wearing an odd-looking bracelet which Nettles takes to the bomb squad for Glass to look over. The bracelet is found to contain detonation cord and Semtex explosive.
The police decide to hold Claire in an effort to find out what Swan is up to. An angry Swan rigs up a powerful bomb and calls in a threat to the police station—if Claire isn’t released within an hour, a large bomb will go off somewhere in the city. Swan intends to continue setting off bombs until Claire is released.
Swan and the men who are working for him are in the city for a big job and Nettles becomes obsessed with nailing him. Glass and the bomb squad are working on the case because bombs are involved so Nettles ends up working with Glass and the bomb squad. Together, they attempt to stop Swan and try to figure out the big job that Swan is in town for, and how Claire is involved. It turns out that Claire is out for revenge—her husband was murdered after discovering plans to build an elementary school on a toxic waste dumping area.
Claire blames the San Francisco City Government for her husband's murder, so she has enlisted Swan's help to get revenge by blowing up city hall. That's the big job that Swan is in town for. With the help of Glass, Nettles sets out to find and stop Swan... and maybe exorcise the demons from his own tortured past.
|
comedy, boring, neo noir, flashback, good versus evil, revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All CostsNot a single other decent review for this film seems to have appeared yet.And this isn't going to be the first one.The cliche ridden,tedium inducing script and flat,uninteresting dialogue are the first of many noticeably bad factors to the film.And as for the casting,to have Dennis Hopper (complete with what sounds like a laughable Irish accent) as the mad bomber villain just shows the extent of it's lazyness.Meanwhile,Tom Sizemore and Steven Seagal turn in styflingly standard performances as the cop-on-the-edge and zen-aided bomb disposal expert.The story is a jumbled mess,confusing and disjointed,and the film also has a really tatty,cheap feel,especially in the action sequences.Somewhere in the film,Seagal says 'When you've hit rock bottom,the only way you can go is up'.Hopefully,the same can be said about his career.*.
I only seen it because I knew Steven Seagal was part of a very promising cast that included Denis Hopper, Tom Sizemore, rapper Nas and Jamie Pressly.
Seagal seems like he is bored and could fall asleep any minute, but I don't blame him the whole time he just sits around and tells people what to do, he only gets one five minute fight scene towards the end of the film.
Along from the films opening the only other action scene is the climax with a few small explosions in-between that don't account for the bad scripting, acting and directing, making this one of the lower point in action history..
My reason for seeing this dung was simple: I liked the title, as well as actors Tom Sizemore, Steven Seagal, and Dennis Hopper.
Tom Sizemore, Dennis Hopper and Steven Seagal should be ashamed of themselves for participating in such a terrible movie.Basically Ticker centers around a police officer Ray Nettles (Tom Sizemore) who must team up with bomb squad leader Glass (Steven Seagal) to pursue an Irish terrorist Swann (Dennis Hopper in a very poor man's version of his famous role in Speed) who is detonating bombs around San Francisco (you could tell very little of it was filmed in San Francisco and was filmed elsewhere on the cheap).
I would disown this movie too.If you are a fan of Tom Sizemore, Dennis Hopper or Steven Seagal by all means check it out, but you will be very, very disappointed at how bad this movie is.
I'm more apt to believe what was implied on the director's commentary, that over-the-hill-and-then-some action guru Steven Seagal had more to do with the production of this movie than Pyun did.
Barring a great deal of respect for Dennis Hopper, Steven Seagal and the others, this movie looks like "a day at the office appearance" for most of them.Point your finger at the director because he is responsible for this low-level picture..
And considering the calibre of actors appearing in Ticker, I was fully prepared to give credit to veteran director Albert Pyun (if credit were due.)It isn't.As someone else already mentioned, it is amazing that this guy still finds people to finance his "films." I can name of the top of my head a few people who could all have made better entertainment with that squandered budget: me, my mother, my grandmother, hey even my cat...I am also amazed that actors such as Tom Sizemore, Dennis Hopper and yes, even Steven Seagal would appear in such films.
The plot: A mad bomber (Dennis Hopper) is (for reasons unclear blowing up the city.) Tom Sizemore is the detective out to stop him, with or without the aid of the zen preaching leader of the bomb squad (Steven Seagal.) add also the beautiful Jamey Preissly as the Hopper's girlfriend who is detained by Sizemore.
I had a great laugh watching it, seeing Seagal using 10 seconds to waddle down 6 stairs while being shot at by a group of men 20 feet away with M16 rifles and hitting nothing, listening to Hopper's Irish accent appear, disappear, reappear and so on, watching the evacuation of a town hall (government building of some kind, it wasn't clear) when what we are shown is a night club evac scene lifted directly out of another film, and hundreds of other serious and obvious inconsistencies unfold before your eyes.
Decent enough cast squandered by stupid plot, inept script, direction, editing.Dont expect any martial arts action either, the only fights are so badly cut and lit that anyone could have done them.Best moment: realising that Dennis Hopper's character is actually supposed to be Irish.Worst moment: realising that it isn't going to get any better than the opening scene..
Steven Seagal and Tom Sizemore make a great couple together to trace the one and only Bomber Dennis Hopper, just like in the movie Speed but now with 10 fingers he is back trying to blow up the place again.
The stunning stunts of Steven Seagal are amazing, the one he jumped of the roof and landed on the object he actually broke his fingernail in that scene, amazing.For Albert Pyun to direct this movie it must have been a dream coming true, after the flops he made in the past.If you like action, humor and thriller this is a must-see movie, but you have to see it in the cinema or at home on a big screen with Dolby surround system.I hope Steven Seagal will continue playing in movies for a long time, I like his performance.DutchDan. The worst so far.
I like watching Steven Seagal movies and I agree that he is not an excellent actor however I really admire his Aikido skills.
Not good...I thought it could not be worse than that but the Ticker is.The interesting thing is that the story of the film is interesting...it has all elements for a good film, some good actors, IRA terrorists trying to explode some San Francisco places, etc...but everything gets confusing and lost.Seagal just talks most of the time and I hardly can understand what he says.
Not sure if the copy of the DVD I got was bad or what...He sounds tired or not really in the mood.Anyway, The Ticker is the worst Seagal film I watched so far (I have watched probably near 10 films)..
It's a film which is led by Tom Sizemore, as a grieving unstable police detective, attempting to thwart a bomber in San Francisco, and by the end has Steven Seagal as a bomb-defusing spiritual guide.
Tom Sizemore stole the entire show for me,, glad he was first billed, and Joe Spano from Hill St. Blues was great i thought, and Peter Greene also,, this movie rocked, i don't give a crap what the so called experts on this site are saying,, this is a action film,, that's not all Seagal front loaded,, Hopper and Sizemore really steal the show,, and the movie rocks because of it to tell you the truth for the matter.
I liked the bombing scenes, quite frightening actually, the plot was good,, lot's of tongue and cheek comedy in this one also,, this is a Seagal film in name only,, he does a decent job,, would have liked to see a few more of his classic fight scenes, but hey this movie was a BLAST!!.
Just hours before watching this movie I was thinking that it would be a good idea for Seagal to play second fiddle to some better actors, because the story and general storytelling style would probably benefit.
It is a movie about a depressed cop, played by Tom Sizemore, who is helped through his depression by a bomb squad leader, played by Seagal.Except for in the end of the movie, Seagal hardly even sees any action, and isn't in any fight scenes.
Sizemore's first partner named "Fuzzy" (you can tell Seagal was on a roll with name selections in this movie) gets shot dead with some embarrassing death scene; the coughs were a touch of class.
This movie has it all, its got Seagal going around "treating devices" and controlling time, its got Sizemore with dodgy acting, its got Hopper with his cheap accent and basically resurrecting his speed role again and it has stolen scenes from other movies.
This is pretty much exactly like all the other action movies out there: Throw in a bad guy, a good guy WITH AN ATTITUDE, and some explosions.
And he does this, though he's just basically reprising his role from "Speed".Anyway, there are things to like about this film: The editing isn't that bad, there are actually some shocking moments (I was shocked when one of the main characters gets killed in the last half of the movie), and -- as I said in the beginning -- you could do worse with your time...
It has a great cast with Seagal and they are Dennis Hopper,Tom Sizmore,Peter Greene,Jamie Pressly,Nas,TLC member Chilli,and in a very short part Ice-T!The action is pretty good.Seagal doesn't fight much but the film is never boring either.I really like Dennis Hopper in this with his Irish accent and his goatee!Sizemore was very good.I also liked Peter Greene in the film as well.This is the second film he has been in with Steven Seagal!If you haven't seen Ticker and love Steven Seagal and the cast mention above then I recommend that you check out Ticker soon!.
Ice-T is in this mess for two seconds as a terrorist.All in all, "Ticker" is a "blast" to watch with friends.Quoth Seagal in the last line of the movie: "Love is eternal and that is a long time." Comeuppance Review by: Ty & Brett For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com.
When I saw the box for Ticker at at the local video store back in 2001,I was genuinely surprised.I had not seen this in theaters?Surely A seasoned actor like Tom Sizemore off great parts like In Saving Private Ryan,Black Hawk Down,and many others get the DTV treatment?Even more eerie is Steven Seagal fresh off his return to box office glory with Exit Wounds hit DTV so soon?It was bound to happen anyway.Throw in acting legend Dennis Hopper slumming it.How could this go DTV?
Simple:its a bad movie.A 3rd-rate speed/Blown away Knock off.Sizemore and Seagal are the cop and Bombsquad master on the trail of Maddog Hopper.It seems like a normal B flick.B for boring.It starts slow and stays that way.Never rising to above mute.Is this the same Steven we saw 6 months earlier from Exit Wounds?The Raspy voice.Sudden Weight gain.There is not even a decent fight scene in the whole movie?I did not buy the Zen style he talked up.I suspect it is not all his fault here though.Sizemore looks bored.But can act in his sleep.He gives a little depth to his role.Fault cannot really lay with him either.Dennis Hopper shows up as the "Irish" terrorist.He is kinda hamming it up here.He is amusing to watch.No fault here either.Peter Greene,Ice-T,Jamie Pressly,Nas,and Hill ST blues alum Joe Spano pop up for either bits or extended cameos.The sad fact is they could have been in the movie longer.Or a better movie altogether.I cannot blame them.Albert Pyun.The name ring a bell anyone?Nuff Said.Bad director.But even he can rise to the occasion sometimes.I think its simple: Nu Image-bad movie makers.Its their fault.This could have been something.I suspect there was a decent movie in the script.But the finished results leave a lot to be desired.Maybe this is what drove Tom Sizemore to drugs?Seagal to even worse movies..
I'm convinced that Dennis hopper and Steven Segal and other actors in this so called "movie" want to forgot all about this as soon as possible!The acting was poor ....
and I really like Tom Sizemore as an acter (some kind of Bruce Willis guy).I bought this movie, and I was full of hopes for having huge action scenes with Seagal kickin' a** with aikido like nobody.Now I watched the movie in english and german.
I love watching movies, and I love most steven segal movies, and I mean most as I would have said all up to I saw this movie.This movie is rubbishAnyway, no use going over the plot because most of you people out there want to know whether the big man has any good fights.
Having noticed the distribution was being handled by Universal and that the cast consisted of Action mogul Steven Segal, Rap Star Nas along with the talents of Tom Sizemore and Dennis Hopper, I thought I had a film which was at least watchable.
Steven Segal managed to sit his way through most of the movie (litterally) except to stand up for a fight scene in which his renouned martial arts techniques are practically impossible to see due to awful lighting, bad editing, bad camera angles and his body weight which makes him look uncombfortable throughtout the film.
It was bad on so many levels that I don't know where to begin,so forgive me if my comment is a bit messy...The plot was terribly weak and completely unoriginal-a madman(Hooper)bombing places(deja vu of "speed",but "speed" is 100 times better), 2 cops(one with a personal agenda-his partner was killed)trying to stop him.The dialogue was awful,full of cliches and sometimes so stupid I couldn't bare it so I put the tv on mute.
A few standard explosions which I could live with,but that scene where Hooper and Pressly are driving in the car...was there anyone who didn't notice the use of a blue screen?It couldn't get more obvious than that...So,okay-the plot,dialogue,acting,special effects-they all stink,so what about some typical Steven Seagal fighting scenes to save the day?
i liked this movie starring Steven Seagal.but Seagal doesn't get top billing.he actually get third billing behind Tom Sizemore and Denis Hopper.the film had a good level of intensity which is maintained throughout.it's not the usual type of movie you would see Seagal in.this one's more dramatic.wit more emphasis on story and acting.speaking of the acting,it's good all around,even from Seagal.there are only two separate martial fighting sequences which are very brief adding up to probably less than two minutes combined,which is good,because it appears as if Seagal had a stunt double do his fighting as all we see are hands and feet but no close ups and no face.Jamie Presley also co- stars and although her role is small,she brings a lot to it.overall,this was a pretty good film.for me,Ticker is a 7/10.
It's Albert Pyun's film.He made such an "amazing" blockbusters like Nemesis 4: Death Angel, Omega Doom or Kickboxer 4: The Aggressor, so you should expect the worst.Believe me it is very difficult to say anything good about this movie.
Wow, another movie with Steven Seagal and Dennis Hopper.
Crappy shots, dialogs from hell written by some idiot who thinks the whole world has the same IQ he has.It is a shame though, because I kind of like Tom Sizemore, but this was a bad career move for him, acting side by side with an old man who used to be pretty crafted in martial arts.
A vengeful vice cop(Tom Sizemore) and a bomb-squad leader(Steven Seagal)search for a mad bomber(Dennis Hopper)that is setting time bombs all over San Francisco.
the only reason i think it was made (and this is just a theory of mine) is because Tom Sizemore, Steven Seagal and Dennis Hopper lost a bet...
Tom sizemore, and Dennis hopper is much better then this movie.
Tom Sizemore is good as always, though he (like Seagal) is never really given much to do.Dennis Hopper was one of the surprising disappointments.
I was hoping to see Ice-T get beaten to a bloody pulp by Seagal, but he disappears without explanation as quickly as he appears, which is just as good.The film itself could have been pretty entertaining, even for a brainless action movie (which I have no problems with).
The bomber in question is Alex Swan (Dennis Hopper), a homicidal Irish extremist intent on making life hard for the San Francisco bomb squad, led by explosives expert Frank Glass (a laughably zen Steven Seagal).
The lack of quality runs deep; Greene can't even do a "painting by numbers" character justice and the only reason I can think for Halsey's terrible accent is that he is doing the acting equivalent of jumping on a grenade for Hopper making him look good by comparison.A terrible film then, one that doesn't even the very basic things you expect from a "straight-to-video" action movie.
Think Segal should go back to big budget movies like Exit wounds and if he's getting to old or out of shape to fight as much, add a sidekick who can to his films to increase the action..
Ticker must be one of the worst movies ever made.With an excellent cast,like Seagal,Sizemore and Hopper, Albert Pyun can't even though the cast, make it right,everything becomes wrong, and why?
When I saw the poster for this in my local video store I thought, "Ah, Steven Seagal in a movie with Tom Sizemore and Dennis Hopper!
Unfortunately, bad script and an uninspired direction by Pyun turned Ticker into a complete mess.In what seems like a bid budget for a B Movie, Pyun didn't know how to take advantage of that, and the result is a slow-moving, sometimes boring, confusing action flick..
Like the body of Pyun's work, TICKER is a pretty awful movie but not without interest; watching it with friends or relatives is a sure fire way to spend an enjoyable evening just having a laugh at all the poor points this film has to offer.The plot is one of those run-of-a-mill edgy cop vs.
Ticker is just awful, I've seen some terrible Seagal flicks but even I think this is probably his worst film & believe me that's saying something.
As for respectable actors such as Tom Sizemore & Dennis Hopper they should know better & are far too good for crap like this.
Why actor's like Sizemore, Hopper, Seagal & Peter Greene agreed to do Ticker is beyond me.
Like others have said, promising cast, but the movie just doesn't really do anything.Steven Seagal for me is best doing some martial arts, or at least fighting.
|
tt0275572
|
Operation Thunderbolt: Entebbe
|
On June 27, 1976, four terrorists belonging to a splinter group of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine under the orders of Wadie Haddad boarded and hijacked Flight 139, an Air France Airbus A300 in Athens, Greece. Two of the terrorists are West Germans named Wilfried Boese (Klaus Kinski) and Halima (Sybil Danning), and the other two are Palestinians.
After landing to refuel in Libya, the four hijackers force the airliner to take off once again. With President Idi Amin's (Mark Heath) permission, the terrorists divert the airliner and its hostages to Entebbe Airport in Uganda. The hijackers are joined at Entebbe by more Palestinian militants. After identifying Israeli passengers, the non-Jewish passengers are freed while a series of demands are made, including the release of 40 Palestinian militants held in Israel, in exchange for the hostages.
The Cabinet of Israel, unwilling to give in to terrorist demands, is faced with difficult decisions as their deliberations lead to a top-secret military raid. This commando operation, "Operation Thunderbolt", will be carried out over 2,500 miles (4,000 km) from home and will take place on the Jewish Sabbath.
While still negotiating with the terrorists, who now numbered seven individuals, the Israeli military prepared a group of Lockheed C-130 Hercules transports for the raid. The transports refuelled in Kenya before landing at Entebbe Airport under the cover of darkness. The commandos led by Brigadier General Dan Shomron (Arik Lavie) had to contend with a large armed Ugandan military detachment and used a ruse to overcome the defenses. A black Mercedes limousine had been carried on board and was used to fool sentries that it was the official car that President Amin used on an impromptu visit to the airport.
Nearly complete surprise was achieved but a firefight resulted, ending with all seven terrorists and 45 Ugandan soldiers killed. The hostages were gathered together and most were quickly put on the idling C-130 aircraft. During the raid, one commando (the breach unit commander Yonatan Netanyahu (Yehoram Gaon), brother of future Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu), and three of the hostages, died.
With 102 hostages aboard and on their way to freedom, a group of Israeli commandos remained behind to destroy the Ugandan Air Force MiG-17 and MiG-21 fighters to prevent a retaliation. All the survivors of the attack force then joined in flying back to Israel via Nairobi and Sharm El Sheikh.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0068619
|
Ganja & Hess
|
The film follows Dr. Hess Green (Duane Jones), a wealthy black anthropologist who is doing research on the Myrthians, an ancient African nation of blood drinkers. One night, while staying in Green's lavish mansion, richly decorated with African art, Green's unstable assistant George Meda (writer/director Gunn) threatens suicide. Green successfully talks him down, but later that night Meda attacks and stabs Green with a Myrthian ceremonial dagger, and then kills himself. Green survives, but on discovering the body, drinks Meda's blood; he has become a vampire endowed with immortality and a need for fresh blood. Though he steals several bags of blood from a doctor's office, he finds that he needs fresh victims.
Soon, Meda's estranged wife, Ganja Meda (Marlene Clark), arrives at Green's house searching for her husband. Green and Meda quickly become lovers, and she moves into Green's expansive mansion. When she unwittingly discovers her husband's corpse frozen in Green's wine cellar she is initially upset, but then agrees to marry her host, who turns her into a vampire as well. Ganja is initially horrified by her new existence, but Green teaches her how to survive. Soon, he brings a young man home, who Ganja seduces and then kills. The two vampires dispose of the body in the water.
Eventually, Green becomes disillusioned of this life and resolves to return to the Christian church headed by his chauffeur (Sam Waymon). Returning home, he kills himself by standing in front of a cross. Ganja, though saddened by his death, lives on, presumably continuing her vampiric lifestyle. The film ends with the young man Ganja had earlier killed rising out of the water, naked but alive, and running towards her.
|
allegory
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0026182
|
A Cartoonist's Nightmare
|
It is closing time at an animation studio and all the staff members are calling it a day. Meanwhile, an animator chooses to carry on with his work while a custodian keeps on watch. In his drawing, he sketches a dungeon scene where Beans the Cat encounters a goblin. Weary for working several hours continuously, the animator decides to take a little snooze. Before ending the session, he draws a steel barricade between the two characters to prevent the goblin from reaching Beans. Suddenly, the goblin comes to life and pulls him into the drawing. The goblin carries the animator away, heading somewhere beyond the scene.
Shocked and terrified, the animator tries in vain to break out of the goblin's grasp. He is then brought into a mystic chamber where painted portraits of various villains are displayed on the walls. The villains happened to be the animator's creations as well as those of his colleagues. They too come to life and emerge from their illustrations. As revenge for how he and other cartoonists made them get subdued in the end of each film, the villains give the animator a pencil and force him to draw a deep pit in the floor where they toss him inside. Upon falling in, the animator holds onto a branch, trying to avoid being devoured by the crocodile at the bottom.
Back at the scene still being worked on, Beans still stands behind the barricade, boredly waiting for his artist to come back. Just then, Little Kitty comes to him, offering a lunchbox. Beans is expecting food but is a little surprised to find a saw in the bread. He uses it to cut his way out of the metal fence. Finally freeing himself, he goes around to find his animator.
In no time, Beans finds the chamber where his animator is being tormented. To intervene, he hurls a boot at the goblin, luring the villains away as they try to capture him. Beans manages to lose them somehow when he returns to the place to rescue the troubled man. The animator then receives a pencil from Beans and draws a ladder to climb out the pit. When the villains return, Beans squirts grease from a grease gun between the room's entrance and the pit. The villains slide on the grease mess and fall into the hole, except for the goblin, who attempts to escape from the hole, but is punched by the angry animator into it. To vanquish them for good, the animator removes the hole with an eraser. Beans and the animator shake hands for a work well done.
It turns out that what the animator went through was merely a dream, as he is awaken by the custodian. To his relief, he finds the drawing on his desk unchanged. Not wanting to recall his experience, the animator erases the goblin and the steel barricade, leaving only Beans in the picture. As a compliment to his little friend, he draws a platter with gelatin on top for Beans to eat.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
A Cartoonist's Nightmare was an amusing early Warner Bros.
cartoon.
Just found this rare Warner Bros.-Looney Tunes cartoon on YouTube.
"Supervised" by ex-Disney animator Jack King (though he'd later return there as the new resident Donald Duck helmer), A Cartoonist's Nightmare is one of the few that starred a now-forgotten character named Beans the Cat who was first seen in Friz Freling's color Merrie Melodies short, I Haven't Got a Hat, which also introduced Porky Pig. In this one, with all the other animators having gone home, one particular cartoonist stays on trying to finish his drawings on time.
As he draws bars on Beans to protect him from a monster, the animator goes to sleep and dreams of getting attacked by other villains he created.
It's up to Beans to rescue him...Lots of clever creative ways of drawing and erasing escapes abound here and while nothing hilarious happens, I was constantly amused at this early version of Duck Amuck that Chuck Jones made with Daffy Duck 18 years later!
On that note, I recommend this for any Warner cartoon completists out there..
Beans Amuck.
Sort of a forerunner to Chuck Jones's more famous "Duck Amuck", "A Cartoonist's Nightmare" portrays an animator working on a Beans cartoon.
He falls asleep and ends up in the cartoon, where the monster threatening Beans proceeds to menace the cartoonist.
It's up to Beans to save the day!
This short, directed by Jack King (previously a Disney animator, he soon returned to Disney, after which Frank Tashlin took over his unit), came out right after Friz Freleng's "I Haven't Got a Hat", which debuted not only Beans but also Porky.
If I remember right, Porky and Beans were officially a team (pork and beans, get it?).
Needless to say, Beans quickly dropped off the radar, while Porky gained fame as WB's first bona fide cartoon superstar, although he soon got overtaken by a certain stuttering duck, and later by a wise-guy rabbit.Anyway, this one's OK as a historical reference..
It may be a nightmare for the cartoonist, but it's not for the viewer.
As has been said by me a fair few times already, it is always interesting seeing early Looney Tunes characters that are not the iconic more well known characters that we all know and love, with more interesting and fleshed out personalities.Beans the Cat, the third Looney Tunes star after Bosko and Buddy, never made it big, starring in 10 or 11 cartoons and then retired after a year when Looney Tunes/Warner Brothers/Merrie Melodies started to evolve and become more imaginative and wittier.
This is a shame, because he was a funnier and more compelling character than either Bosko or Buddy (both of which lasted longer), though there are admittedly funnier and more interesting Looney Tunes character around, being neither an annoying stereotype or bland.The cartoonist has a fun role that is done quite inventively here, the frustration and such is done very nicely.
The caricatures of particularly Bob Clampett were funny and will be for anybody familiar with them, a potential problem with caricatures is not knowing who they're caricaturing so it goes over the viewer's head but that is far from the case here.One of the earliest cartoonist/characters on page coming to life cartoons (something done a lot in animation), 'A Cartoonist's Nightmare' is not among the best of them (1953's 'Duck Amuck' is the king of them all) but it's a good one still.
It's not hilarious, the best of it is still very amusing but not much more than that, and not hugely imaginative and fairly slight in terms of story with the conflict obvious.However, the way the drawings come to life are handled in an inventive and lively way and look great.
Everything looks very fluid and detailed and the setting of the animation studio is used to full advantage.
The energy is constant.Not just in the very amusing gags and the characterisation.
But particularly in the cleverly orchestrated, beautifully scored and characterful music score, with songs that are catchy and with remarkably witty lyrics (particularly the song of the villains, who are suitably dastardly).In conclusion, pretty good and interesting.
7/10 Bethany Cox. Monsters are exterminated when teddy bears have their picnic..
Directed by Jack King, "A Cartoonist's Nightmare" is a delightful black-and-white Warner Bros.
cartoon about - dig this - life inside a cartoon studio!
An unidentified animator works after hours to put the finishing touches on a cartoon featuring Beans the cat, a character who never really made it big.
When the animator creates a monster as Beans' nemesis, he very soon wishes he hadn't!
Here are a few of my favorite moments from "A Cartoonist's Nightmare" (DON'T read on until after you have seen this cartoon).
All of the various cartoon villains taunt the animator with alternate lyrics to the popular children's song about a teddy bear's picnic, which we actually hear throughout this film.
The animator gets knocked around to an electrifying sound effect inside the cartoon villains' room.
And as all the other animators leave the studio for the night, we see some fine caricatures of wacky animator/director Bob Clampett and goofy comedian Ed Wynn.In "A Cartoonist's Nightmare", the unidentified animator literally gets grabbed & pulled into his own animation cell by the monster he draws.
A certain contemporary animator, who I won't name, claims that any Warner Bros.
cartoon directed by Bob Clampett has the same effect for him; it grabs him and yanks him into the story!.
How can an "expert" commentator mistake .
. a classically-molded mound of jello--with the typical but Cartoonishly exaggerated attribute of stale hardening--for "ice cream"?
Yet that's the rudimentary sort of haphazardly careless visual error contradicting what 99 out of 100 average viewers would decipher easily with their own eyes that Cartoonbrew.com's Jerry Beck makes at the end of his effort to muddy up, obfuscate, and confuse viewers' comprehension of A CARTOONIST'S NIGHTMARE, the 15th Looney Tune offered on Disc 3 of Volume 6, Warner Bros.' Looney Tunes Golden Collection.
With "experts" such as Beck, this product is about as "Golden" as the toilet seats in Trump Tower!
Mistaking "Bean's" jello "reward" for "ice cream" is but one of many questionable statements that Beck makes on his alternative commentary soundtrack.
(It has about the same ring of Truth as a seven-minute rant by Donald J.
Duck on "Crooked Hillary.") Philosophy 101 students learn such Syllogistic Equations as "Ronald Reagan was a Repub.
Reagan had Alzheimers.
Therefore, all Repubs are demented" (or is it "All demented People are Repubs"?) Who's to say where Mr. Beck fits into this Equation..
Warner Bros' take on Felix the Cat.
"A Cartoonist's Nightmare" is a 7.5-minute short film from pretty much exactly 80 years ago directed by Jack King and featuring the voice work of Billy Bletcher.
Both went on to become very prolific and successful int eh decades afterward.
This is a black-and-white movie, but it's not a silent anymore.
I must say the cat character in here, Beans, really reminded me of Felix the Cat from Disney and it's probably no coincidence.
However, Beans is not half as famous and I'm not even sure if there are more cartoons starring him apart from this one.
It is about a cartoonist who has a dream, in which he joins his fictional characters in their world and needs Beans' help when one of his villains, a scary monster, attacks him.
I wonder to what extent King brought himself in here.
I don't know how he looks and if the character maybe looks the same like him.
Anyway, there were a couple funny moments in this one, but it's nowhere near Warner Bros' best and I can see why it is not really a well-known work.
All in all, not recommended.
|
tt0164003
|
City of Ghosts
|
Jimmy (played by Matt Dillon) is a conman who's been working for a fake insurance company in New York City that is being investigated by the FBI after it cannot pay claims that have poured in after a hurricane. Discovering that his mentor and the mastermind of the scheme, Marvin (James Caan), has skipped the country and gone to Thailand, Jimmy boards a plane with the intention of trying to collect his money.
Once in Bangkok, Jimmy meets Joseph Kaspar (Skarsgård), a partner in the scheme who's living with his Thai katoey companion Rocky (Kyoza). Joseph informs Jimmy that Marvin has moved on to Cambodia, where he's planning an even greater scam. So Jimmy sneaks across the border and makes his way to Phnom Penh.
He checks into a seedy hotel run by a Frenchman named Emile (Gérard Depardieu) and has his passport stolen by another traveller. Later Jimmy has his sunglasses stolen by a macaque monkey.
Needing to travel around, he hires a cyclo driver named Sok (Kem Sereyvuth), who becomes the only person Jimmy can trust. He also meets an NGO worker named Sophie (Natascha McElhone) and dabbles in romance with her while attending a rave party at an ancient temple.
Eventually, Marvin turns up, but the scam he's trying to get together – involving corrupt Cambodian government officials, high-ranking military and the Russian mafia – turns out to be more risky and dangerous than anyone ever imagined, taking Jimmy on a surrealistic odyssey.
|
violence, intrigue, murder, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
We get a sense of the sadness and tragic history of the country, its current condition, and the wonderful warmth of its people (as portrayed by Sok, the cyclo driver, who is absolutely authentic).Some reviewers have complained that Cambodia is portrayed too negatively in this film.
We also see that the crimes of Harry Lime have become institutionalized and common today, not only in the third world (Generals spend tax and aid money building luxurious casinos, while Phnom Penh still looks like a war zone after twenty-five years of peace), but in the United States ("City of Ghosts" opens with massive insurance fraud perpetrated in the U.S. by Marvin).There is more depth to "City of Ghosts" than first meets the eye.
Matt Dillon makes his directorial debut with "City of Ghosts", the moody tale of Jimmy Cremmins, a con man seeking redemption in Cambodia.
Dillon's was the first film to be shot in Cambodia since the 1960s, and the unfamiliar setting contributes much to the movie's allure.
"City of Ghosts" has a remarkable look and feel that lend it resonance and lead one to anticipate Dillon's further outings as a director.The actors fit nicely into their roles and deliver strong performances.
Sereyvuth Kem, a real-life Cambodian cyclo driver, leaves a lasting impression as Jimmy's loyal friend Sok. The film's soundtrack- a heady international collection of pop music mixed with Tyler Bates' evocative score - adds another layer to the already-rich atmosphere.
Exotic, but you wouldn't want to live there, at least the parts shown in this film!Although showing a lot of dingy city scenes, the Cambodian scenery was fascinating.
There are so many bizarre characters in here, nobody that you can really trust, that it keeps you on edge.Another odd thing about this film: it's quite a mixture of international actors: Dillon and James Caan, both from the United States; Natasha Melhone from Great Britain, Gerald Depardieu from France, Stellan Skarggard from Sweden and Kem Sereyvuth from Cambodia.
The latter is the only truly nice person in the whole movie, playing Dillon's faithful guide, "Sok."The movie, which plays like a film noir, gets a bit ugly at the end but is well worth your time..
If all City of Ghosts was was a travelogue of postwar Cambodia it would be an accomplishment, but it is in its own way a well built film noir in a very unusual, very appropriate setting.
Matt Dillon's directorial debut is a film noir of intrigue and sentiments - "Both Sides Now" in a Cambodian setting, with strong cast: Caan, Depardieu, Skarsgård.
"City of Ghosts" works like a film noir suspense thriller, Dillon and co-writer Barry Gifford also layered human drama into the mix.
No wonder I felt some (Twin Peaks-like) Lynch atmosphere when Caan and Skarsgård were at some remote location - kinda eerie and sinister with the camera approach suggesting foreboding elements a-lurking.I like the film right from the start - intrigue is established in the prologue: the TV news, the simple and brief office scenes - within minutes we are given the backdrop to the story yet to unfold.
"City of Ghosts" must be a rewarding experience for him to shoot on location at Cambodia and Thailand, besides Canada and New York.Bravo to Matt Dillon's persistence (6 years) in realizing this first film.
After watching, though, I thought the comments were a little harsh.Criticism's included under developed characters, thin plot, unexplained actions, and a poor performance by Matt Dillon.
Set in Cambodia a generation after a bloody revolution and civil war, this film follows the adventures of a smalltime crook, Jimmy, who is tracking down an older man responsible for an insurance scam and who has absconded with the money.
He arrives in a country full of gangsters and opportunist thieves - not knowing who to trust, he is robbed and beaten up as often as any hero of a film noir movie.Modern Cambodia is depicted as a hell on Earth - with the exception of a rickshaw driver, Suk, the locals are shown as violent and untrustworthy.
The love interest seems tacked on - and a reason for having a female character - but gives Jimmy an incentive to abandon his life of crime and go straight.An interesting film, worth a look..
The Cambodian setting really amounts to another character in the film, and it's obvious that Matt Dillon has a real love of the country and the people.
The film moves at a somewhat slow pace, giving the story and characters lots of time to develop.
Having traveled in the third world I have to say that the movie captures perfectly the atmosphere of a place that is so far away that it could exist in another space and time as well as all the strange characters that tend to inhabit places like these.
May be the movie does not do a good enough job of explaining things to those who have never visited a place with a different like Cambodia but I don't think it has to.
Part of the problem with the script may come from the fact that Dillon attempted to pack so much material into it - simultaneously making the protagonist a fully realized and sympathetic character and causing some important plot points such as those illustrating the developing romance between Dillon and McElhone to appear as little more than distracting loose threads.Dillon and Caan have been working together since Dillon was nine years old.
After one of these schemes goes bad, Dillon flees the US to try to find Caan in P'Nom Phen, Cambodia, where most of the story takes place.
Matt's role character is the, "wrong place wrong time sort of guy" (What a great line!) likable and looking for an out and a release from the 6 lifetimes of bad Karma.
This feature film (his first as a director), which he co-wrote and stars in, is extremely atmospheric and has an intriguingly twisty plot, vivid characters, terrific editing (one nighttime scene, in which a minor character is unexpectedly stabbed, is especially effective), and a nice adult, amoral point of view.
Even Roger Ebert said the plot is not nearly as attention grabbing as the impressive setting, cinematography and mood."Cityu of Ghosts" is reportedly the first major motion picture to be shot in Cambodia since the 1960s, and Dillon & his filmmaking crew didn't skimp on finding the best settings.
The locations can best be summed up by a line from the film when James Caan, who is occupying the ex-governor's estate, says "What do you think?" To which someone answers, "Could use a coat of paint" and Caan fires back, "The entire country could use a coat of paint." In other words, the locations are full of majesty and grandeur but with a raw, unkempt appearance that only add to the charm.Some of my favorite scenes were at the tavern and hotel of innkeeper Emile (Gerard Depardieu), again reminding me of Bogart's "Rick's" in Casablanca.
Matt Dillon directs and co-writes and as such manages to create many worthwhile scenes with the help of some heavyweight friends such as Gérard Depardieu and James Caan and Natascha McElhone.
I loved the film as much for its flaws as its strengths and it still haunts me like a good ghost should.If you've never visited Phnom Penh (or a similar city) then it may be a bit hard to fathom.
The first thing my girlfriend said after watching this Dillon directed film was "wow, I feel like I've been to Cambodia!" City of Ghosts is packed with atmosphere.
For someone who started his career as a teenage pretty-boy actor, Dillon has taken a lot of chances over the years, playing some unsympathetic characters in offbeat movies.
Finally, this movie is shot on Location in Both Bangkok Thailand and Cambodia making for an incredibly Original film experience for North American audiences.
I have never liked Gerard Depardieu in a single thing he has done but he SHINES and is without a doubt Fantastic here as a Disgruntled Hotel Operator in Phnom Pen. Of all of the movies I have seen in the Past 12 years, this was the Single Most Original and Matt Dillon has, weather anyone likes it or not, created a social masterpiece with a message that is so relevant in today's world it needs to be required viewing for people all over the world !!!
Don't be put off by the IMDb score (currently 5.9), take a look at the reviews and you'll see that a lot of viewers loved it.While it is a far from perfect movie, and I can see why the majority of people wouldn't really enjoy it, it does contain atmospheric qualities rarely found in modern films.
The performances are excellent and Matt Dillon can take pride in the fact that while the City of Ghosts was never a mainstream hit, he has made a movie that offers something others don't..
It stars Matt Dillon, James Caan and Stellan Skaarsgard and is shot almost entirely in Cambodia.
As a matter of fact, it has a lot of great qualities, but somehow still doesn't capture the viewer in the way you would want it to.Aside from a sadly two-dimensional and useless Natasha McElhone love-interest character, the rest of the characters in the film are well-developed and well-played.
In Dillon's haste to get the plot rolling, he and his screen writing partner, Barry Gifford neglected to get us to care about or like the main character of Jimmy.
But Jimmy gets more than he bargained for when - against a backdrop of raw, dangerous beauty and ever-shifting loyalties - Marvin draws him into a web of deceit and murder from which there may be no way out!" according to the DVD sleeve's synopsis.Matt Dillon promisingly joins the multi-tasking actor ranks, as the director, star, and co-writer of "City of Ghosts".
Mr. Dillon and photographer Jim Denault make Cambodia look darkly beautiful, with the film's soundtrack music helping to set the mood.Father figuring James Caan (as Marvin), cool blonde Natascha McElhone (as Sophie), and baby wielding Gérard Depardieu (as Emile) try to keep up with Kem Sereyvuth (as Sok) and the local crowd.
Dillon plays with a neat neo-noir style that harkens back (in a good way) to Carol Reed's "Third Man" (post-Khmer Rouge Cambodia this time instead of post-WWII Vienna).
The only real interesting character in the film was the belligerent bartender, played by Gerard Depardieu.The movie becomes somewhat complex, but they give you few hints to sort out the facts as you go along, and you get the feeling that everyone is lying to everyone else, which simply gets annoying.
I would have liked to see this drive Matt Dillon's character as crazy as it did me, but instead he keeps it pretty monotone throughout the entire film, never showing any extreme emotion despite the extreme situations he finds himself in.
Loving movies like I do, this was the one of the best of all possible worlds in which to see this movie - it didn't help."City of Ghosts" is Matt Dillion's first shot at directing and writing a film and it shows.
Matt Dillon may be a good director, and he definitely is an excellent actor, but he shouldn't try to be both at once.
This might have worked except for the fact that the film is so long winded that it is easy to forget your question by the time the answer arrives.The plot is basically that of a New York insurance broker who flies to Cambodia to escape a scandal that is rocking North America.
In Cambodia, Dillon's character, Jimmy, tries to find his former business partner, and insinuated father portrayed by James Caan.
There's a vague love interest (the ever beautiful Natasha McElhone, always terrific), a jovial innkeeper (Gerard Depardieu) and other wayward souls who flit in and out of the proceedings, all amidst this authentic South Pacific setting (Dillon filmed on location in Cambodia, which does wonders for atmosphere).
He knows his way around, understands his low life customers, who to deal with, which palms to grease and more importantly - when.Other main characters comprise the not -quite-good guy around whom the story is built, the successful con man who might have gone in for one con too many, the corrupt general, the bar girls (boys) and of course, the decent clean western girl visiting old temples and naively treading her delicate way through the mud and filth.Cambodia is shown as a near derelict run down ruin of a place, crumbling buildings, dirt roads, rubbish strewn everywhere, although there are some glimpses of lovely homes and attractive gardens.
As one of the characters in this monsoon thriller said, "the whole country could use a coat of paint." Matt Dillon is the insurance executive caught up in a scandal that he needs to rectify, maybe, if he can locate the company chief executive, the mysterious and shifty Marvin.
Honestly I never really thought of Matt Dillon as much more than a pretty boy actor until City of Ghosts.
The problem with a film peopled with characters you don't care for is that it leaves you feeling like you've spent two hours in the company of...
Perhaps Matt Dillon should have removed himself from acting duties in the film in order to concentrate on developing a story worth telling..
A typical Hollywood product with good technicals and art but poor humanistics and character depth, Dillon's "City of Ghosts" does appear to try to avoid cheap sex and violence while embracing the beauty of Cambodia.
I think Matt Damon should stay in front of the camera - he has little talent for direction.Matt Dillon plays Jimmy, who is associated with Marvin (James Caan) - the pair are scam artists.
Jimmy is tired of the life and wants out, though he doesn't care about his cut from the insurance deal.I think the idea was Dillon would play this world-weary criminal who tries to save his mentor and instead falls in love with a beautiful idealist, but the film is too muddled in its presentation to make that story work.
And Jimmy's conversion to the honest life just seems flat.Matt Dillon does a pretty good job of acting, even if he's stuck with his own writing.
Mat Dillon's first attempt at directing a film is the City of Ghosts, a movie about Jimmy, a con man who's out to get his hefty share of an insurance scam in Cambodia, unaware of the dangers he is about to face.Dillon doesn't fail to capture the beauty and culture of Cambodia, the film making is masterful.
CITY OF GHOSTS (2003) *** Matt Dillon, James Caan, Natascha McElhone, Stellan Skarsgard, Gerard Depardieu, Kem Sereyvuth, Rose Byrne, Shawn Andrews, Chalee Sankhavesa, Christopher Curry, Kyoza.
Dillon uses great economy in his lean yet focused direction and is helped immeasurably by an eclectic cast (especially Depardieu as a blustery French expat barkeep and a waxy, weaselly turn by Skarsgard as Caan's partner in chicanery).The story comes across as a Graham Greene novel for the poor man yet it has its own charm of the unexpected menace lurking about like its humid locales..
This was more eye candy for me than Natascha McElhone's perfunctory all-weather-resistant love interest for Matt Dillon.Dillon does get knocked around enough to make this look on the surface like a film noir, but I really think it is a meditation on karma.
Caan's character ends up telling this a little too explicitly, but the film did an admirable job of showing it.Not on par with Duvall's "The Apostle" (a must see), but I'd like to see Dillon find another county or concept he falls in love with and makes a film of.
after watching the movie, i really had the impression that matt dillon just terribly wanted to make a movie in cambodia cause he was somehow fascinated with the place (who wouldn´t be?) and then just scrambled a story together, taking obvious bits and pieces from here and there, including the completely superfluous love interest part just cause that´s what movies do not because it made sense for the story.there´s some reflection going on here about the role of foreigners in a country like cambodia, which i think is a worthy and extremely interesting subject.
Gerard Depardieu, Natasha McElhone, James Caan, and Matt himself are good, but not at their best.
However, if you're looking for mind-bending intrigue
.well, maybe this isn't it either.Matt Dillon's first attempt at directing a movie isn't going to win him any awards; even with James Caan in a starring role.
The acting is passable on a few occasions, and the atmosphere created by the on-location filming, using local actors, gives one a very realistic feel for the culture and people who live in Cambodia.
He knows a guy named Melvin is behind this scam, which he's tied into somehow himself, and he skips the country to go to Thailand where he meets sweaty, nervous Casper (Stellan Skarsgård) in Bangkok, who tells him Melvin (James Caan, Dillon's real dad in the story) is in Cambodia.
Story is about an American named Jimmy Cremming (Matt Dillon) who's involved in an insurance scam and after the FBI tells him not to leave the country...he does.
When asked why he would get involved with something like that Jimmy reveals that Marvin is in fact his father.This is Matt Dillon's feature film debut as a director and he also wrote the script which is the part of the film that really needed more work.
The cinematography is good as you would expect when films are made in exotic locations but the camera also captures real moments and people in the streets that establishes an authentic mood for where this story is taking place.
There was never any attempt to have interesting interactions between James Caan and Matt Dillon's characters.
I like the actors when I see them in other movies, they are all talented, but they aren't asked to do anything especially difficult in terms of character development or moving along the story.
|
tt0278295
|
All About the Benjamins
|
Tyson Bucum (Ice Cube), a maverick bounty hunter, is out to capture a petty drug dealer, Lil J (Anthony Michael Hall). Bucum confronts Lil J in his trailer home and nearly handcuffs him, but Lil J's girlfriend, who wields a shotgun, recklessly shoots at Bucum. Bucum manages to tackle Lil J's girlfriend and arrest Lil J. Bucum's boss Martinez (Anthony Giaimo), however, is not pleased with Bucum and pays him less than expected. After a brief conversation about the lottery with his attractive co-worker Pam (Valerie Rae Miller), Bucum learns from Martinez that he must capture a con man named Reggie Wright (Mike Epps), whom Bucum has captured three times prior.
Bucum sees Reggie at a convenience store but fails to catch him after a long chase through Miami. Meanwhile, during a photoshoot, diamond thieves Julian (Roger Guenveur Smith) and Ursula (Carmen Chaplin) are posing as a photographer and model until a Mr. Barkley arrives. The duo murder the co-photographer, the makeup artist and Barkley's bodyguards, much to Barkley's surprise. Barkley is then shot in the head after a brief dialogue with Julian for murdering the witnesses. They then retrieve diamonds from the shoot. Bucum tracks down Reggie again and chases him until he remains unnoticed since he is hidden in a van. The thieves comes down, upon running into him instantly by accident, shoots at Bucum, who shoots back in response, and escapes, unbeknownst to them that Reggie is hidden. In a boatyard, the thieves finds Reggie in the van and shoot at him when he escapes, leaving his wallet behind, which is picked up by Juilian. At the crime scene, Martinez is fed up of Bucum's attempts and orders him to stay away from Reggie.
In Reggie's apartment, Reggie and his girlfriend Gina (Eva Mendes) eventually win the lottery, only to find out that Reggie lost the latter, which was in Reggie's wallet. In the boatyard, Julian and Ursula are yelled at by their boss Williamson (Tommy Flanagan), having told him that the diamonds they retrieved from the shoot were fake. Out of frustration of not getting the diamonds, Williamson responds by shooting Julian in the arm, severely wounding him, which is later enclosed in an arm brace. Reggie is soon captured by Bucum during an attempt to retrieve his wallet and while in the car, Reggie manages to convince Bucum to find his wallet and find the thieves. At the boatyard, Bucum and Reggie realizes that the van is unclear of its location, so Bucum tries to look into the connection of the photo shoot and the van, while Reggie is handcuffed to his bed with Gina. Julian, in a psychopathic state, goes after Reggie. He arrives at the apartment, and is knocked unconscious by Bucum, having anticipated him coming after Reggie. The duo then decides to torture Julian into answers by pending a screwdriver into Julian's arm brace, which can rip through his skin. Julian then reveals Williamson's name. Bucum awaits in the boatyard of Williamson's boat dealership and poses as a customer. This soon fails, so the duo decides to go to the Barkley residence. At the house, they find a dead Mrs. Barkley, a man named Roscoe who was the one who murdered Mrs. Barkley, and attacks Bucum (only to be knocked out by Reggie), eventually finding the diamonds in a fish tank. They return to Bucum's apartment and discover that Williamson has kidnapped Gina.
In response, they roll a car into Williamson's boat dealership with Julian and Roscoe, tied up and gagged in the trunk. Willamson finds a tape recorder that informs him to meet Reggie and Bucum at a dog track with Gina to exchange for the diamonds. This goes successful with Pam posing as a janitor, Reggie revealing the diamonds, and Bucum taking position as sniper in a dog tracksman disguise to take out a sniper working for Williamson until Reggie flips the diamonds off of Williamson's hands leading to a shootout and chase. During the chase, Williamson pulls out a bazooka and opens fire, missing Bucum, Reggie, Gina and Pam but instead blowing up a nearby fish truck. He escapes, and Bucum and Reggie are so fed up with the plan that they decide to break up their partnership . Pam convinces Bucum to talk to Reggie and they make up again. The duo tracks Williamson to a boat dock in which Gina and Pam await behind them in the car. Bucum gives Reggie a taser since Reggie accidentally dropped one of Bucum's guns into the ocean. On the boat, as Bucum leaves, he sees Pam and Gina running away, having knocked out two henchman by pushing a lifeboat in their direction. Meanwhile, Reggie finds his wallet and recovers the lottery ticket, but is soon caught by Williamson and Ursula and he even forces Reggie to take his money on the boat. Bucum, taking Ursula as a hostage, catches up with them. Williamson, in response, kills Ursula by shooting her in the head and wounds Reggie, leading to a fight as the boat speeds up. Williamson is knocked out by the boat's speed and the boat crashes onto shore. Bucum and Reggie reunite until Williamson, badly injured, attacks Bucum. Reggie tases him and Bucum shoots Williamson to death multiple times. Later, Bucum and Reggie are figuring out what to do next but the coast guards are coming, and Bucum is forced to handcuff Reggie and hide the money.
Six weeks later, Reggie is released from prison, and Bucum, who has a new car and spending money along with Gina and Pam, shows Reggie the ticket. The film ends as the quarter, along with two elderly con associates of Reggie, skiing on the boat through the ocean.
|
violence, humor, comedy
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Ice Cube is always good at his characters.
Ice Cube plays a similar character that he does in most of his films, the hard ass smart ass, but it works well with his role.
They both have pretty good comedic performances which along side the action directing makes a decent/ tolerable action comedy.Its not a fantastic film by any means, and though I said they had good comedic performances, the acting wasn't that great.
The directing and writing is also nothing special, it works here, but that's about all you can say about itAll about the Benjamins is a pretty average and predictable action comedy but it was fun and funny.
If you are a fan of Next Friday and Friday After Next, you will probably enjoy this "fourth installment." It's very similar in style and definitely similar performances by Cube and Epps.
Though it may appear as a Friday style film, All About the Benjamins is far from the comedy franchise as possible.
Instead of being a slacker, buddy comedy, it's an action cop film similar to 48 Hours or Beverly Hills Cop. It isn't necessarily bad, but it takes a path I didn't expect.
It's in a four pack that includes all Ice Cube movies, and it stars Mike Epps as well.
It's kind of tilting on the edge.Bucum (Cube) is a bounty hunter who's goal is to get money to open his own investigation firm.
After winning big on the lottery, but losing the ticket in the back of a van with diamonds thieves, Bucum and Reggie have no choice but to work together to get the thieves and retrieve the lottery ticket so Reggie can claim his riches.It reminds me of a film I watched not too long ago called Lottery Ticket that also stars Cube, about a young man trying to survive a weekend with a $370 million lottery ticket the whole neighborhood is aware of.
Ice Cube and Mike Epps made a great duo in Next Friday and Friday After Next, and had numerous dialog scenes in the film that were utterly hilarious and clever.
This film relies too much on action movie clichés, and a drawn out plot.
I'm grading on behalf of the film's plot, characters action scenes, and suspense.
But so decent they were forgettable.Starring: Ice Cube, Mike Epps, Eva Mendes, Tommy Flanagan, Carmen Chaplin, Valarie Rae Miller, Roger Guenveur Smith, and Anthony Michael Hall.
This was a another great partnership of Mike Epps and Ice Cube.
Ice Cube has certainly come a long way and is proving to be a very versatile actor.
I am becoming more and more a fan of Ice Cube's movies, he is really not a bad writer or a director.
My game ball for best acting goes to Eva Mendes who played Epps' character's girlfriend Gina who wins the lottery at the beginning of the movie.
Unfortunately for her, Reggie (Mike Epps) loses the ticket while being chased by Bucum (Ice Cube).
It becomes kind of a running "gag" thorough the movie that he is always looking for his missing lottery ticket.
I heard ahead of time that Tommy Flanagan was supposed to play a different kind of tougher villain from Ice Cube, but frankly I was not impressed.
But last night I watched from a more critical stance than usual and found some flaws in this movie that I thought was very good.
First of all, I love Ice Cube and what he's done with his career and how he branched off from music to movies.
At times his jokes can fall flat, but the hilarity of his funny moments make up for the missteps.I watched 'All About the Benjamins' last night and I was in stitches laughing at the shower torture scene.
Oddly enough, it wasn't Ice Cube, Mike Epps, or even the torture that I found funny.
When he mouthed off at Mike Epps' character (Reggie) I was rolling all over the place uncontrollably.
I was never bored and I will watch this movie many more times in the future.
Ice Cube should employ better writers in the future.
Half the time when I don't expect much from a movie, I become oddly surprised as it turns out to be much better than I assumed.
But the other half of the time, I'm exactly right and the movie turns out to be just as bad as I assumed.
Prior to watching the film, I wasn't aware that Ice Cube co-wrote the script.
Sure, I liked the first two "Friday" movies, but they're simply guilty pleasures.
Rappers can barely write comedies; they sure as hell can't write action movies!
You watch Eddie Murphy's invasion of the redneck bar in "48 Hours" and you compare it to any of the low-brow antics Epps pulls off in this movie, and THEN look into my eyes and tell me he's the next Eddie Murphy!
Murphy's mouth is ten times filthier than his, but his humor is often at least somewhat intelligent (if you watch the films of his hayday like "Coming to America" and "48 Hours," and not some of his lame recent work like "I Spy" and "Showtime").
These movies are making us think that only low-brow comedies like this can make black people laugh.
After sitting through "All About the Benjamins" it's a real enjoyable action/comedy.
This is the story of a bounty hunter (Ice Cube, who also co-wrote with first-time screenwriter Ron Lang and co-produced) who's on the pursuit of a bail jumper ("Next Friday" co-star Mike Epps) and their footchase ends up at drop-off for a major diamond where the killers left a few dead bodies in the process.
And, Epps, is real hilarious in this movie.
And, Ice Cube shows a lot more comedic talents than he did in the last two "Fridays".
I feel that this is one of the most plot-driven movies Ice Cube has done since "Players Club".
And, if you look hard at "All About the Benjamins" it's not just an Ice Cube movie.
This fish out of water story is been done too many times but it works thanks to Cube's and Epps' performances..
A professional bounty hunter (Ice Cube) is in the search of a two-bit hustler (Mike Epps).
The bounty hunter and the hustler are mixed up with a diamond heist, a lost winning lottery ticket and one thing become clear...
The film's has an familiar storytelling but if it wasn't for Cube's and Epps' likable performances, the film would have been a real mess.DVD has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an strong DTS 5.1 Surround Sound (Also in Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound).
The film has an fine music score by John Murphy (28 Days Later) and an good looking cinematography work by Glen MacPherson (Exit Wounds, Romeo Must Die, Walking Tall-2004).
It is worth seeing, especially if you are a fan of Cube's or Epps' films.
It is better then the previous releases, but it is just another weak movie with a lot of shootings, stolen diamonds, super bounty hunters, stolen money and one or two good looking women taking very important roles.
Tyson Bucum (Ice Cube) is a Miami independent bounty hunter.
His next job is con man Reggie Wright (Mike Epps) whom he caught three times before already.
Then to his horror, Reggie finds his winning lottery ticket for the $60 million jackpot is lost with his wallet.This tries to be a mad-cap irreverent wild action caper.
I love Ice Cube and Mike Epps is fun sometimes.
It's an action film with a few shots of comedy that actually delivers where it counts.
Ice Cube plays it pretty straight here (like all of his other movies, but that's why we love him), and Mike Epps seems to be channeling Chris Tucker.
I liked Friday and Next Friday, they had an ok story with some comedy thrown in, but this movie blows them away.If you haven't seen this movie and you're trying to pick out something good to rent, get this one for sure..
"All About the Benjamins" is a fast and loose action/comedy caper about a bounty hunter (Ice Cube, who also co-wrote the script with Ron Lang and co-produced) who's on the trail of his latest bail jumper (Mike Epps) and their chase ends up at a drop-off for a diamond heist where a dead bodies pop up in the process.
Ice Cube does a better comedic performance than he has done in the last two "Fridays" and is becoming a better leading man.
"All About the Benjamins" in a very offbeat but good action/comedy and is one of the most must-see movies of the spring..
It overextends its constricted script with excessive amounts of strained comedy and hackneyed action, and as a result it winds up sacrificing the proverbial feet of efficient storytelling and character development.Ice Cube (who co-wrote the screenplay with Ronald Lang) is Bucum Jackson, a Miami bounty hunter who hopes to someday open his own private investigation agency.
(In the meantime, he complains about his low-paying assignments while buying $600 tropical fish.) One of his menial jobs includes relentlessly chasing con man Reggie Wright (Mike Epps).
It fails as a comedy, a buddy movie, and an action thriller, and it most definitely fails as quality entertainment, relying heavily on endless chase scenes, Epps' grating slapstick routine, and Cube's scowling facade in order to conceal the numerous absurdities and lack of suspense in the plot.
Ice Cube has nothing to do here except stare angrily at Epps' overacting in between knocking a few heads.
Meanwhile, Bucum's accomplice Pam (Valarie Rae Miller) and Reggie's girlfriend Gina (Eva Mendes) are unfortunately nothing more than armpieces in skimpy outfits who spend time looking offended at their partners' actions.It's appropriate that a boat storage warehouse plays a significant role in this movie that ends up sinking in an ocean of implausibility.
(It also spawns the film's only line that contains a shred of humor: "You bite my nipple again and I'll kill you!")"Benjamins' " greatest sin, however, is that it's a blatant insult to viewers' intelligence that's encased in a box of cheap laughs, due to the fact that it tries to make heroes out of two greedy individuals who commit murder, assault, burglary, and wrongful imprisonment, among other things, in their pursuit of stolen diamonds that don't even belong to them in the first place - and then treats their mission as if they're participating in some great cause.
Even worse, the filmmakers shamelessly want us to empathize with these guys during an obligatory moment in which they spill their deepest feelings to each other during a lull in the action.One of the worst films of the year, "All About the Benjamins" will appeal to those who have an affinity for movies with appalling storylines chock full of abysmal dialogue and repugnant characters.
Do not give it your undivided attention, because it doesn't deserve it.It seems like everyone realized they weren't making a very good movie and phoned it in accordingly.
No one, even the normally enjoyable Ice Cube, ever breaks a sweat trying to get this movie off the ground.If you held this flick up to your ear, you'd hear the ocean.
To be fair, Ice Cube has done the best he could with All About the Benjamins.
Not as funny as you'd think, especially from the constant annoyance from Epps, but the movie provides basic entertainment and accomplishes it's goal- obscene, action comedy for a weekend afternoon.
It isn't funny at any point, the characters are paper thin, and largely doesn't have a point.Ice Cube and Mike Epps don't really do much as a comedy duo in this movie, it seems that they worked well in the Friday 2 and 3 but just kind of phoned it in for this one.
This would be probably be a 3 star rating from me if I didn't like Ice Cube and Mike Epps.
Ice cube is a VERY bad actor, well all of the actors of this movie are bad.
only instead of people with huge afros going on about "jive turkeys" we hear from people with cornrows (Ice Cube's wearing really bad extentions in this flop) bouncing around saying things like "bling bling" and it's well..."all about the bengamins".
mike epps once again plays the loud mouth "brotha" from the streets who's a con man...suprised.
Great action film with load of comedy.
Ice Cube in the lead role proves his action star status and his writing talent(he co-wrote the sciprt.) Mike Epps in the second lead continues to make a name for himself as a very funny comic and sidekick.
Kevin Bray who has directed videos for N'Sync , 112 and Jagged Edge makes a good debut with this fun, upbeat action comedy.
Ice Cube is pretty good.
Ice Cube is entertaining in this movie.
Ice Cube is a bounty hunter out to get his man for some money, while the guy he's after just won the lottery.
One of the funnier scenes is in the beginning when Ice Cube uses a shock gun on a guy in a place you wouldn't want it to be used!
Mike Epps was believably upset when he loses his ticket or gets arrested by Ice Cube.
I am not a huge fan of Ice Cube anymore but I have to say that his acting in this movie was better than his performance in say, Anaconda.
This movie was A LOT better than I would have expected.
He plays the perfect straight man to a very Very funny Mike Epps.
The story sucked, ice cube...predictable, Flanagan, a real man raised in the streets of Glasgow, and that is where he get is his intensity..
Frankly I am getting really sick of all these predictable bad boy movies.
The same old bad guys are getting as predictable as the films they appear in, Yea we all love Al Pacino but audition this Flanagan in a modern version Scare face and he might just shock you.
This mismatched buddy movie is every bit as fast, funny and action packed as its triler suggested and prooves that money is really the root of all evil.
Ice Cube again solidifies himself as the best muscian turned actor as Bucum, a bounty hunter who will do anything to make a quick buck, but gets more than he bargained for when he is sent to bring in Reggie (Mike Epps), a low life street hustler who accidently gets involved with a bunch of blood thirsty diamond crooks who almost kill BUcum while he is looking for Reggie.
Epps is generally goofy and reminds me a lot like Eddie Murphy or Chris Tucker, while still being undeniably hilarious but it is Cube who is the master of his own game as he gives a greatly mastered comedic performance.
For everyone who couldn't get enough of Money Talks and loved Next Friday, this movie delivers just what the doctor ordered..
this movie was not as good as expected.
why ice cube would do another movie with mike epps is baffling to me.
Not Flanagan's best nor Ice Cube's.
Could have been funnier if more effort was spent on "comedy" but definately doesn't qualify as an action film.
Co-written, co-produced and starring Ice Cube.
Ice Cube is the best thing about Ghosts of Mars and he owns Friday and Next Friday.
Here, he's a bounty hunter in Miami whose prey loses a winning lottery ticket in the middle of a diamond theft by an evil criminal mastermind.Michael Epps (Omar's brother maybe?) is quite good.
The ending however was a little too The Whole Nine Yards for me.Great action sequences, nasty villains and good guys to root for.
Cube and Epps make terrific team.
Ice Cube has definitely flipped the script.
"All About The Benjamins" isn't a great movie by any means, but it validates tomorrow's newest duo - Cube and Epps.
When Mike Epps teamed with the Cube on "Next Friday", I thought it was gimmicky.
I enjoyed this film about a bounty hunter (Ice T) who chases a con man who keeps eluding him.
When the con man wins the mega lottery and then loses his ticket (in the boat of a nasty villain) he tries to enlist the aid of Ice T to get it back.
Unfortunately for him, Ice T does not believe him about the ticket and is not only interested in collecting the bounty for the con man and also recovering several million in diamonds that a bad guy has.Eventually, Ice T starts to believe the con man and they somewhat work together but Ice T maintains a short leash on him until he can beat the villain and get the diamonds.There are some really hilarious scenes and both Ice T and the con man put in excellent performances.An overlooked gem that is as good as any of the Lethal Weapon films!.
First off, there is no one in the movie named Benjamin.
The opening scene is Ice Cube, as a bounty hunter (Bukum, pronounced Book-em), going into a red neck trailer park to capture his bounty.
As it turns out this is an NRA trailer park and Ice Cube is shot at by the yahoo's girlfriend (foot is in a cast) as well as some old lady next door.
The secretary at the bail bond's place wants to be Ice Cube's partner, although he would rather go alone.
During the chase Epps and Bukum end up at a murder scene over some diamonds.
Now to make this more interesting it seems Epps has a winning lottery ticket worth $60 million, but through a series of events it ends up in the hands of the murderers.
Ice Cube is leery about Epps' story and uses him to go after the murderers.The movie is funny and keeps moving.
The character of Epps as a talkative, cowardly, pretending to be brave con artist compliments the series role of Ice Cube.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.