5 comments about Escape From Alcatraz.

1. This was the second movie I have bought on Amazon and I am VERY Pleased! The condition of both were new and they were in great condition and good movies! VT



2. I have this DVD and I am waiting and hoping PARAMOUNT will make a Special Edition of this movie with a new Anamorphic (16x9) widescreen presentation and interview and commentary with Clint Eastwood before it's too late.



3. The famous island prison of Alcatraz has been the basis for more than just one film that was based on actual events that happened there. Perhaps the most famous of all is "Escape From Alcatraz" starring Clint Eastwood. Eastwood plays the part of Frank Morris, who along with several other inmates was famous for being the only ones to effectively escape from the prison. Although the results of that 1962 feat resulted in nothing more than tattered lifejackets washed up in far away places and the F.B.I. deeming them dead in the water, the mystery surrounding their whereabouts and the ingenuity used in making an impossible escape possible, still makes for a fascinating drama.
   
   Director Don Siegel can be applauded here for bringing to the forefront a wide variety of cons who all have a story, personality and ultimately become a part, in one way or another, of the portrayal of Frank Morris and his days on the rock. The period setting is good and shows some hard luck cons as well as downright evildoers like the one known as "Wolf", who is an antagonist of Frank's throughout the film. The lines of racial tension are shown very believable scenes while still providing a building friendship between Frank and the con known as English. Frank Ward plays John Anglin and does a great job of being a somewhat happy go lucky fella whose brother is also at the rock with him. Together, the brothers soon realize they share the same goal as Frank Morris...to break out of the rock.
   
   Although the disc lacks in special features (no bio or interviews, no behind the scenes) it is still a classic Clint Eastwood movie and one that has to rate in the top five prison films of all time. Good to also note is Larry Hankin, who plays the part of one of the planners known as Charley Butts. Butts has a cell next to Morris and is an integral part of the films sequences of Morris executing his plan of escape. In the actual escape, this man was known as Allen West, and Hankin's facial features when shown next to West are uncannily similar, for the two could almost pass as twin brothers.
   
   You'll meet Doc the painter, whose own sanity is challenged greatly by the smarmy Warden (Patrick McGoohan) who is not so much of a hard case as someone who systematically does anything he can to mess with the minds of the prisoners, taking away anything that might possibly make them happy. The film has many tense moments while the chance; timing and sometimes pure luck scenarios are played out. The teamwork and trust between these men are perhaps what makes it so unreal, and yet so thrilling at the same time.
   
   The ending will leave some wondering...did Frank Morris make it out? Eastwood can be commended here for an excellent job, and alongside Frank Ward and Jack Thibeau (who played Clarence Anglin) the three help bring the biggest prison break in American History to the big screen.



4. This movie keeps you interested with the distinct characters. Love learning the cleverness of these desperate felons to prevail escape.



5. The vast majority of Eastwood movies are great and what is there to not like about this one? Clint is once again great, as usual, and you find yourself loving every minute he gets over on "the man." Love the scene where he punches out a fellow con who wants to kill him. If you love Dirty Harry or the Eiger Sanction you will love this one also.

5 comments about Baby Einstein - Baby Noah - Animal Expedition.

1. My son love this DVD, at last we have found something that he will watch instead of "Baby McDonald". He gets very excited when he hears the opening music and when the puppets come on. The DVD takes you all over the world to discover the animals that live there. It is a great learning tool and has pleasant music which, so far hasnt got to annoying.



2. The name "Baby Einstein" can lull you into thinking it's okay or even good for babies to watch t.v., but the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no television at all to children under 2 because so many studies have proven its harmful effects on children. Studies have shown that:
   
   - for every hour of television a baby watches a day, their chances of acquiring an attention deficit disorder increases by 10%.
   - among babies ages 8 months to 16 months, every hour spent daily watching programs such as 'Brainy Baby' or 'Baby Einstein' translated into six to eight fewer words in their vocabularies as compared with other children their age."
   - brain wave activity in babies is slower when watching television than when sleeping.
   
   I believe television should be used SPARINGLY and with caution, and without any delusions of it increasing baby's intelligence. As for making them more intelligent, Dr. William Sears says, "relationships, not things, make babies smarter." The easiest way to make babies smarter and calmer is to carry them a lot. Slings, pouches and carriers help make this more manageable. Studies have shown that:
   
   - carrying babies an extra 3 hours a day resulted in 40% less crying.
   
   Babies who are frequently carried are proven to pick up verbal skills faster, and develop better core muscle strength and balance. My Listmania list "Natural Parenting for Baby's First Year" has more information on babywearing, or you can google "babywearing" or "television and baby studies" for your own research.
   
   Crown Crafts The Original NoJo BabySling by Dr. Sears - Black Chambray is a great starter sling.
   
   Finally, I'd suggest "SIGNING TIME" videos - not to be confused with "Baby Signing Time" - as a last resort instead of other baby videos because at least baby can learn sign language. Sign language is proven to:
   
   - reduce frustration and tantrums
   - accelerate language development
   - promote parent-child bonding
   
   I found the entire series at my local library. I especially liked Signing Time! Volume 4: Family, Feelings & Fun DVD and 'naming' feelings also increases emotional intelligence in babies.



3. My daughter loves this video. She is almost 2 and we've had the video for 2 months and she asks to watch it every day. She very quickly learned the names of all the animals, and she giggles at the puppets' antics. We also have Baby Neptune and Baby Galileo, and she loves those as well. She likes having me sit next to her to watch it with her, because then she can ask me what the animals are and what are they doing. It makes for relaxing downtime for both of us.



4. For whatever reason my girls LOVE animals.. everyone known to man.. and this DVD is great.. We love the "peak a boo" feature and they can guess what the animal is behind the flap!! Great job again baby einstein!



5. My 19 month old daughter just got into this DVD. I'd reccomend it if you're looking for a baby einstein DVD for a toddler. It's very relaxing for her and me!

5 comments about G.I. Jane.

1. Well. Blue ray is not perfect as I expected. But comparing to DVD, way betther both Video and Audio.



2. Not the True Blue-Ray but much better picture quality than DVD...I'm happy with this one



3. If you follow Demi Moore, this is a must. She outdoes herself in the personification of O'neal, plus she's a real beauty and shows the best condition ever! Two thumbs up!!!



4. its been along time since i have seen this movie so thought i would buy it as i remember it was a good movie. well it was fantastic and on blu-ray it made the movie seem like a recent movie it didn't seem old at all great story, very well done and demi in one of her best



5. Why anyone would want to waste time and money seeing this movie is beyond me. Demi Moore, even to the most generous critic, has limited talent as an actress, and the movie stinks! I have no objection to a woman wanting to serve in a commando unit, but the plot line is laughable, unless you want to see how well Demi Moore fills out her tightly fitted t-shirt. And how any woman in the military managed to get such tight-fitting outfits is interesting, did she have a custom tailor? The business about seeing her as one of the 'guys' is a bit hard given her apparent choice of attire. Still, maybe that's why people watched it, it was good for a laugh. Movies like this make it clear why Demi Moore's movie career, such as it was, has tanked.

5 comments about House of Games.

1. I've seen two other Mamet films (Spartan and Redbelt). Although I enjoyed both of these films, I don't understand why this movie has received so much acclaim. Maybe it was because I knew there was a twist (but probably not), I saw it coming, not from the beginning, but it became painfully obvious. I enjoyed the dialogue in the other Mamet films I've seen, but not in this film. Seriously, who says, as they are being shot to death, "Thank you, sir. Can I have some more?" (or something to that effect). And once you figure out the con, the color motif becomes obvious and, frankly, uninteresting.
   
   A real disappointment.



2. ...who would have thought.
   
   Excellent movie. For anybody, especially David Mamet fans!



3. Shame on Criterion for pricing this only slightly lux version of standard packaging, graphics, and extras at the $35.00 price point where one would expect a high end treatment throughout the entire package! The new transfer is absolutely first rate. But talk about cheap and over priced packaging and extras! Nothing but a plastic case, a single disc, a fat booklet and a few on disc extras, no more than you would get with a regular edition for countless other films. This disc might do well at $16.99, but at thirty-five dollars ($35.00) it's just a rip.
   
   I love this film, always have, always will, ever since it was first released. So I was excited to see Criterion issue a completely remastered edition to replace the very mediocre transfer and disc that has, till now, been all that was available. I had recently purchased the Criterion three disc edition of the beautifully remastered "Seven Samurai". That set was without a doubt one of the most lavish, best designed, wonderfully packaged and best presented sets I have ever seen. Well worth the $35 Amazon charged for it.
   
   Silly me, I assumed that, just because "House Of Games" was priced at the same $35 level that it would be packaged and presented with the same value and care. Boy was I wrong!
   
   So, to balance out my two star rating:
   
   Film: *****
   Packaging: *
   Transfer: *****
   Value: **



4. SPOILERS AHEAD: Dr. Margaret Ford is such a good mark because she's such a bad girl. Dr. Ford is a con artist. She is a devious woman. She is aroused by the art of the con. She wants to be a thief herself. At the end of the film we learn--when she exacts her revenge--that she is in fact more ruthless and cold than any of the grifters who set her up. What many viewers might miss when watching House of Games is that Dr. Margaret Ford was already a con artist before involving herself with the cardsharp. In fact, that's why they targeted her. After all, "You can't cheat an honest man." Or, "You can't cheat a man who doesn't have larceny in his heart."
   
   Dr. Ford is a psychiatrist, and psychiatrists are--whether they realize it themselves or not--con artists. Kind of like psychics. M. Lamar Keene--once the most financially successful psychic in America--has said that psychics have two categories for themselves. An "open eyes" is a psychic who knows he does not have any sort of supernatural power--no ESP, no clairvoyance, nothing. In other words, an "open eyes" will admit TO OTHER PSYCHICS that he is a con artist. As ANY magician knows, it is very easy to convincingly make it look like you have psychic powers. People eat it up too. "Open eyes" account for about 90% of all psychics. And then there are "shut eyes." These are deluded people who--often because of positive reinforcement--actually believe that they have genuine psychic powers. The point here is that I think these terms could apply to clinical psychologists too, except here maybe 10% would be "open eyes" and 90% "shut eyes." Dr. Ford would be a rare "open eyes."
   
   If you don't believe me, on the excellent commentary which appears only on the Criterion Collection's release of this film (and this commentary alone is reason enough to buy it), writer/director David Mamet (with con artist expert Ricky Jay) discusses how in his opinion psychiatrists (and clinical psychologists) are--by and large--fraudsters. As an empirical psychologist (someone who scientifically studies psychology) myself I must say that I agree with him. As Mamet puts it (allegorically), here is the racket: You go to them with some problem. They tell you that the problem stems from something you don't realize. There is some "magic phrase," and if only you could think of it, your problem would go away. The only thing is the therapist doesn't know what this "magic phrase" is. You have to search for it--for the rest of your life. You meet with the therapist for years, paying her hundreds of dollars a week, looking for the magic phrase. The con is that there is no realization; there is no "magic phrase." If there was, and if you thought of it, then they would lose you as a client. They would lose their meal ticket.
   
   Dr. Ford has a book called "Driven," and it is about compulsives. The book is, like many books about clinical psychology, a bunch of BS. The book is, as Mamet reveals in his commentary, the reason why the con artists targeted her. When she realizes that her shady profession is why she was targeted, she hurls a copy of her book at her framed degree on the wall. She proceeds to rip her despised degree through the broken glass and cuts her hand. And then she sets out for revenge.
   
   House of Games is a spellbinding film, perhaps the best movie ever made about con artists. It boasts extraordinary cinematography, inspired by what Mamet calls the "poverty row" films of the 40s and 50s. (These films had no budget, and therefore could afford no stars, and thus had to rely on plot for their own survival.) The soundtrack is also very good. It consists of inversions of a toccata in C minor by Bach. The poker scene in House of Games is now famous. Most poker scenes involve actors who do not have a large amount of experience at the poker table. They don't have experience handling cards in real life, and it shows. Not here. Every single person in the poker game in this movie was a seasoned poker aficionado, including the great Ricky Jay, who is perhaps the greatest sleight-of-hand artist living today. Jay also invented the con that is explained to Dr. Ford in front of the "House of Games." He didn't want the film to reveal any con that was actually being used by any con artist buddies of his, so he made one up. Later an insurance salesman was arrested in real life for using the con displayed in the film.
   
   I recommend not only watching this film, but then watching it again with Mamet and Jay's commentary on. Most director commentaries I've heard are very boring. Not so here. Perhaps this stems from the fact that Mamet--unlike most people in show business today--is actually extremely intelligent. He is a tremendous writer with a style of dialogue all of his own. He says it evolved out of a lifetime spent arguing. The commentary humorously begins with Jay and Mamet being caught on tape discussing George Bush. Mamet says that all politicians are liars and that Bush--to him--seems like he must be a decent man because he is so bad at lying. (Unlike, perhaps, the Clintons, who lie with such ease and even finesse. Such comments could be seen as a precursor to Mamet's brilliant essay entitled "Why I am No Longer a Brain-Dead Liberal.")



5. THe key performances are off. THey feel like stage performances rather than cinematic. Im assuming its the direction thats misguided; most of the performances are consistently bad in the same way.
   
   The writing is very angry. Like a temper tantrum against human nature.
   
   THe depiction of female characters is ugly.
   
   the plot is very predictable.

5 comments about The House of Mirth.

1. House of Mirth was actually number one on my Christmas list of must-read books last year. I'd heard so much about the movie, I forced myself to abstain from watching it until I finished this sure-to-be intensely satisfying book. I'm sure it's because I'm not used to Edith Wharton's writing style, but I think she may've been alergic to action. There's plenty of self-examination from our heroine, Lily Bart, and her seemingly endless commentary on society and her place in it. Thankfully, we're spared much of that in the film. The film brings up many interesting points that I'm sure the book discussed, had I cared at the time. Is Lily Bart a martyr for accomplished, well-to-do ladies of her circle? Does she surrender too soon? Does her weakness say more about her or society? It really is rather a disturbing look at societal politics and how quickly the upper echelons of society could eliminate or alienate rivals by rumor, slander or even the hint of impropriety. As much as I initially loathed Lily Bart and her ineptitude, I really should sympathize because she's not a survivalist in the skilled, strong work-ethic sort of way. She wasn't bred for that. We get early on that even she knows she's doomed to failure. She's given several opportunities to get back in the game, but shuns them out of pride or loyalty to her friends. Gillian Anderson is exceptional in the film because she understands Lily Bart is an uncomplicated woman. She wants to be a part of high society but won't step on anyone to get there or take the easy way out. She knows Lily's imperfections but she'd explain that they're necessary if she's to fight for her place in the world. That's all she knows. I do love the entire cast in this film, especially Dan Aykroyd as Gus Trenor. Some people dislike the casting of Aykroyd and I too think his presence is rather jarring. I'm waiting for him to whip out his proton pack. But his odd, slimy salesman presense was a brilliant choice as we instinctively don't want him anywhere near Lily. I'm rather partial to this film for restoring the bitter disappointment I felt for the book. I really find it more interesting to watch Lily's star gradually diminish without needing a constant commentary from the heroine. We only need to see how she reacts. She isn't able to share her inmost feelings and I think her silent, self-struggle, is what makes the audience wish they could help her or be her confidant.



2. I just finished the dvd after having read the book a few weeks ago, and I'm sorry to say that my high hopes were disappointed. You would think that a novel worth adapting to film would be worth adapting with some sense of fidelity to the original...unless you have learned better by now. (I have not.)
   
   My first frustration with this version was when I realized that the script had collapsed, into one very incoherent character, the heroine's greatest (blindest, even!) defender *and* one of her greatest detractors. Was this a misguided attempt to economize? In the novel, Gerty Farish is a crucial foil not only for Lily Bart's beauty but also for her taste for luxury, her selfishness, and her charm--perhaps someone decided that, with her unrequited longing for Selden and her bad complexion, Gerty would drag down the film's aesthetic standards. In the novel, however, this is essential: she is shabby, yes, she is exhaustively principled and self-effacing, but she also shows us that the extreme poverty that leads to such squalid ruin in the heroine *can* be compatible with some kind of respectable and useful existence. This all sounds like a load of moralizing, but what works about the novel is that it doesn't try to privilege this good-doing over what is undeniably more interesting; you could say that it is Gerty who manages to survive the course of the plot, but you would also have to admit that the life of Gerty Farish would never merit any kind of novelistic treatment. I have harped on this for too long, but to half-eliminate and half-combine what is probably the fourth- or fifth-most important character in the book with, of all people, Grace Stepney, is, to say the least, problematic.
   
   My other main gripe with this adaptation was that I missed a sense of Lily Bart's tragic habit of doing the wrong thing, against her better conscience, until it was just too late. This was what sustained, through the better part of the book, a sense of ineluctable doom. If a pervasive sense of ineluctable doom doesn't sound like a good idea for a movie, then someone ought to rethink making movies out of stories that [spoiler, if you are still with me] end in suicide, even if the suicide is staged with a bottle of red liquid dripping artistically from the heroine's loosening fingers.
   
   If you're looking for Edith Wharton, needless to say, you'll do better to read the book. If you're trying to save yourself the trouble of reading Edith Wharton for a class--shame on you!--you'll probably get more out of wikipedia than from this movie.



3. I loved the book, and didn't mind the rewriting of the storyline. But this was just a badly made film. The acting was terrible, for one. As much as I like Gillian Anderson, I felt she was out of her depth for the role. Everyone else (with the exception of Laura Linney) seemed to be "faking" it. The worst part was the transitions between scenes, which were too long, and usually without dialogue or music. I'm not looking for an action-packed film, but the transitions really added nothing to the flow or emotion of the film. There were some good moments, and the costumes were beautiful, but otherwise, I'm waiting for someone else to make a film adaptation of Edith Wharton's wonderful book.



4. The melancholic tale of rapacious Lily Bart, that was so meticulously and brilliantly written by Edith Wharton, deserves to be depicted onscreen with the same fluidity, subtleties and emotive presence as the novel, and I'm not exaggerating when I say that director Terence Davies truly accomplished this. Having read the novel a couple of weeks before, I was so anxious to see the movie adaptation that could do it justice and in my opinion, it sure did.
   
   What Davies concocted in this small-budgeted movie that somehow looks extravangant and lush is the dreamlike atmosphere, with shades of ethereal lighting, that poses a stark contrast to the realism and a sense of brutality in the movie. It seems realistic in a way, as people have mentioned, by the lack of background music that may all but decimate the essence of the words said by the characters. The stillness of a scene without music whatsoever, pulls the audience in and makes the conversations more private and true.
   
   I'm actually very happy that Davies had decided to retain the 'stilted', formal dialogue that Edith wrote, which makes the similarities between the novel and the movie more tangible. Most of the actors seem to be at ease with the dialogue, and I can only sing songs of adulation to Gillian Anderson. I'm not very familiar with her and the supporting cast's work, and the faintest memory of Gillian in X-Files that I have is when I was barely in elementary school.
   
   Gillian is absolutely resplendent as Lily Bart, and the fact that her translucent azure eyes emoting a paroxysm of different emotions within seconds astound me. Her downward spiral towards penury is executed wonderfully; her trembled voice and breaths and her fatigued expression just express pure debility. She does an absolutely brilliant performance that deserves a universal recognition.
   
   As Lawrence Selden, the handsome Eric Stoltz portrays him with such sophisticated charm, at times boyishly, and flirtatious air that it's no wonder that Lily, Grace Stepney and Bertha Dorset are vying for him. In the second part of the movie, Stoltz proves to be a remarkably effective actor in doing dramatic scenes, especially his final scene where he strips off Lawrence's righteous facade and pours his heart out that all but shows the vulnerability and despondency of a crestfallen man. Only stone-hearted people are not affected by this particularly sad scene.
   
   I also have to mention that Gillian and Stoltz elicit amazing sparks and chemistry from each other, which makes their attraction very credible and justified. They react off each other perfectly just with clandestine glances, smiles and even behind cigarette smokes. Their intimate scenes are titilating and private, under Davies' claustrophobic frame, that makes me feel as if their rendezvous is not meant to be seen by the audience.
   
   Other standout performances for me are Anthony LaPaglia as Sim Rosedale and Laura Linney as the vulturous Bertha Dorset, whose malicious intentions lie behind her placid smiles.
   
   The only complaint I have about this movie is that some scenes can only be understood by the rarefied few, albeit those who have read the novel. One scene in particular is the entertainment at the Brys where they held a tableux vivants and Lily was Watteau's Summer. It seems to come out of nowhere in the movie without explanation whatsoever. Such problems occur, unfortunately, because of the meagre amount of budget.
   
   Nonetheless, The House of Mirth is an extraordinary adaptation and it lingers on with me long after I finished watching it that I had to watch it again on the same day. And both times, I couldn't help but cry and feel extremely moved by the movie. This is the movie to see if you enjoy the aesthetics of great cinema and leisurely-paced movie that is deep and wreathing with emotional turmoil.



5. HOUSE OF MIRTH (2000) is a period piece based on the Edith Wharton novel that portrays the early 20th century social caste of New York's elite. Gillian Anderson brings depth to Lily Bart's character as she navigates the protocols and expectations of society that are steeped within her own personal vices. Eric Stolz, Laura Linney, Dan Aykroyd, Anthony LaPaglia, and Elizabeth McGovern also display fine performances, portraying characters that provide a cohesive backdrop for Lily Bart. Caught between gambling debts and naivete, Bart (Anderson) finds herself in a maelstrom of life-altering events, which preclude her from being with the man she truly loves.

5 comments about Murder at 1600.

1. I really liked this movie. I like the way Wesley Snipes played the detective and dug till he found out the murder. What I thought was great was - who was the real person who did the murder. The movie keeps you suspense till the end. You will be very suprized to see who it is. I am not telling- sorry. I liked the whole action and drama of the movie. It was action, suspense, and total fun. It is worth every penny and cent. IT was fun and totally a movie to own. Go buy it.



2. Snipes and Lane make a great team in the high pressured thriller that has more then just "who done it?" riding on the line. In what I think is his best role, Wesley Snipes plays a tough, hard nosed cop who is sent to investigate a murder in the White House. With no one on his side and the government covering all the bases, Snipes turns to Diane Lane, at best his only hope for solving this crime. Together, they uncover clues and cover-ups in crime that goes deeper then just a simple murder. A gripping movie you will not soon grow tired of, "Murder at 1600" is must own for any fans of thriller/action movies.



3. This movie was actually a gift for my father. He really liked it a lot, and said he would watch it over and over again.



4. I'am a big wesley snipes fan, have about all his movies. If you like try to figure out who done it, then this movie for you



5. A murder in the White House? Could this really happen? Today, I guess, just about anything can happen. Who knows what people with "agendas" are capable of doing.
   
   Wesley Snipes is on the D.C. police force and is called in to investigate a murder at the White House. Diane Lane is on the White House Secret Service detail and the two together work to solve "who done it".
   
   This was a very good suspense movie, well acted by all the cast. The blending of Wesley Snipes and Diane Lane as a team was very interesting.

5 comments about Hot Shots! / Hot Shots! Part Deux (Double Feature).

1. This was one of the funniest movies around in the 90's, I can remember all the laughs I had in the theatre when it was on the big screen. I guarantee you even watching this today you would get more laughs than expected for this old movie double.



2. First of all, Charlie Sheen and Llyod bridges Make This Movie. The actors in the film are amazing in the fact that in a spoof you have to pretend your actually serious. So I give much props to Sheen for keeping a straight face througought the whole film. It wouldn't have been hilarious without that.
   
   Every single frame has a gag in it. The movie becomes sort of a treasure hunt to spot hilarious props and hidden jokes. For example, the Old Iraqi Beer in the fridge. If you haven't taken the time to catch all this stuff please rewind+pause. Your missing some great material. This movie really couldn't have been funnier with its premise. It had the perfect actors for the roles including Ryan Stiles who really deserves more hollywood attention. These were the days where spoofs were really thought out. I'm talking about the era before the disasters such as Scary Movie 4 and Date Movie. This movie is about pure silly humor, unlike the recent films that have been made to produce more money from tricking people to buy the movie ticket.
   
   Bottom Line: If you are old enough to watch this ronchy film, then watch it already! There are too few of days in your life to let such a great comedy pass you by. If you love Two and a Half Men so much then you should pay tribute to your sitcom actor and watch his previous films. He is actually an amazing actor, no matter what all the other critics say.



3. Awesome. Not much more to say. Both Hot Shots. One DVD. Do you even really need a review? If you seen these movies, and like them both, buy this DVD. For the price, it's a steal and a half. These are 2 of the best comedys. Funny as hell, and well worth the price. Buy this DVD. Just click the button. I'm serious. If I was joking, I'd say, a horse walks into a bar, the bartender says "Why the long face?".



4. It has been years since I have seen these two movies and I am just ecstatic to find them on DVD. I have watched them over and over again. Thanks Amazon for alwas having what I am looking for.



5. Both of these DVD Movies were great. I am planning on ordering more series to add to my collection. Amazon.com is a GREAT and time saving way to purchase movies and book's, they process fast and are received in excellent condition.

5 comments about Dirty Dancing (Ultimate Edition).

1. When this movie came out it spawned a hype unlike anything I'd seen before or since. Full of notable quotables ("No one puts Baby in a corner"), having not one but two successful soundtracks (one even featuring the one and only published vocal talents of Patrick Swayze the star of the movie!), and a semi camp classic that the famous 80s movies would go down in history for. Looking back brings so many memories, and so much silliness.
   
   Jennifer Grey plays Baby, a nice Jewish girl who is vacationing with her family in the Catskill mountains. I can't imagine, even in the times that this movie was set in, that any gal would tolerate being called Baby by her family, let alone be introduced and allow strangers to call her Baby as well, but I guess that was the point. There she falls for Johnny, the sexy swaggering bad boy of the entertainment staff who dances his way into her innocent, sheltered heart. Just a little idealistic, just a little far fetched, but just enough of a fantasy to keep things lite and airy.
   
   There werea plethora of subplots (the sister in her own infatuation with the waiter, Johnny's partner needing the abortion, the inevitable confrontation between Baby's father and Johnny, etc.). The song and dance routines were spaced out in between enough dialogue and plot development to make it otherwise a musical, but not quite. It's just cheesy enough to make everyone like it.



2. What's not to love? I'm so glad to have one of my favorite movies in DVD. The anniversry edition is just a bonus.



3. I like the movie. But this recording is terrible.
   It is NOT 1080p, and the sound is mostly mono.



4. This movie was made in 1987...I was born in 1986... and it is hands down one of my very favourite movies. It's even greater to update it for us, the "microwave generation" and I like that I have it on hand whenever I want to watch it.



5. I love this DVD. If you love the movie Dirty Dancing you will love this

5 comments about Baby Einstein - Baby Bach - Musical Adventure.

1. I watched this dvd with my 11 month old. It was ok, but she didn't seem as interested in it as the other Baby Einstein movies that we have. It just didn't grab her attention like some of the others.



2. I just love the music and colors. My son just stares and i get house chores done while he is mesmorized.



3. My 10 month old daughter loves this video and Amazon got it to me in two days! Excellent.



4. This is a wonderful gift for a new baby -- the music lulls them to sleep, and by the time they reach the ripe old age of 3 months, they will be watching the TV as the shapes go with the music! I wish these had been around when my kids were babies!



5. This dvd is pretty good. It's not as good as the Baby Mozart, but it's not bad either. My son will watch it, but I have to keep directing his attention back to it at times. The music is not as peppy as the Baby Mozart, but Baby Bach is still musical in nature-making it better than all of the other Baby Einstein dvd's we have with the exception of Baby Mozart.

5 comments about Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man.

1. I'm not a big fan of Don Johnson, but teaming him with Mickey Rourke was a great idea. A great tale of good friends. Good movie for guys and girls.



2. Let's face it... this isn't a great flick. So why do I watch it all the time. I don't know. The opening sequence makes me want to jump on my bike and ride into the desert. Keep an eye out for the "outrageous" gas prices early in the film (keep in mind that this came out in 1991). You'll either laugh or cry.



3. A western action movie in the near future of then...
   New drugs, old bikes and real tough guys meet
   Kevlar and radio tracking devices.
   As usually the bad guys take the big fall, but the high dive
   in Los Vegas is the real stunt in the movie where they go off the top of a high rise hotel into the deep end of a swimming pool.
   The names of the heroes kind of tells you it is sort
   of an action figure type movie, like speedracer or transformers...



4. It is the total rip off of the Butch Cassidy and Sundance movie. They copies the format, the story line and all we got is a big 'HUH?'



5. "High concept" movies -- that's Hollywoodspeak for two-sentence descriptions used by screenwriters to convey the entire idea of a proposed film to catch a studio executive's interest -- have been providing us with Bad Movies We Love for years now. "An all-star cast at an opening night party atop the world's tallest building. Fire breaks out below, the sprinkler system doesn't work yet, and only Steve McQueen and Paul Newman can save them."
   
   Not every no-brainer sales pitch results in THE TOWERING INFERNO, however. High concept meets rock bottom with HARLEY DAVIDSON AND THE MARLBORO MAN, which surely was sold with something like, "Picture this: a remake of BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID, set in the future, with motorcycles instead of horses, and we don't kill the heroes at the end. Here's the beauty part -- we've got two product placement tie-ins right in the title alone. Doncha love it?"
   
   We sure do, but not for the reasons that the writers might have guessed.
   
   The movie opens with Mickey Rourke flashing his bare buns, then lovingly revving up his Harley. Like your homoerotic associations more deliberate than that? You have only to read the names of cast members like "Big John Studd" and "Tom Sizemore" to start collapsing with mirth. When Roarke (dressed in leather lad regalia, replete with tattoo and earring) bumps into his ol' high school pal Don Johnson (dressed in cowpoke drag, including Stetson, boots, and whiskers), we suspect the pair must have attended Village People High. When Rourke ponders, "If there is a God, I'd like to meet the dude,"i'd like to hang out with him," it's hard not to cry out to the screen "Yo, Mick -- you're already in Bad Movie Heaven, and your'e God there."
   
   Though HARLEY's all tricked out with costly high-speed chases, helicopter footage, and leaps off Vegas hotels, it never passes muster as a LETHEL WEAPON clone, and the two stars are the reason why. They're just B actors time-warped into the wrong period of movies: both belong in the mid-'60s, when America was the land of drive-in movies, and Roger Corman was churning out cheapo WILD ANGELS biker flicks. "It's better to be dead and cool than alive and uncool," the stars tell each other, oblivious to the fact that, as actors, they're already both dead and uncool.
   
   At movies end, Rourke pulls over his Harley for a shapely starlet with her thumb out. "Where you heading?" he asks. She says, "Nowhere special." "C'mon," says Rourke, "I'll take you there."
   
   Indeed.
   
   Nowhere special is where Rourke always takes us, down that long lonesome highway, headed straight for Unintentional Laughter, U.S.A.
   
   Look for Chelea Field, Vanessa Williams and Daniel Baldwin (who does a dead-pan take on brother Alec doing Steven Seagal).