5 comments about A Star Is Born.

1. Marked by a pervasive sense of melancholy, the 1954 musical version of the familiar Hollywood warhorse will forever be remembered as Judy Garland's most acclaimed work in films. Even though she would go on to a handful of films in the early 1960's, this was her last leading role in a major Hollywood production, an ironic point since she plays an emerging movie star on the rise. True, she doesn't look her best in the film, but her fulsome talent is on full, heart-wrenching display as Esther Blodgett, an obscure but thriving band singer who becomes movie star Vicki Lester thanks to Norman Maine, an alcoholic has-been actor in career free-fall. Their love story and the opposing trajectories of their careers are tracked meticulously by Moss Hart's shrewdly observed screenplay and George Cukor's sensitive direction.
   
   The double-sided 2000 DVD provides the 176-minute restored version, which is just five minutes less than what was shown at the original premiere. Until 1983, the half-hour of footage excised after the premiere was thought lost, but film historian Ron Haver found much of it and supervised an extraordinary restoration effort that includes a necessary albeit brief use of production stills to match up with the complete soundtrack. Even with such technicalities, the resulting film is even more of a landmark musical drama, emotionally resonant in spite of certain pacing issues with the storyline. Cukor's approach is probably more leisurely than the relatively hard-boiled material requires since he includes so many establishing and lengthy shots, but his direction shows his legendary sensitivity toward actors.
   
   While he comes across a bit too robust as a fading matinee idol, James Mason vigorously captures Norman's scornful pride and self-pity. He may lack Fredric March's innate sense of vulnerability in the original, but Mason makes the character's inner torment more palpable. As for Garland, she brings so much of her own history to Esther/Vicki that her scenes feel alive with her vibrant, masochistic personality. She is aided immeasurably by the masterful songs of Harold Arlen and Ira Gershwin, most significantly her torchy rendition of "The Man That Got Away", as perfect a musical movie moment as has been ever produced. While her work in the fifteen-minute "Born in the Trunk" sequence is impressive, it is really later in the film when she soars, in particular, when she segues from the tap-happy "Lose That Long Face" into a breakdown scene in her dressing room with sympathetic studio head Oliver Niles portrayed with his typically stentorian fervor by Charles Bickford.
   
   The print condition and sound quality on the DVD are superb. There are also some fascinating extras on the B-side starting with three alternative takes on "The Man That Got Away", each distinctive in presentation with costume and lighting changes, a must for Garland fans. Also included is a very brief deleted number within the "Born in the Trunk" sequence", "When My Sugar Walks Down the Street". Three vintage pieces have been gathered - a brief newsreel piece of the premiere, a four-minute clip of the Coconut Grove premiere party held after the premiere, and most interestingly, a half-hour kinescope akin to the current-day red carpet pre-shows with an amazing parade of period stars expressing little more than good wishes on their way to the theater. Lastly, the theatrical trailers for all three versions of "A Star Is Born" are also included.



2. A Star Is Born explores the dark underbelly of a ruthless Hollywood. Judy Garland plays Esther Blodget whose star is on the rise while her famous husband played by James Mason is on the way down.
   
   Garland is superb in the musical numbers but struggles with some of the dramatics. To be fair director Cukor places huge demands on her with many long scenes. It's ironic that Garland plays the wife of a fading alcoholic star...
   
   In its restored version this film is very long at 3 hours, and the photographs used to fill in the gaps where the film is missing is rather off-putting.
   
   For its time this is quite a hard-hitting film, unglamorous in its depiction of an unforgiving business. There is very little musical score -outside of the musical numbers - of course, which makes this film seem more modern. Cukor lets the actors tell the story.
   
   The film's musical numbers are superb and the film is a great tribute to the talent of Garland. George Cukor's direction is also striking. Visually the film is superb. Definitely worth seeing.



3. This is the darnedest movie to rate. I usually don't judge musicals the same way that I judge other movies. I just rate their production value, since that's often the only reason to see a musical. (Who rates an Arnold Schwarzeneger movie for its screenplay?) But when I first saw "A Star Is Born" I had mixed opinions. Great acting, great directing, great screenplay (for what could be done with such a story), and even the cinematography seemed two decades ahead of its time. And of course, there were great production numbers. All this, it seems, was tragically sunk by a hackneyed, thrice-filmed story. Can I really enjoy a feel-bad musical? And what of its ending? After three hours of being Judy Garland's hate letter to Hollywood, why the schmalzy conclusion?
   
   Nevermind. After my first analysis, I've been drawn back to the movie time and time again, and I think I know why. Judy Garland's colossal talent is unparallelled. Not only was she a great actor, not only was she an above average dancer and funny raconteur, not only was she the greatest singer I have ever heard -- she was a legend, clearly in her own time.
   
   The fifteen-minute born-in-a-trunk segment reveals the core of her amazing legacy: in only four years she went from being a drug-addicted has-been who was fired from MGM to being "Miss Show Business", who can sing a fifteen-minute homage to herself in her own movie. ("Born In a Trunk" could be retitled "The Myth of Judy Garland Put to Song.")
   
   Her acting here is very different from her MGM acting, now that she is no longer playing the glossed-over characters of Metro's escapism days. The scene late in the movie where she as Ester recovers her emotions just in time to get in a filmed shot for a musical comes almost as a physical shock. Norman Maine and Esther Blogett seem like they are both projections of different angles of the real Judy Garland. Or is that just more of the legend? On one hand there is the very charming and talented starlett whose limit is the sky, and on the other hand there is the polarizing, self-destructive, addict. Every now and then the movie shows little hints of Norman Maine's brilliance shining through the surface, a credit to Mason's acting abilities.
   
   And then there is the production value. Unlike her earlier musicals, she does all the singing here, in multiple styles and multiple settings, from "The Man That Got Away" in closing-for-the-night cafe to "A New World," sung entirely a capella while the audience watches the ocean waves. (Another shock. Was this a first for a musical?) The movie has my favorite performance of "Swanee," and a joyful (in an otherwise unhappy movie) costume number "Lose That Long Face." I wonder how much of the tap-dancing was choreographed and how much was improvised. Garland wasn't noted for being the greatest dancer, but Gene Kelly said, "What you could give her she could learn like that." My favorite number is the one where Garland mimicks cliches from Fifties musical production numbers using only her living room props. (And the movie still cost six million dollars?)
   
   Should I recommend this movie? I think yes. Even if you might not like it, it is important enough of a movie that you should see it at least once. You may get the same original impression that I got, but I was driven to think about it long after it was over, and like I said, I've seen it many times since.



4. DVD was in its infancy in 1999, and at that time, Warner Bros. was still not the greatest studio at releasing good DVD editions of their classic films. However, with the premiere DVD release of the 1954 musical remake of A Star Is Born, Warner Bros. started on the right track.
   
   The film is famous for its amazing dramatic and musical performances by the legendary Judy Garland, in her first movie since being fired by MGM in 1950 after making Summer Stock, as the rising star Esther Blodgett (under the stage name of Vicki Lester); its incredible Cinemascope and Technicolor cinematography; and a stellar performance by James Mason as falling star Norman Maine. What the film is just as famous for, and possibly even MORE famous for, is Warner Bros.' editing of it after theater owners complained about the length, as well as Judy Garland's Oscar loss and the film's 1983 restoration. The film premiered at 181 minutes and was hailed as a trimphant return and tour-de-force performance by Judy. After being butchered to 154 minutes in which entire scenes and musical numbers were reviewed, many felt the film made absolutely no sense and it ended its run with a whimper. Judy Garland was nominated for an Oscar for her performance, but lost to Grace Kelly in what Groucho Marx famously called "the greatest robbery since Brinks."
   
   In 1983, film historian Ron Haver did something few, if anyone, had ever attempted - a reconstruction of a film that had been brutally edited after initial release. The film was A Star Is Born, and after several years of searching for elements, Ron Haver was able to restore the movie to just 5 minutes under its original length. The restoration team used whatever they had to in order to make the restoration work - home movies taken on set, whatever deleted footage could be found, even production stills during a stretch of several minutes in between Norman Maine's offer to get a screen test for Esther and the studio makeup scene where none of the footage could be found. Although the use of stills may seem jarring to some people, you must understand that these scenes are absolutely necessary to the development of the narrative. In the cut version, it was simply Norman offering Esther a screen test and then she gets it. Here, we get to see how she struggles and the jobs she takes in order to break into show business, the way most stars in the real world have to do it. Fortunately, the stills aren't used constantly throughout the film, which allows for a much easier viewing experience than if all of the deleted scenes had required reconstruction with still photos. This reconstruction, which George Cukor sadly passed away the day before its first screening, finally allows for a more cohesive narrative and, joyfully, two additional numbers by Judy.
   
   This DVD is absolutely superb for an early single-disc Warner Bros. release. The DVDS boasts a new digitally refreshed transfer with a remastered Dolby Digital 5.1 audio track. The video and audio quality are absolutely superb, although new restoration processes could revitalize the video quality even further if Warner Bros. decided to do a new DVD release of this film. The video is presented in its original Cinemascope widescreen theatrical aspect ratio, animorphically enhanced for widescreen TVs.
   
   As with many early DVDs, especially by Warner Bros., this DVD is a DVD-15, or a flipper disc with a DVD-9 (dual-layer) on one side and a DVD-5 (single-layer) on the other side. The DVD-9 side contains the movie, naturally. The DVD-5 side contains the bonus features. What's here is amazing to have - newsreel footage of the premiere and post-premiere party, the kinescope of the NBC broadcast of the Hollywood premiere, three alternate takes of The Man That Got Away, When My Sugar Walks Down The Street, which was deleted from the Born In A Trunk sequence, and theatrical trailers for all three film versions of A Star Is Born - it's interesting to note that all three trailers are anamorphically enhanced - including the 1937, which is given black bars on the side to fit within the 16:9 frame without cropping.
   
   What's NOT here, sadly, is a documentary on the making of the film or at least something on the restoration. Someone who doesn't know much about the history of the film might not understand why there's several minutes of the movie which are mostly shown with still photos instead of film footage, or why some of the footage that IS in the film, such as the scene where Esther is a carhop at a drive-in, is so grainy, dirty, and fuzzy.
   
   Since this DVD's release in 1999, Warner Bros. has gone from being a so-so DVD factory to a company that has finally come to appreciate the immense catalogue of classic film titles that they can release on DVD, and therefore have released the finest DVD editions of some of the greatest movies of all time. With this in mind, I think it's high time Warner Bros. revisited this film with a brand new DVD release - preferably a 3-Disc Special Edition. Disc 1 could contain a brand new digital transfer from newly restored film elements and outdo the already sparkling transfer from the 1999 DVD release. An audio commentary by John Fricke, which could touch on the making and 1983 restoration, would be a nice touch as well. Disc 2 could contain all of the bonus materials from the flipside of the 1999 DVD, plus a new documentary on the making and restoration of the film. And, as a great bonus, disc 3 could contain a freshened-up version of the original 1937 version of the film. While Warner Bros. probably wouldn't undertake a massive digital overhaul of the film just so it could be a bonus on the 1954 movie's DVD, they could at least freshen it up from a 35MM nitrate negative. Since the movie's in the public domain, Warner Bros. could do this easily AND in better quality than any other DVD release available, except maybe for the Image Entertainment release, which is supposedly remastered from the 35MM nitrate elements.
   
   Meanwhile, since Warner Bros. has yet to announce any plans for a new DVD of A Star Is Born, this DVD version will do very nicely. The film, for the most part, looks absolutely excellent, with vibrant color and very little dirt, grain, scratches, etc. The audio is superb, and the bonus materials presented here are completely outstanding. I wholeheartedly recommend this DVD to fans of the film, Judy Garland and James Mason fans, and fans of classic films. Despite necessary shortcomings in the reconstruction, it's a must-see film. In addition, if you enjoyed the songs from this film, you simply MUST own the 2004 expanded reissue of the film's soundtrack album. The CD is a revelation for those who've owned previous soundtrack editions. The new CD contains much of, if not all of the film's score, including deleted portions, as well as complete songs, including the never-before-heard extended intro to The Man That Got Away, as well as some new gems - When My Sugar Walks Down The Street and the complete audio for The Trinidad Coconut Oil Shampoo Commercial. The CD, like the film, is pieced together from multiple existing elements, such as the film's stereo soundtrack, the mono recordings of the film's score, the mono soundtrack album masters, and even a worn acetate playback disc for the shampoo commercial. If you love the film, Judy, or just classic soundtracks in general, the CD is also a must-own.



5. Yes, it's overlong and dated but not particularly campy. It is Judy and James Mason at their finest and a still-potent critique of the Hollywood star system. If you've never seen it, it's a must. I tried to find it to rent or buy around Oscar time this year, but no store in my area had it. It would be terrible if this film, which underwent a lengthy and historic restoration in the 1980's, went out of print or became impossible to find in the future.

5 comments about Purple Rain.

1. I really enjoyed this movie as a kid and had to have it once it was available on HD DVD. Prince is amazing in this movie and so is Morris Day - let's not forget Apollonia's song!
   
   The movie is fantastic and when friends come over I just forward to the songs and crank up the sound. It's like a mini concert at times. Anyhow, after all these years I still LOVE this movie!!



2. Purple Rain single handedly defined a subculture that had never before been seen by the public eye. Even if you consider yourself to be familiar with the album, you will discover a whole new layer to the masterpiece of a soundtrack when you watch the performances that coincide with the music.
   
   If you have yet to see this film, I ask you, why not?



3. This has always been my favorite movie. Back when the only access I had to this film was via a Music Video show, "When Doves Cry" became my favorite song, and "Let's Go Crazy" was a close second. I watched every Prince video, and eventually had access to Satellite by babysitting. I saw Purple Rain several times on satellite, later bought the vhs tape, and I purchase better versions as they are released. This movie inspired me throughout life. Ironically, I accomplished most of my dreams and desires without becoming famous, but the movie is inspirational for numerous reasons.
   
   I loved the androgyny of the '80s, the glam, and the wild lifestyles. Prince was and is a master of music, performance, and I dig his acting as well. I also recommend Under the Cherry Moon, and his other movies, recorded performances, etc. However, for me, Purple Rain is "it." This movie was the crux and focal point of my life, for a long time. I lived a unique life, inspired by this film, and lived out many dreams. To me, this movie is about doing whatever it takes to get where you want to be, without losing your Self in the process.
   
   Prince is an amazing musician. I own most of what he has created on CD, and I never tire of his music. I rarely watch movies more than once or twice, because of my recall. However I do not know how many times I have seen Purple Rain.
   
   I believe that many people who are Driven, and want to achieve will appreciate this movie. Those who did not live it might want to visit the era. Our "future" became boring, and all the Individuals became automatons. Shake it up. "...Go Crazy...."



4. I love Prince he's so hot and sexy. the dvd is a great quality i watch it all the time.



5. Contrary to Tom Keogh's review at the top of the page, Albert Magnoli was very much alive when I spoke to him at the end of last year. His direction and editing for the musical portions of this film are perfect. But the plot that serves as the backdrop is somewhat weak and fragmented. Morris Day is supposed to be Prince's romantic rival for Apolonia, but in a scene where they are drunk and showing affection for each other in back of the night club, he doesn't even try to hug her before Prince sweeps her away on his motorcycle. The film's musical numbers are not to be missed, Take Me With You and Computer Blue being my favorites.

5 comments about The Prophecy.

1. Someone bought me this dvd off of my wish list because I thought it was about witches! I was so mistaken.
   
   I thought this movie was terrible. It is very very slow to pick up and some parts are hard to understand and follow. Basically, fallen angels (who are angry that God created human beings in His image)are in a war with the rest of the angels. Throughout periods of boredom and a snail pace plot, there is horrendous images of angels burning to death & angel war scenes of bloody angels hanging on posts.
   
   I also had a hard time buying into Walken's performance. Although I generally think he is a good actor, he was not believable in this role.
   
   The highlight of the film was Viggo Mortensen (more well-known from the Lord of the Rings Triology)who plays Lucifer.



2. The Prophecy is a family classic. I bought it to replace a VHS tape that had been stolen. My family and I LOVE this movie and recommend it to anyone. Amazon is so easy to buy from, and their prices are great. I could have tried the whole ebay thing, but I personally will go with Amazon whenever I can.



3. 
   Angels shown with human faults, pride, hate and envy. Walken played
   a great Gabriel!



4. Thomas Daggett (Elias Koteas) is about to be ordained minister, but he suddenly has problems and receives terrifying visions. He ponders that most turn away from religion because they receive too little knowledge, but he turned away because he received too much.
   
   Years later, he has become a police officer, and after working one day he returns home to see a long-haired Eric Stoltz standing on the back of a chair in his apartment. If that doesn't scare you into religion, nothing will. Well, Simon (Stoltz) mentions that he saw the same visions as Thomas, ostensibly to prove some sort of transcendent connection.
   
   Stoltz, an angel who gathers the souls of recently deceased, returns to his apartment, registered under an alias, where he is attacked by an evil, hermaphrodite angel. We know this second guy is evil because the new guy has obsidian black eyes, and dies quicker than ensign Johnson on a Star Trek away mission. Upon his death, he just so happens to be carrying a Bible with the 23rd Chapter of St. Johns Revelations, which doesn't exist on earth. It is within the bible that Daggett learns that there is a heaven-and-hell battle between angels. Some of the angels, namely Gabriel (Christopher Walken) are upset that God has allowed humans into heaven. The recent death of the most evil man on the planet provides the ultimate weapon in that battle, and it's a search for his soul - a soul that Simon has taken and hidden inside a little girl.
   
   In the end there is just a little bit too much going on, and the people are way too composed considering they are in the midst of the angel battle, zombie slaves of Gabriel, evil souls being exorcised, winged angels flying over head, and the Devil audibly conversing with people on an Indian Reservation. Walken's great, but the rest of the movie is only slightly above average, and the plot seems to be just a bit too involved and far-fetched.



5. "Jeezus H. Christ, people! Christopher Walken as a vengeful, none-to-happy Archangel?! Nuff said....Oh, and the dude from 'Killing Zoe' also rocks." PILATE: A Brutal Bible Tale

5 comments about Alias - The Complete Second Season.

1. LOVE ALIAS. Great season...probably the best of the 5. Love Sydney...love her mother...love the season.



2. I love Alias, in this season, every chapter is very interesting, and you always end up wanting to watch the next one, rather than wait one week to see the next one.
   
   This is the only show I want to watch, the whole five seasons of it.
   
   A must buy!!



3. I paid 49.00 when it was first released. Great to catch up on missed episodes. Too bad the show ended.



4. Last Year...on a very special "Alias":
   
   Sydney Bristow, a young woman working on her PHd while working part-time at Credit Dauphine, leads a double life as a secret agent for SD-6 - purportedly a deep-cover branch of the CIA, but really a faction of "The Alliance", a global-network of arch-criminals who make hundreds of millions in arms sales, extortion and murder. Warned by her father when SD-6 murders her fiancé and then marks her for death, Sydney "defects" to the CIA, and becomes their double-agent. Now Sydney conducts compound missions - operations for SD-6 which are really counter-missions for the CIA intended to bring SD-6 down. Her only ally in SD-6 is her father, Jack Bristow, one of the few who knows the truth about the organization and its chief - the evil Arvin Sloane. Sydney must navigate the tight channels between SD-6 and its rivals (other evil organizations, security operatives of the alliance obsessed with uncovering moles, etc.) and not infrequently other functionaries of the US Government. In season 1, Syd faced several complications: the workings of a renaissance-era inventor named Rambaldi whose writings and inventions border on the prophetic and the apocalyptic, the shifting (and often selfish) loyalties of her homicidal father, the meddling of her reporter-friend Will Tippen and the truth about her mother, Laura Bristow (AKA KGB agent Irina Derevko, AKA "the Man"). (MadTV spoofed this show with a rapid fire skit that parodied the many tangled webs of Sydney Bristow's life - the biggest joke is how much of the material was accurate.)
   
   If that sounds like a lot, it is, especially since many of the episodes resolve around the same basic idea: a mission that involves Sydney sneaking into a highly-secured location in disguise, break into a secure vault or hack a computer using exotic technology, grab the goods, kick-box her way out. Rinse and repeat. Nevertheless, the show manages to work its plot twists in how these missions connect - a mission goes bad, and somebody's captured, is he worth the risk?; a mission goes too well, and SD-6 gets the goods before Sydney can get them to the CIA; and just how good is this intel anyway? Brisk action keeps each episode going - also keeping us from wondering how SD-6's agents (presumably about as competent as Sydney, multilingual, combat-trained, techno-savvy and just so generally brilliant in so many other areas) never learn of SD-6's true nature while out in the field.
   
   Tonight, on ALIAS!!
   Everybody's loyalties are strained to the breaking point. It begins with mom - Laura Bristow (referred almost all the time as "Derevko") revealing herself as "The Man", the shadowy head of an organization with a murderous efficiency rivaling that of SD-6. Surrendering herself to the CIA ("The Enemy Walks In") she proves in every way the perfect match for Jack Bristow. Can she be trusted? Sydney is torn, but her father is not - making us wonder how far he'll go to discredit her. And what will happen when the Bristows take a family trip (hunting for WMD's in Kashmir)? Meanwhile, Will Tippen's investigation into last season's murder of Sydney's fiancé causes him to be sucked into the world of international espionage. In order to ensure his promotion into the Alliance, the evil Arvin Sloane must execute his wife, Emily. (Dying of cancer, Emily blabs what she knows about SD-6 to Syd, and then inconveniently goes into remission.) When Sloane receives hints that Emily may be alive, he slowly goes off his hinges - or is it something else? Season 2 gives more attention & action to characters given the side-order treatment last year, including Dixon, Marshall and even Asst. Director Kendall (Terry O'Quinn - YES!!!).
   
   "Alias" is a lot of fun even though it's also dated - having less in common with shows like "Lost", "Heroes" and the new BSG than the shows replaced by them (any of the reincarnations of "Star Trek"). "Alias" isn't about ordinary people in extraordinary situations; nor will we find Syd in a situation where her only hope is a tenacity she's not supposed to have. And most graying of all, we never doubt that Syd's targets have it coming - they're all bad-guys, and the only bad consequences of Sydney's actions are further missions. For all the murkiness about SD-6 or any pretension about how we're too modern to simplify the world into goodguys and badguys, once Syd's stilettos go into action, we need not worry that she's going after a totally innocent dude, or that the measures (or wardrobe) taken aren't overly extreme. "Alias" is about as obsolete as a show can be, but it gives the spy-fi genre a great treatment, with larger-than-life (and meaner) characters, enigmatic loyalties and some beguiling questions.
   
   STUFF THAT ALMOST KEPT US FROM TUNING IN:
   No show is perfect, though "Alias" has some quirks which nearly abuse the privilege. Needless celebrity guests (since they're stars, the show can't do that much to them or with them), too much important dialog spoken in quick and hushed tones, too much info spoken straight out ("subtext" anyone?), too much gratuitous footage of Jennifer Garner's bod or of Syd in suggestive clothing (Yes, we know she's mega-hot, but that doesn't mean we should be treated like we're a bunch of stalkers) and too many artificially-emotional scenes with extra-sappy music playing in the background (if you're wife is a bigger fan of "Grey's Anatomy" or "October Road" than you are, you know what I'm talking about).
   
   That aside, "Alias" is still a fun ride that sends the spy-thriller genre out with a bang. Lena Olin is coolly sexy as the evil/motherly Derevko, while Victor Garber and Terry O'Quinn vie for the title of "CIA's meanest", while Ron Rifkind chews up the scenery as an archvillain in an age where such men are thought extinct. The show is like one of Sydney's disguises, a sheath of artifice over a compelling and inescapable reality.



5. this was my first season collection. i have watched and loved first season and i predicted that second one should be fantastic. as i predicted, that was awesome. each episode took me to the adventure of two sided agent sydney and her complicated family :D

5 comments about End of Days.

1. End Of Days DVD
   
   End Of Days starring Arnold Swarzennegger playing a cop turned security guard seeking to prevent a diabolical plot for Satan to mate with a human. Great special effects.
   
   
   Recommended for Arnold Swarzennegger fans and fans of action movies.
   
   Gunner December, 2007



2. This review is for the HD DVD version of this film.......
   
   Overall the movie is just OK. Like the title says, its entertaining if there is nothing better on TV. I bought the HD DVD version after not seeing this film for nearly 8 years. Too bad i didnt rent this before buying it. lol The HD DVD version is pretty good for the quality but the film itself is lacking. This is ment for only those who are die-hard Arnie fans....



3. End Of Days was billed as Schwarzenegger comeback after the misstep of a movie Batman & Robin. While Schwarzenegger is good in the film Gaberial Byrne has the most fun as the devil. Robin Tuney does good in her first female lead and Kevin Pollack gives some one-iners. Peter Hymas has made a okay film with enough action to please the Schwarzenegger fans.



4. not that the film is really bad, it's ok, it's just that Arnie is too buff looking to be a drunk so he wasen't too convincing in the dramatic scenes when his family was murdered. Enjoy!



5. A great flick with a scary premise, some people might not find this premise scary but there are others who might find it downright freigthning. Arnie is at his best here his acting is top notch and the action scenes are phenomenal. If your an arnie fan get this flick dont listen to some reviewers and go into this movie thinking your gonna see something brand new cause trust me most movies are not new premises theres only so many ways a story can be told)remember some of the most memorable movies are rehashes and familiar stories. This is a great action flick it does what it intended to,takes you out of reality . If your lookng for shakespear buy macbeth or hamlet if you wan a great action flick get this movie.

5 comments about G.I. Jane.

1. Definitely one of Ridley Scott's lesser moments, GI Jane's main problem is that the script takes an interesting, somewhat possible scenario and quickly hurries it towards absurdity. The first hour of GI Jane is absolutely riveting, as Demi Moore's character is selected to be a trial subject for a "gender-blind" Navy. Naturally, sexist politicians and Naval higher-ups want to see her fail, so Navy SEAL (Sea, Air, Land) Combined Recon Team (CRT) is chosen as her trial by fire. It's all smooth as silk in Scott's hand, and a pre-Lord Of The Rings Viggo Mortensen is electric as the over-the-top Command Master Chief Urgayle, tasked with making commandos out of the maggots. Trevor Jones' bombastic chanting and horns borrows a bit too heavily from the best bits of Hans Zimmer's score for Crimson Tide (another Navy action-drama, ironically directed by Ridley's brother, Tony Scott). Jones' music tends to be excessive and overwhelming during the action scenes, though it's quite effective when it goes for quick, sudden orchestral hits of chanting between scene changes.
   
   The problem with GI Jane is its simplistic and heavy-handed way of asking the film's "big questions," which seem like they were written so that even the dumbest person in the audience will quickly get the point. Additionally, halfway through the film there's a sudden shift in tone, and the film rapidly becomes a really dumb action flick in the vein of Shooter or The Rock. By the time this supposedly stealthy and precise team of SEALs starts blowing up half of the Libyan coast, you can't help but wonder what happened to that interesting movie you were watching. Thankfully, the film ends before the "you can be my wingman/teammate any day, Demi! Top Gun-motifs can fully sink the film faster than the Titanic.
   
   Still, Demi does a bang-up job getting into shape and stomping around witht the boys. Aragorn is, as said before, delightfully excessive, and Jim Caviezel, prior to playing Jesus for Mel Gibson, was a wacky yet lovable Navy SEAL. Some of the other supporting performances are just a bit awkward, however. Naturally, being a Ridley Scott picture, everything is exquisitely shot.
   
   GI Jane could have been a really thought-provoking film, but neither screenwriters David Twohy and Danielle Alexandra or the producers are willing to risk that kind of intelligence. As a result, the film is a smart-dumb flick like Michael Bay's The Rock: it's smart enough to draw you in and keep you immersed, but once it ends, any intelligent analysis will just make your brain hurt.



2. I can't help but be dumbfounded when I think the director of such excellent thought provoking films as Alien, Blade Runner & Thelma & Louise directed this trite piece of PC girl power. Whether or not women belong in front line combat or special forces is an extremely important issue and deserves a far more serious consideration than what is presented in this movie. G.I. Jane spoonfeeds simplistic answers to complicated questions. I wonder if the moviemakers even agree with the moral message of thier own movie.
   
   The film lives and dies on Demi Moore's performance and she is completely wrong for the role. Demi Moore is just simply not believable as a Navy SEAL trainee who lasts longer than a few days. She is 5'5 and a slender bodytype. I don't care how tough or buff a person is, a person that small, male or female would not be able to handle the hardest training of any military in the world. Ask yourself. Do you really want someone as small as Moore protecting you and yours? In the special forces doing the dirtiest of the dirty work? Me neither. A bigger woman would at least have been more credible as strong enough. Lucy Lawless & Sigourney Weaver come to mind.
   
   The movie seems to be a compendium of modern military movie stereotypes and lazy scriptwriting. The politicians are slimy and the soldiers are hateful, stupid and cruel. How not original. Moore's characterization of Lt. O'Neill lacks any subtlty or nuance. She has no inner monologue besides a constant "be tough" mantra. We are oblidged to root for Moore's character not out of sympathy or understanding but from a filmgoer's obligation to root for the hero-protagonist vs. the bad guys.
   
   Important questions are raised but real discussion is avoided in favor of Moore amping up her tuff-guy-with-[...] response to everything. The ending, as many other reviewers have noted, is contrived and silly. I have a hard time seeing the military putting a whole team of untested trainees in a real special OPs situation. In the end, Ridley Scott seems oddly content to make an ordinary PC era Hollywood patriotic music and bullets movie.



3. give me a break people- "This movie was a real disappointment. Laced with inaccurate facts and utterly unrealistic scenarios."- since when are movies supposed to be realistic or accurate. if you're the kind of person that bases how good a movie is on how realistic it is then you've gotta be a very dull person. how do you even know the filmmakers wanted it to be realistic? it was a great movie with a great story, it doesn't matter that it's not realistic. if they start to make only realistic movies i'm gonna shoot myself, because movies ARE NOT supposed to be realistic. if you want something real go watch a frickin biography! this is a good movie with a good story and great action scenes.



4. Ordering was easy. Delivery was prompt. Product was in good condition. I will be using Amazon again for furture purposes.



5. 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!!!

5 comments about Dragonfly (Widescreen).

1. First, I do have to say I like Kevin Costner is just about any movie, but this brought out a very gentle side of Costner.
   The movie is part spiritual, mystery, thriller, romance and love. It is definitely, "what would and how far would you go to unearth a mystery and give your love and life for the one you were meant to be with."
   I really like the movie-I own the movie (B)



2. I can't say enough good things about this movie. Kevin Costner is outstanding in this role. It's a great story from beginning to end with a beautiful message. A truly intense believable thriller! I have watched this movie several times and still look forward to seeing it again. Highly recommended!



3. An amazing thriller that goes against any kind of logic. Everything is wrong, resolutely wrong. A pregnant woman, a doctor mind you, decides to take a bunch of kids to the jungle deep in Venezuela on an adventurous sabbatical. An accident throws the school bus down into a river. No survivors. The husband, another doctor, is then the victim of visions, hallucinations, seizures of some kind that he very quickly interprets as signs from her trying to speak to him from where she is. He believes and thus is led to going back to where she died and to the village of Indians living at the foot of the waterfall where she met her fate. I won't reveal the end. The film is not interesting because of the thrilling suspense, nor because of the rather sentimental ending. It is interesting because of the way it describes the reactions of normal people in front of something, or someone that does not satisfy their expectations of what they call sanity. Anything or anyone that looks suspiciously insane in our society is at once rejected, becomes suspicious, and is supposed to be pushed aside into some kind of social sabbatical, or even worse is hassled by the guardians of normality in our social order, i.e. priests, and cops, and doctors. The point is that the story that supports this fact is so hectic and farfetched that it gets the true fact down the chute along with the unbelievable elements in the story. Believing is essential, provided what is believed is believable. Otherwise the film becomes pure entertainment, and it is too somber to be pure entertainment.
   
   Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines



4. I ordered this for my mom and she was incredibly grateful. She loves this movie and was so happy when I found it for her on Amazon.com.



5. Really enjoyed this film..
   
   So glad there was a happy ending.. was beginning to think it was going to be dissapointing end.
   
   Shame the song "star" by Zoo Story cant be found anywhere on the film soundtrack.. and i cant even find it online - has anyone got it?
   
   Good film - worth seeing.

5 comments about Stuart Little (Deluxe Edition).

1. I thought Micheal J fox was the perfect voice for stuart for one thing his often comical yet distressed voice that he used in the back to the future trilogy worked perfectly.
   Geena Davis made the perfect Mom and that guy even if he was a child molester which I far from condone played the role of the dad to a tee. He didn't do anything untowards to kids in the film so It doesn't come into play in my review anyways. I thought the scene with the boat race was perfect the best part. Snowbell had some great lines that if my cat's spoke english I think they'd hardily agree to like " I gotta go lick myself, scratch and stare at traffic that could take hours if I do it right" All together a charming comedy movie if you don't mind that other then the films name and the charictors names there is absolutely nothing related to the book in this film. Even the boat race is a far deviation from the book. If you don't mind that then it's perfectly harmless family fun with alot less bathroom humor than the normal these days. However I urge you when your kids are older read them or havem read the book. EB White was a brilliat writer and deserves to have the classic story at least be known as far from the holloywood script.



2. I received this product quickly and it was in brand new condition. I would buy more items from this seller!



3. My wife Mechelle and I went to see this movie as our first date. She made a wise choice as it is a very cute movie. I would definitely recommend it to both the young and old in your household. This movie stars many great actors (both in person and voiced) including Michael J. Fox, Geena Davis, Hugh Laurie, Chazz Palminteri, David Alan Grier.



4. I ordered this movie for my son's birthday. He was too young when this series came out. He is starting to enjoy movies that aren't always animated. Lovely story. Recieved this DVD on time and brand new. I will continue to shop at Amazon



5. This movie is visually very very cute. Hugh Laurie is terrific as always. The mouse is darling. But the storyline does not resemble the book much, and I was much disturbed by the evil fake parents who come to take him from the adoptive ones. This is a movie for little children yet it shows Stuart being led to his death by his supposed mouse parents. When will disney stop making movies about evil mothers? Children can be entertained without being terrorized by such stupid ideas. Read the book to your child, watch a Wooster and Jeeves movie, enjoy Michael Fox in something else, and skip this one..

5 comments about Taking of Pelham One Two Three.

1. I saw this movie as a child and the details were sketchy. I watched it recently and i was very satisfied. The movie is gripping and the excitment starts right away. This is a must see movie, whether you are watching it after many years or its your first time. if your from new york or ever rode on the nyc subway, you'll enjoy it even more.



2. This movie is truly a timeless classic, from the goofy college girl meditating for a red light, the gruf not suffering any fools police officers.The powerless MTA officials expressing their frustration of powerlessness at the unrevaling of events.The portrayal of NYC in grips with a financial crisis of the 70s.The dialogue and reaction of the average person on the subway train.The glimpses of the WTC in the background(who knew those glimpses would mean so much for someone who grew up in NYC).The facetious remarks('Yeah I got eyes', 'How many hijacked trains have we got?','Whose moving?'),they may seem like goofy one liner fillers but they are genuine and not canned like todays movie dialogues.
   This is the movie that deserves to be a cult classic, not the ridiculous and surreal Taxi Driver.Character development is excellent because it feels genuine.This movie can never be replicated.Most of the key characters in this movie grew up in NYC which is so key to playing a genuine New York official.The subway scenes are authentic, I've ridden the subway for decades and know those lines and the streets with the exits.All of it 100% authentic.I've realized that movies are meant more to be enjoyed than believed.This movie is enjoyable because of its authenticity.This movie shows that NYC is the main character and the people add life to it.This movie will never be replicated or duplicated, but has been copied.Oh, cant forget the music.The theme from Taking of Pelham 123 is so very NYC, a 70's jazz song that tells you there is trouble in NYC, big trouble.You could transplant the characters from the 70's into today and they wouldnt seem out of place.The reason thats even possible is because they all played their background.Shaw plays an English out of work mercanary (Shaws from the UK and has that sinister look to him),Mathau plays a Transit Cop(Mathau grew up NYC), even the little kids playing at the front of the subway car (I remember hoping to get on the front of the train when my mom and I would ride it when I was a kid).This is THE NYC Subway thriller movie.



3. This is a classic crime/drama movie from the 70's. Excellently cast, this well written story is a bit dated now but, not so much that it isn't a very enjoyable experience. I guess we're all spoiled by the intensity of today's action films but, I'm sure this one was pretty intense for it's time. Watching this film now, I barely remembered it. I'm glad I got to see it uncut in my home theater, it's an excellent movie, well worth seeing or revisiting.



4. Not just for transit buffs, and those loving good, solid classic movies! It should not miss in any New York City lovers DVD libairy. Classic New York language presented by great actors.
   The story is thrilling an even so, you saw the movie a couple of times, it is enjoyable over and over again!



5. A great capper movie with a New York attitude! Indeed, what do these riders expect for their lousy 35 cents? The acting and writing are fantastic. The wit-laden stress and frustration expressed by Lt. Garber, mixed with the cool, calculated brutalness of Mr. Blue makes this movie pure fun and completely entertaining. The bizarrness of the two character's figuring the other out and playing off one another has been unmatched since.

5 comments about The Bounty.

1. By far, my favortie adventure drama film! My only complaint is the opening and background music. It could have used a rousing "Gone with the Wind" memorable theme song instead of the somber haunting music employed. I liked the back and forth switches between Bligh's official enquiry and the story of the Bounty. I don't agree with the too common assessment that Bligh and Christian were both deeply flawed men. This film succeeds in presenting them in a balanced manner. I believe Bligh was mostly a victim of a very unusual set of circumstances. Officially, he was only a first lieutenant, not a captain. Unlike normal crown ventures, he lacked commissioned officers and marines to back up his authority, a critical point the film fails to bring out. Apparently, there is no evidence to back up the implication that Bligh announced his intension to sail around Cape Horn, thus provoking the mutiny. It seems plain that the instigation for the mutiny had mainly to do with the very long(5 months) layover in a paradise of willing girls and relative leisure, which many of the crew, including Christian, preferred to continue over a return to naval drudgery and discipline and an ultimate return to England. Christian apparently, as the film dramatized, had also accumulated an intolerable load of recent brow beatings by Bligh. Apparently, he had considered suicide shortly before the mutiny as the only practical way out of his conflicting feelings, as the film may suggest. It is painfully obvious that the prudish aloof Bligh feels very unconfortable in the leisurely free love atmosphere of Tahiti that most of his men relish. Thus, he seems to his crew a different species all together.
   I found this version of the Bounty story far superior to previous versions in terms of its characterization of Bligh and Christian and its overall realism. Anthony Hopkins was unbeatable as Bligh, and should have won an academy award. In contrast to some reviewers, I found Mel Gibson entirely adequate as the real Christian. Some prefer Gable's heroic rabble-rousing version of Christian which fit in with other 1930s swashbucking adventure tales. In terms of realism, it also helped that Gibson was much closer to the real Christian's age of 22 than either Gable or Brando. A few reviewers object to the extensive realistic portrayal of bare-breasted nymphomaniac native maidens, something the strict codes of the mid-1930s wouldn't allow. I found this a definite plus and, having married to South Seas maiden, continue to enjoy the view when not watching this film.



2. If u love this movie, like I do, forget this region 1 edition and go for the UK region 0 disc. The UK disc has two exclusive commentaries and lots of extras not found on the US disc. It, the UK disc, is also NTSC (the US television system) so is perfect for US customers.



3. Awesome movie, just a pity there wasn't time to cover the pitcairn story and also more on Bligh's boat journey to timor.



4. The 1935 black & White version of "Mutiny on the bounty" may have won an oscar for Best Picture at the time, but will likely strike modern viewers as dated and unrealistic. Marlon Brando's 1962 remake is the most epic, captivating and compelling version even though it failed at the box office when first released; indeed the '62 version is a masterpiece (see my Amazon review). But Mel Gibson's 1984 version, simply called
   "The Bounty," is without doubt the most historically accurate and realistic film version of the infamous mutiny.
   
   THE PLOT: The Bounty mutiny story is so fascinating because it's TRUE. William Bligh, as acting captain, was sent on a mission in December 1787 to bring breadfruit plants from Tahiti back to England. Bligh intended on circumnavigating the globe in fulfilling the mission. Unfortunately he and his crew failed to get around Cape Horn, South America, and had to go the long way around Africa. It thus took them 10 months to reach Tahiti, wherein they were forced to stay another 5 months due to the breadfruit's "dormant" period. The natives were friendly and the women beautiful. It comes as no surprise that the crew naturally fell under the spell of the Polynesian paradise; Fletcher Christian even married the King's daughter, Maimiti. But after 5 months they had to get on with their mission and return to Naval discipline and England. Three and a half weeks later on April 28, 1789, Fletcher took over the ship with 18 other mutineers. 22 remained loyal to Bligh and 2 others were neutral. Christian set bligh and 18 loyalists adrift in the ship's launch boat and then sailed back to Tahiti where he dropped off 16 men but picked up 6 Tahitian men and 11 native women, including Maimiti. Fletcher then set forth with 8 other mutineers and the Tahitians to elude the Royal Navy, ultimately settling on Pitcairn Island, which was well off the beaten path and misplaced on Royal charts, seemingly a perfect hiding place to live out the rest of their days.
   
   WHAT WORKS: As already stated "The Bounty" is the most historically accurate version. It also has the most realistic vibe, which isn't to say that the '62 version isn't believable, it's just that this '84 version strikes the viewer as completely REAL. It's almost as if the film takes you back in time to view the actual events.
   
   This version also gives the most balanced and positive portrayal of the infamous Captain Bligh, played by Anthony Hopkins to great effect. Indeed the film stresses that he was exonerated in the matter. But it also hints of his character flaws that ultimately provoked the mutiny. In real life Bligh had a bad tempor and was abusive & insulting to his subordinates. The other two versions show an event that really happened on the Bounty: two big cheeses came up missing on the ship and Bligh unjustly blamed and punished members of his crew even though it was he himself that stold them!
   
   Perhaps Bligh's biggest flaw was that he lacked the ability to inspire loyalty in others; by all accounts he was a real bastage to be around when he was in authority. Lending creedance to this is the fact that, even though he was exonerated in the Bounty case, he provoked ANOTHER mutiny years later in New South Wales, Australia!
   
   Despite all this Bligh was certainly a brilliant seaman and navigator. The film shows this with Bligh and the 18 loyalists on the adrift launch. After failing to settle on near islands due to unfriendly natives, Bligh navigates the small craft over 3600 miles to Timor in 47 days on very few provisions. He didn't have any charts or compass. All he had was a sextant and a pocket watch. Although all of the loyalists survived this incredible journey 5 later died due to ailments sustained in the voyage. The '62 version barely addresses this miraculous event but "The Bounty" devotes quite a few scenes to it.
   
   The score by Vangelis is very fitting. The best part of this composition is heard during the end credits. The film shows Fletcher, the mutineers and the Tahitians stranded on Pitcairn as they sadly observe
   The Bounty go down in flames. They know they can never go home again. Vangelis' unique piece then plays out over the credits. It perfectly captures the mood and setting. It's so magnificent sometimes I just play the end credits sequence. It's definitely one of the most emotionally potent endings in motion picture history.
   
   WHAT DOESN'T WORK: Although Gibson is more realistic as Fletcher Christian than Marlon Brando, especially since Gibson was closer to Christian's real age of 23-25 (Brando was 36-37 during filming), Mel simply lacks Brando's captivating charisma.
   
   The Tahitian scenes seem to lack pizzazz; the film almost crawls to a halt (which is the the exact opposite of Brando's version). It doesn't personally bother me because the film is attempting to show us what leads to the mutineers' decision to take the ship, but some viewers may have a problem with it, in particular those with ADD.
   
   "The Bounty" also fails to give any glimpse of what life would offer the mutineers & Tahitians on Pitcairn Island. The '62 version, on the other hand, devotes a number of scenes to this part of the story. This is not a negative to me, however, since showing subsequent scenes on Pitcairn would ruin the powerful end sequence noted above.
   
   FINAL ANALYSIS: "The Bounty" is the most historically accurate and realistic version of the infamous mutiny even though Brando's version is the most epic, engaging and compelling. I recommend seeing both versions back to back, which is what I usually do. Both versions are amongst my favorite films of all time. In fact, I consider them masterpieces.
   
   The film runs 2 hours and 12 minutes; Brando's version is 3 hours.
   
   THE FATE OF THE MUTINEERS: There was ample land, water and food for the 9 mutineers, 6 Tahitian men and 11 women on Pitcairn Island. Christian naturally became the established leader and many children were born. Although Fletcher treated the native men fairly, other mutineers treated them like servants and relations deteriorated. When John Williams' native wife died he took one of the Tahitian men's women as a "replacement," which naturally caused the Polynesian men to revolt. This conflict took place 3.5 years after they arrived on Pitcairn. The result was that five of the mutineers died, including Christian, and all six of the Tahitian men. Of the four remaining mutineers, one died in a drunken fall and Quintal was killed by the other two after a drunken fit of rage. The remaining two mutineers had a bible from the ship and became devout Christians, converting the Tahitian women and children and holding regular church services. Peace and goodwill reigned in the colony. Ned Young died in 1800 of asthma leaving John Adams (aka Alex Smith), 9 women and 23 children to be discovered by an American whaling vessel in 1808. Adams was interestingly granted amnesty by the British government. Today Pitcairn is home to about 50 people from 9 families, most descendants of the mutineers and Tahitians. Many adherents of Seventh-Day Adventism due to a mission in the 1890s.



5. The premise of this Australian film is to purpose an historically more accurate and plausible explanation for the famed "mutiny on HMAV (His Majesty's Armed Vessel) Bounty." That proposal is that Captain (actually "Lieutenant") Bligh (Anthony Hopkins) was a working class stiff trying to be upward mobil and had basically a working class mouth -- i. e. he was too verbally abusive, not the fictional physical sadist that Charles Laughton portrayed in the 1930s classic.
   
   Moreover like every would-be middle class sort Bligh was a sexual prig of sorts and deeply resented "Mr Christian's" (Mel Gibson) liason with the comely Tahitian chief's daughter -- indeed a hint of suppressed homosexual attraction and jealousy is present. Bligh though is a great sailor and a genuinely brave man; Christian in this film is the self-indulgent one, the upper class "gentleman" who yields to temptation and even a sexual obsession which turns out, it appears, to be rather less rewarding than the "south sea paradise" it may have suggested.
   
   The principals are, as usual, very fine in their roles -- Hopkins is a bit "mannered" as his performances often are but Gibson is straight on, "clean" and Daniel Day Lewis shows up in a supporting role in which he manifests his "darkly" mysterious persona. Wonderful on location scenery and the familiar story is again made interesting and compelling...