Amazon.com

Jim Jarmusch's 1991 ensemble comedy turns a gimmick into a revelation. The story begins in Los Angeles one evening at 7:07 p.m. A talent agent (Gena Rowlands) gets into the back of a taxi driven by a sullen, chain-smoking young woman (Winona Ryder), and over the course of their bumpy conversation, Rowlands's character becomes convinced that the cabby would be perfect for a particular part in a movie. Meanwhile, at that very moment, taxi drivers in New York, Paris, Rome, and Helsinki are all having unique encounters with a variety of fares, breaking through that invisible social barrier between the front and back seats of their cars, often to absurd or touching effect. Among them are cabby Roberto Benigni's ranting confessions to a priest, Armin Mueller-Stahl's relinquishing of the wheel to a stunned Giancarlo Esposito, and Isaach De Bankolé's relentless discussion of sight and sex with an angry, blind woman (Beatrice Dalle). What emerges is a chain of brief intimacies (not always welcomed by the characters), like a number of matches lit simultaneously across the globe, flickering brightly for a few short moments. This popular work by Jarmusch helped confirm his reputation as a fiercely independent filmmaker of rare perception, rigor, and classical sensibility matched with original thinking. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (30)

OFFBEAT, POIGNANT FIVE-STORY COMEDY
Tom Waits' music helps establish the mood of the streets in cities, empty of its day people. Seemingly, the minds of Jim Jarmusch's night people are affected by all of the dreams and nightmares surrounding them. NIGHT ON EARTH creates a lonely, romantic mood similar to Jarmusch's "Mystery Train," a film about wanderers in nighttime Memphis.

NIGHT ON EARTH presents us with slices of life in five cities played out by taxi drivers and their passengers at twilight through dawn. A Los Angeles casting agent (Gena Rowlands) tries convincing a tough young female cabbie (Winona Ryder) that she should have a career in the movies. In New York, a black passenger (Giancarlo Esposito) is convinced his driver (Armin Mueller-Stahl), who had just immigrated from Germany, will never find Brooklyn without help. In Paris, a taxi driver from the Ivory Coast throws out two tipsy African diplomats from his cab, then picks up a self-assured, tough and sexy young blind woman. In Rome, a cabbie (Roberto Benigni) burdens an aging priest by "confessing" his sexual perversions; causing the priest to have a heart attack in the back seat. Problem: what to do with the dead priest? Meanwhile in Helsinki, an icy snow covered winter dawn surrounds three drunken passengers as their driver decides who has the most tragic story to tell.

The film opens somewhere in space, zooming in on LAX airport in Los Angeles at exactly 7:07 PM. Jarmusch is mainly concerned with character; with relationships that form. For example, he throws together in a taxi a tattooed, gum-chewing, chain-smoking young cabdriver played to the hilt by Ryder, and the elegant Hollywood casting executive Rowlands who decides she'll cast her for a movie. But Ryder character announces, "I've got my life all mapped out," hoping to work her way up to mechanic. "There must be lotsa girls who want to be in the movies. Not me," she instructs the presumptuous and bemused talent scout. Nice!

Moving from Los Angeles, Jarmusch creates a global feeling of kinship. As the film progresses eastward around the world, we will hear Spanish, German, French, Italian, Finnish and even a little Latin. The film's literal and figurative vehicle remains the same: the inside of a taxi moving through a the empty streets of a great city in the middle of the night. Maybe the New York segment is the funniest. Mueller-Stahl's German cab driver lets passenger Esposito, who insists on driving himself home to Brooklyn to admireingly do so. On the way, they encounter anmd pick up Esposito's foul-mouthed sister in law, Rosie Perez as the shrill counterpoint voice from the back seat. Each man (the German named Helmut and the cool black guy who is Yo-Yo) argues that the other one has a rediculous name.

In Paris an Ivory Coast, African taxi driver gets up the nerve to ask his blind young woman passenger what sex is like for her: what's it like to make love with someone she can't see? Then he asks her what she thinks about colors. Without a hint of self consciousness, she abruptly responds that she knows more about colors and sex than he ever will! "I can do everything you can do," she assertively answers and announces that her entire being is involved in whatever she does. Retorts the skeptical cab driver, "Can you drive?" She shoots back, "Can you?!"

Jim Jarmouch offers us offbeat comedy and pathos at their best.

A true unsung classic
Night On Earth is often described as a "slice of life", but it is more accurate to call it a slice of time, cinema temporal rather than cinema verite. Unlike the new novel, in which the timeline of a story is chopped up like a piece of film and re-spliced out of order, Jarmusch's little masterpiece pulls apart five simltaneous events which take place in different time zones and presents them sequentially. The new novel technique gives the impression that ordered time is merely a psychic convention, that life is ultimately fragmented...by allowing us to experience five simultaneous taxi rides, from 7 pm in Los Angele to 5 AM in Helsinki, Jarmusch shows us the unity, rather than disconinutity, of life across time. It is a bit like what I imagine the astronauts felt in viewing the Earth from the Moon.

I find Night on Earth to be a tremendously comforting and human film...it is five small vignettes, each describing it's own particular emotional, as well as temporal, moment. Winona Ryder's turn as a gum snapping chain smoking tomboy taxi driver to Gena Rowland's high powered call-phone addicted Hollywood agent is priceless.. Roberto Benigni delivers one of the most hilarious comic performances of a legendary career in his portrayal of a chronically self-narrating lunatic careening through the deserted streets of Rome. Despite the differing feeling-tones of each story, a tender shared sense of the commoness of experience, what Latinos would call "sympatico", prevails. This movie is a masterpiece of the best sort of non-cloying sentiment.

See the film...

fun flick
Watch this one with friends. The Italian part had me laughing so hard I hurt.

Oh. My. God.
If you haven't seen this 1991 classic comedy, see it now.
The premise is that we follow events during one night in taxis in several places around the world: New York, LA, Paris, Rome, and Helsinki. The best, by far, the one I always think of first when someone mentions this incredibly funny and touching film, is the one set in Rome with Roberto Benigni as the taxi driver. He gives this rambling monologue sort of a confession about lambs and pumpkins and sex that you HAVE to see the movie to appreciate. There's a priest in the back seat getting more and more 'cardiac challenged' by the specific nature of this confession. It's a marvelous set piece, and I always rewind and watch that sequence at least 2-3 more times. It is just as funny on the 3rd viewing as it was on the first.
Top notch.

A Great Night on Earth
I watched this film late at night, when every sane person is supposed to be asleep, out of their cars and in their beds. Life still goes on, however, for the taxi-drivers who move people from one quiet location to another in the wee hours of the night. The locations are quiet, but the people are not, and the dialogue in this movie is humorous, meaningful, and real. A temporary bond is formed between passenger and driver (sometimes the roles are even reversed, as in the New York vignette featuring Helmut Grokenberger and YoYo, played by Armin Mueller-Stahl and Giancarlo Esposito, respectively). Armin Mueller-Stahl, born in 1930, may be relatively unknown to American audiences (as opposed to, say, Rosie Perez), but he did play Vertikoff in the George Clooney flick "The Peacemaker" (1997). Who is the stranger at the wheel who is responsible for bringing one home? What kind of person drives late at night, waiting for the dispatcher's call to a new address? A passenger has to pay him or her at the end of the ride, but there is still a feeling of gratitude, and even affection, towards this gruff conveyor of souls. "You're a good man, Mika," the half-drunk, initially hostile, Finnish workers tell their driver (played by Matti Pellonpää) at the end of their journey. Or a battle of wits takes place, as evidenced by the Paris vignette. Ivorian actor Isaach De Bankolé (who also appears in Jim Jarmusch's "Coffee and Cigarettes") is great here as a luckless "taxiste" whose prying questions are turned against him by his blind passenger (played by Béatrice Dalle). Roberto Benigni is of course hilarious, and does here what he does best: rapid, hilarious dialogue with a lot of gesticulation and wide grins. He and the actor who plays the priest (not a bishop), Paolo Bonacelli, have been co-stars before: on the Benigni vehicle "Johnny Stecchino."
I am really looking forward to the time when "Night on Earth" is made available on DVD. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Consciously crafted by director George Stevens as a piece of American mythmaking, Shane is on nearly everyone's shortlist of great movie Westerns. A buckskin knight, Shane (Alan Ladd) rides into the middle of a range war between farmers and cattlemen, quickly siding with the "sod-busters." While helping a kindly farmer (Van Heflin), Shane falls platonically in love with the man's wife (Jean Arthur, in the last screen performance of a marvelous career). Though the showdowns are exciting, and the story simple but involving, what most people will remember about this movie is the friendship between the stoical Shane and the young son of the farmers. The kid is played by Brandon De Wilde, who gives one of the most amazing child performances in the movies; his parting scene with Shane is guaranteed to draw tears from even the most stonyhearted moviegoer. And speaking of stony hearts, Jack Palance made a sensational impression as the evil gunslinger sent to clean house--he has fewer lines of dialogue than he has lines in his magnificently craggy face, but he makes them count. The photography, highlighting the landscape near Jackson Hole, Wyoming, won an Oscar. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (93)

Farmers vs. Ranchers
Shane is the title of the movie and the main character of this well-made Western. Alan Ladd plays the stranger who arrives in a Western community where a range war between farmers and ranchers is about to play out. The farmers' leader is Joe Starrett, played by tough, reliable Van Heflin. He wants the farmers to stay, to stand up to rancher Rufe Riker and his hired hands.

Riker tries to buy Starrett out, but Starrett won't go. Then Riker hires a gunman - Wilson - played by Jack Palance. He's as mean as they come and he verbally goads one of the farmers into trying to "draw" on him. Wilson(Palance) kills the farmer without blinking.

The farmers are about ready to give up. But when Riker sets fire to a farmer's home as the community gathers to bury its dead, the farmers vow to "play one more hand." Riker sends men to Starrett's ranch to tell him that Riker wants to see him. But Shane stops Starrett by physically knocking him out. He knows that he must go into town to "talk" to Riker.

Civilization is fast approaching on the Western range. And Shane is going to hasten that change by going into battle against Riker.

Western Classic
Shane might well be the greatest western ever made and a true American classic. Recently in a New York Times article, Woody Allen of all people considered it the best American film of all time. The movie is about a mysterious stranger who unexpectently comes into a homestead family's life and helps in their battle against a greedy landowner who is threatening them to move off their land. Alan Ladd stars in the title role and he exudes an air of calm control and dark mystery. Shane is an expert gunman and a skilled fighter, but he doesn't want any trouble. He tries hard to avoid a fight in the local saloon, but no matter how hard he tries, trouble finds him. The homestead family is played by Van Heflin, Jean Arthur and the young Brandon De Wilde. Mr. De Wilde is excellent as a wild-eyed youngster who grows to idolize Shane. Mr. Heflin plays the strong, defiant landowner, but also loving husband to his devoted wife, played tenderly by Ms. Arthur, and his son. He stands by his new friend Shane, when the other homesteaders want him to leave when they feel he's stirring up trouble. A young Jack Palance is menacing as an icy hired gun hired to drive the homesteaders off their land. The showdown between him and Shane is a tense and taut showdown. Director George Stevens captures the breathtaking beauty of the American Old West. Shane was nominated for several Academy Awards, but failed to win any. Despite that fact, it remains a brilliant film worth repeated viewings.

Revisionist History as Entertainment
A lone rider approaches a family ranch. He observes a gang riding up to order the owner off his land. There is an economic conflict between a big land owner and small ranchers who are bringing in Jersey cows and working the land for agriculture. The big land owner wants to eliminate competition from small businesses; his government contract shows his political connections. The film shows the use of barbed wire, the invention that put an end to the open range. The settlers go into town for supplies. A barroom brawl occurs when Shane is attacked; Joe Starrett joins in to help his hired hand. Tavern owner Riker sends to Cheyenne for a hired gun, Jack Wilson, for a final solution to the homesteader problem.

The settlers gather for a July 4th celebration. They hear of Riker's hired gunfighter. That evening Riker show up to make a final offer to Starrett: join him for a good price, and abandon the other small ranchers. This offer is refused. The next day the gunfighter insults Torrey to force a duel, and kills him. Joe Starrett announces he will go into town next, without waiting for the other settlers. The question is: shall the people be oppressed and swindled by a rich powerful landowner? (Most of the large ranches were owned by corporations from back East.) Some of the small ranchers decide to abandon their claims. Yet they have the right to settle and farm the land. "This country wasn't made for just one man." The burning of one home makes the settlers decide to hang on for a while.

Riker makes an offer to draw Starret to his place (for an ambush). Calloway turns up to warn Shane of this trick. Starrett's wife argues for giving up and moving out now. (Credible?). Shane tries to stop Starrett, and they fight in the dark (to hide their body doubles?). Shane wins and leaves to keep the appointment, and force a final showdown. Shane successfully resolves the problem of Jack Wilson, then Riker, and moves on to new territory. [This avoids any retribution by Riker's allies.) {This film uses the dime-novel fantasy of a "fast-draw", which did not occur in historical records.]

This story is loosely based on the Powder River war. In reality, the settler's militia drove off the armed gang hired by the large landowners. The large ranchers tried to get rid of small ranchers by passing a law that gave them sole rights to all cattle in the state! Read the chapter in William Weir's "Written With Lead" for more details. "Unhappy are the people who want a hero."

Two stars. One for each time it put me to sleep.
Don't get me wrong, folks ,I am A HUGE fan of classic Westerns! This one, it just doesn't make it for me. Don't even get me started about Alan Ladd's "tough but gentle" potrayal of Shane. Ladd is unconvincing to this reviewer not only in the tough guy category, but his dramatic side is very, very "Ward Cleaver." AND THAT KID!!! That blasted kid. Joey, played by Brandon De Wilde. Good gawd, if he wasn't the most annoying little snot that came out of Hollywood. (before the debut of Pauly Shore) "Shane, are you gonna shoot that man? "Shane, are you gonna let me look through your Playboys?" I spent half the film (before I fell asleep) hoping Shane would say, "Come here, Joey, and help me change the wheel on this stagecoach" and have a little "accident." Joey's absence from the second half of this movie MAY have kept me awake. (but I doubt it.)

miscast but still legendary
SHANE is among the most renowned westerns in motion picture history, inspite of the miscasting of Alan Ladd in the title role. many other more accomplished actors come to mind of whom could have assumed the role, and many of these were offered the role. however it was Alan Ladd who was awarded the role.

Ladd was a formidable actor and delivered a fine performance inspite of the other more accomplished actors who may have given better performances.

regardless of Ladd in the role of SHANE, the movie was legendary and considered a true classic to this day. the other actors, which include: Van Heflin, Jean Arthur, Brandon De Wilde, Emile Meyer and Jack Palance all gave stellar performances. however it was George Stevens, a director whose name is synonymous with great filmmaking who was solely responsible for the renowned success of this truly legendary western classic. a true masterpiece. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Always a classic
I loved this movie when I was a kid. Now my daughter loves it. This movie everybody needs to have in their collection.

the Ultimate family musical
I loved this movie when I was younger and now it's the kind of movie that you can view over and over and never get tired of it.
I have the song purple people eater on CD, my son and the kids in my day care love the song they sing it on our Karaoke all the time.
so I've been looking for the movie and will not stop till I find it. This is one family movie they will never forget.

THIS FILM IS WICKED!!!!!!!!!
I watched this film as a child and haven't been able to find it anywhere! I recommend this film to all kids because it is absolutely brilliant and definately one of the best films around!!!! SO GET IT!!!!!!!!

Purple People Eater Fans
The Purple People Eater is one of the best movies of the century. I loved it as a child and our video got ruined I have never been able to find it until now and I am sad that it is out of stock. I would reccomend this movie to any parent for their children. It is a classic in my book and wish it was more popular. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Michael Radford's adaption of George Orwell's foreboding literary premonition casts John Hurt and Suzanna Hamilton as lovers who must keep their courtship secret.Aside from criminalizing sex and interpersonal relationships, the ruling party in their country Oceania both fabricates reality and reconstructs history for the sake of oppressing the masses.They brainwash their citizens via large, propaganda-spewing TV monitors installed in their living rooms, which also inspect everyone's activities. Hurt and Hamilton are among the few we see desperately trying to fight the system by keeping control of their thoughts and beliefs.While the atmosphere becomes a bit too stifling at times, the images are quite striking with their muted colors and dilapidated sets. In an interesting bit of casting, Richard Burton costars (in his final role) as a government agent who surreptitiously exposes Hurt to the ideas of resistance. Unlike many like-minded films, 1984 does not offer a flashy vision of the future, but then that aspect makes it feel all the more real. In an age when more and more of our everyday activities are being scrutinized, Big Brother may not be so far off after all. --Bryan Reesman ... Read more

Reviews (102)

An outstanding rendition/interpretation of Orwell's novel.
This movie/DVD captures the spirit of Orwell's novel more perfectly than almost any movie I have ever seen that was derived from a book. The film perfectly captures the sense of dispair, the dingy physical lives of the people, the omnipresence of a malevolent Government, all of which constitute the main theme of the story.

William Hurt turns in quite literally a perfect performance as Winston Smith, the main protagonist of the story. The cinamatography of the film is brilliant, and perfectly captures the dingy, ratty existence of life in the ultimate totalitarian/socialist state. The constant background harangue of the Party via the telescreens is perfectly done. If Orwell had lived to see this film I believe that he would find little or nothing to criticize. It brilliantly captures the novel for the silver screen.

Without giving anything away, this is the story of one Winston Smith, a citizen of "Oceania" which is one of three superstates that dominate the world. (Oceania is comprised of Britain, the Americas, and Australasia; its adversaries Eurasia and Eastasia are of similar size and power). The Government dominates and controls everything through the "Party" which promotes the doctrine "Ingsoc" (derived from "English Socialism"). Everyone, even the elite, live in a ramshackle dingy world in which shortages of everything is the norm--it is a world in which "nothing is cheap and plentiful." (Basically your socialist state taken to the nth degree). Winston works in a pointless job that involves constantly re-writing old archives to conform to present "realities" as defined by the Party. Love is forbidden other than love of the Party and its leader ("Big Brother") and the "Thought Police" ruthlessly root out anyone who fails to conform to the requirement of strict orthodoxy and Party loyalty. The fact that Winston is such a one is the central theme to the story. When he falls in love with a beautiful young woman, his troubles begin in earnest.

To properly appreciate this film, the viewer should of course first read the book. I would imagine that the film would be somewhat bewildering to one who was not familiar at least with the novel's basic theme and premise--the dispair of life under the ultimate totalitarian state.

This is not a film for the whole family to enjoy together. It is intense and depressing. The final portion of the movie, involving Winston Smith and O'Brian (Richard Burton in his final role) is long, unhappy, and downright dreary. Although utterly necessary as an essential component of the story, it both drags and depresses.

1984 is essentially the story of the ultimate result of allowing Government (any Government) to run our lives, and what will happen if the people substitute trust in Big Government for the love of liberty and freedom.

Doubleplus Outstanding!!!
"April 4th, 1984 ... I think"

I picked 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' as one of the books for a high school reading assignment in my junior year. I didn't actually read it then (1975), but read it just after high school. By the time I'd finished it was near the top of my list of favorite books ' and remains so. When '1984' came out in 1984 I, naturally, rented the video and fell in love with the film. It was one of the better-done film adaptations of a book that I'd seen. I was really taken with the martial music of Dominic Muldowney so I rushed out and bought ' 'The Soundtrack' ' by the Eurythmics. Well, no martial music, no nothing; just Eurythmics. When the Muldowney soundtrack became available a few years ago I purchased it and tried to envision the film with Mr. Radford's original choice attached. I even wrote the director to ask if it was going to be different than the '84 release (I never heard back from him).

So what's all this about soundtracks and the Eurythmics and Muldowney you ask? When my copy of this DVD came in March 2003 I was more than pleasantly surprised with a number of things. First, the picture quality is plusgood. Secondly, and even though they are credited, there is not a hint of the Eurythmics on this DVD! That's doubleplus-phenomenal! The film has a different 'feel' to it, almost a nostalgic feel, that the original didn't have and that I credit to the soundtrack changes. I know there are some that think the film should have been tampered with, but having followed the history of this film and the conflict Mr. Radford encountered with Virgin, I'm very pleased that it's been released in this format. I would have liked to have seen the Eurythmics soundtrack added as an option, but it was not.

As someone said earlier; this is not the book. It is a well-written, well-adapted, film that captures (for me) the essence of Orwell's work. I highly recommend it.

*sigh* Get the VHS!
I've seen the VHS version a dozen times, and waited a LONG time to get my hands on the DVD. Well, I finally saw it two days ago.

I regret to say, I'm glad I only rented it.

In short, the DVD version of this film is completely, utterly LIFELESS. Not boring, but passionless and without the vitality of the original. I suspect it is a combination of the inappropriately bright, clear colors (not suggestively muted and washed-out as in the VHS) and the new, quietly ponderous "serious" soundtrack which is just plain...well...weak. Overall, this version is about as impressive as a good made for TV movie, if that can be called a compliment.

Please do not judge Radford's 1984 by the DVD, even if he is reported to prefer this version (something I will NEVER understand). The life has been literally SUCKED from this film. If you can find a copy of the VHS, watch it instead. It is literally a different movie - try it and see.

The only good thing about the DVD is the addition of subtitles which do clarify many scenes. That I liked.

Kudos to No Soundtrack Alternative comment
I agree with the review of this DVD concerning the lack of the Eurythmics soundtrack. Absolute blasphemy! Radford has not only made a huge miscalculation in judgment -- he's showing his true colors. His hatred of the Eurythmics soundtrack was only the beginning. He has completely taken Dave Stewart and Annie Lennox out of the film! He has somehow digitally removed them!

meaningless without the novel
A film by Michael Radford

Clever. Very clever. This movie was filmed in 1984 during the months that were specified in George Orwell's novel. It was also released in 1984. This fit perfectly with the title and gave a nice contrast between Orwell's vision of the future and what the world was like at that very time. The question, however, is: Is "1984" any good as a movie? Well, yes and no, and it has everything to do with what was included in the movie.

The year is 1984 and the setting is London. At least, the city used to be London. Now it is just a city in Oceania. Oceania is a communist style society where propaganda rules the day and history is re-written daily to reflect the views of "The Party". One day Oceania may be at war with Eurasia, and the next Oceania is at war with East Asia and has always been at war with East Asia. History is changed and officially, the past never happened if "The Party" says that it didn't happen. Winston Smith (John Hurt) is a worker. It is his job to change history's headlines. Through Winston's eyes we see "The Party" outlaw personal relationships, emotional attachment, and even thought that does not mirror the party line. The latter is called "thought crime".

Winston is a thought criminal. He secretly writes in a journal about the revisionist policies and he visits a store that sells (on the sly) items that are older than Oceania (one piece is said to be 100 years old). Winston is secretly seditious and he meets Julia (Suzanna Hamilton), who, like Winston, is defying Oceania as she can. Her method is sex. Sex for pleasure is highly illegal and this is the foundation of their relationship. We know that a movie set in a world with this sort of a society, they have to be caught because we have to no what the repercussions of their actions will be.

The main difference between this film and the novel is simply that in the film we are seeing what Orwell described, and in the book all we have is the words of George Orwell. The reason this is a difference is that in the movie we know what a thing looks like, but not what it is. One example of this is the "two minute hate". Orwell describes several scenes in which the workers are given a forum where they must vent and scream and express their hatred for the enemies of Oceania. It is a form of social control. We get a sense of what is going on, and why. In the movie, we see what happens and how it affects the workers, but the detail which makes the scene meaningful is missing. This is fairly typical of the film and is the biggest flaw. If I hadn't read the novel, the film would be confusing and meaningless. It is only because I have read the source material that I know what these scenes are and why they are important. We do get a good sense of the type of society that Orwell envisioned as a potential future, and the visualization of the characters and the world is excellent. It is just lacking the meaning that is available in Orwell's text. Film is a different medium than a novel and a movie should not be dependant on the novel to make it comprehensible and meaningful. Unfortunately, "1984" fails in this regard. It is faithful to the source material, but the film can't succeed without the novel.

-Joe Sherry ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Ranking No. 21 on the American Film Institute's list of the 100 greatest American films, this 1940 classic is a bit dated in its noble sentimentality, but it remains a luminous example of Hollywood classicism from the peerless director of mythic Americana, John Ford. Adapted by Nunnally Johnson from John Steinbeck's classic novel, the film tells a simple story about Oklahoma farmers leaving the depression-era dustbowl for the promised land of California, but it's the story's emotional resonance and theme of human perseverance that makes the movie so richly and timelessly rewarding. It's all about the humble Joad family's cross-country trek to escape the economic devastation of their ruined farmland, beginning when Tom Joad (Henry Fonda) returns from a four-year prison term to discover that his family home is empty. He's reunited with his family just as they're setting out for the westbound journey, and thus begins an odyssey of saddening losses and strengthening hopes. As Ma Joad, Oscar-winner Jane Darwell is the embodiment of one of America's greatest social tragedies and the "Okie" spirit of pressing forward against all odds (as she says, "because we're the people"). A documentary-styled production for which Ford and cinematographer Gregg Toland demanded painstaking authenticity, The Grapes of Wrath is much more than a classy, old-fashioned history lesson. With dialogue and scenes that rank among the most moving and memorable ever filmed, it's a classic among classics--simply put, one of the finest films ever made. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (45)

Ford and Fonda do justice to Steinbeck
Take John Steinbeck's Pulitzer-Prize-Winning Novel. Turn it into a movie and let John Ford direct it, and get Henry Fonda to star. In 1940 you could hardly find a more certain recipe for a cinema classic.

As good as the film is, it really should be a companion-piece to Steinbeck's original masterpiece, and if you haven't read it I recommend setting aside enough time to read one of the greatest pieces of American literature ever written.

That being said, the medium of the cinema allows for a visual impact that can't be matched with the written word.

The Grapes of Wrath follows the Joad family during the great depression. That period of economic hardship hit the farmers in Oklahoma a little harder than the rest of the world, at the time of the dust bowl the "Okies" were at the end of their ropes, financially speaking.

Thousands of Okies packed up the house after being foreclosed and moved out to California - many winding up around Bakersfield, at the California end of old US Route 66. (Merle Haggard's family did so and the "Okie from Muscogee" wrote about it in songs like "California Cottonfields".)

Anyway, this is the historical context of the movie. The theme of the movie, and of Steinbeck's book, is the ability of the human spirit to remain intact in these worst of times. The Joads suffer terrible humiliations, one after another, most of them because of their desperate financial status. But as the story proceeds we see that they are fundamentally decent, hard-working people, and every time life knocks them down they get back up, brush the dirt off themselves, and keep moving forward. As a national characteristic, this was an important trait because this was the generation that produced the hard-working, high-minded individuals who did important things like win World War II, followed by America's greatest financial flourishing and the Baby Boom. Tom Brokaw called them "America's Greatest Generation".

The cast is picture-perfect, with Henry Fonda as the spirited Tom Joad and John Carradine as the former preacher with a new social consciousness. Jane Darwell won a well-deserved Best Supporting Actress Award as Ma Joad, and the remainder of the cast is in every way equal to the story and the film.

An American Classic
This is a great movie based on a great novel, and I am surprised by how honestly the film captures the raw humanity of the book. Steinbeck weaved social commentary into the story, and the movie makes many points about the human condition and spirit without being heavy-handed. The story of the Joads and their fight for survival rings very true, thanks to the realistic performances and the atmosphere created by director John Ford. Henry Fonda gives one of the best performances I have ever seen him give, and his "I'll be there" speech is one of the great movie moments. Jane Darwell is also very impressive, and her direct, down-to-earth style of acting makes the quiet strength and the suffering of Ma Joad seem very real. The Grapes of Wrath is an American classic, both as a novel and as a film.

"I'll be all aroun' in the dark."
"Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord. He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored; He hath loos'd the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword, His truth is marching on." - Battle Hymn of the Republic.

In 1936, John Steinbeck wrote a series of articles about the migrant workers driven to California from the Midwestern states after losing their homes in the throes of the depression: inclement weather, failed crops, land mortgaged to the hilt and finally taken over by banks and large corporations when credit lines ran dry. Lured by promises of work aplenty, the Midwesterners packed their belongings and trekked westward to the Golden State, only to find themselves facing hunger, inhumane conditions, contempt and exploitation instead. "Dignity is all gone, and spirit has turned to sullen anger before it dies," Steinbeck described the result in one of his 1936 articles, collectively published as "The Harvest Gypsies;" and in another piece ("Starvation Under the Orange Trees," 1938) he asked: "Must the hunger become anger and the anger fury before anything will be done?"

By the time he wrote the latter article, Steinbeck had already published one novel addressing the agricultural laborers' struggle against corporate power ("In Dubious Battle," 1936). Shortly thereafter he began to work on "The Grapes of Wrath," which was published roughly a year later. Although the book would win the Pulitzer Prize (1940) and become a cornerstone foundation of Steinbeck's Literature Nobel Prize (1962), it was sharply criticized upon its release - nowhere more so than in the Midwest - and still counts among the 35 books most frequently banned from American school curricula: A raw, brutally direct, yet incredibly poetic masterpiece of fiction, it continues to touch nerves deeply rooted in modern society's fabric; including and particularly in California, where yesterday's Okies are today's undocumented Mexicans - Chicano labor leader Cesar Chavez especially pointed out how well he could empathize with the Joad family, because he and his fellow workers were now living the same life they once had.

Having fought hard with his publisher to maintain the novel's uncompromising approach throughout, Steinbeck was weary to give the film rights to 20th Century Fox, headed by powerful mogul and, more importantly, known conservative Daryl F. Zanuck. Yet, Zanuck and director John Ford largely stayed true to the novel: There is that sense of desperation in farmer Muley's (John Qualen's) expression as he tells Tom and ex-preacher Casy (Henry Fonda and John Carradine) how the "cats" came and bulldozed down everybody's homes, on behalf of a corporate entity too intangible to truly hold accountable. There is Grandpa Joad (Charley Grapewin), literally clinging to his earth and dying of a stroke (or, more likely, a broken heart) when he is made to leave against his will. There is everybody's brief joy upon first seeing Bakersfield's rich plantations - everybody's except Ma Joad's (Jane Darwell's), that is, who alone knows that Grandma (Zeffie Tilbury) died in her arms before they even started to cross the Californian desert the previous night. There is the privately-run labor camps' utter desolation, complete with violent guards, exploitative wages, lack of food and unsanitary conditions; contrasted with the relative security and more humane conditions of the camps run by the State. And there is Tom's crucial development from a man acting alone to one seeing the benefit of joining efforts in a group, following Casy's example, and his parting promise to Ma that she'll find him everywhere she looks - wherever there is injustice, struggle, and people's joint success. In an overall outstanding cast, which also includes Dorris Bowdon (Rose of Sharon), Eddie Quillan (Rose's boyfriend Connie), Frank Darien (Uncle John) and a brief appearance by Ward Bond as a friendly policeman, Henry Fonda truly shines as Tom; despite his smashing good looks fully metamorphosized into Steinbeck's quick-tempered, lanky, reluctant hero.

Yet, in all its starkness the movie has a more optimistic slant than the novel; due to a structural change which has the Joads moving from bad to acceptable living conditions (instead of vice versa), the toning down of Steinbeck's political references - most importantly, the elimination of a monologue using a land owner's description of "reds" as anybody "that wants thirty cents and hour when we're payin' twenty-five" to show that under the prevalent conditions that definition applies to virtually *every* migrant laborer - and a greater emphasis on Ma Joad's pragmatic, forward-looking way of dealing with their fate; culminating in her closing "we's the people" speech (whose direction, interestingly, Ford, who would have preferred to end the movie with the image of Tom walking up a hill alone in the distance, left to Zanuck himself). Jane Darwell won a much-deserved Academy-Award for her portrayal as Ma; besides John Ford's Best Director award the movie's only winner on Oscar night - none of its other five nominations scored, unfortunately including those in the Best Picture and Best Leading Actor categories, which went to Hitchcock's "Rebecca" and James Stewart ("The Philadelphia Story") instead. Still, despite its critical success - also expressed in a "Best Picture" National Board of Review award - and its marginally optimistic outlook, the movie engendered almost as much controversy as did Steinbeck's book. After the witch hunt setting in not even a decade later, today it stands as one of the last, greatest examples of a movie pulling no punches in the portrayal of society's ailments; a type of film regrettably rare in recent years.

"Ev'rybody might be just one big soul - well it looks that-a way to me. ... Wherever men are fightin' for their rights, that's where I'm gonna be, ma. That's where I'm gonna be." - Woody Guthrie, "The Ballad of Tom Joad."

"The highway is alive tonight, but nobody's kiddin' nobody about where it goes. I'm sittin' down here in the campfire light, with the ghost of old Tom Joad." - Bruce Springsteen, "The Ghost of Tom Joad."

The Grapes--and Apples and Oranges--of Wrath
It's striking how many reviewers here base their comments on a simplisitic comparison between the film version of "The Grapes of Wrath" and the Steinbeck novel on which it was based. For many such a comparison seems to function simply as an excuse to proclaim the inherent superiority of the Steinbeck original--and, by extension, the superiority of their own literary taste values-- when all it really does is highlight the patent silliness of trying to pit different artforms into some sort of evaluative competition. Literature and cinema are two vastly different modes of representation each with their own strengths and limitations, so the framing question shouldn't be which version of "The Grapes of Wrath" is "better"--as if there were a universal yardstick with which to measure such things--but rather how do they perform in terms of their respective mediums? On that count, I think we are extraordinarily fortunate with both the Steinbeck and Ford versions of "The Grapes of Wrath" to have two masterworks that operate consummately at the peak of their respective artforms. What each does well, it does brilliantly. As a verbal medium that unfolds slowly, literature is good at offering rich, layered descriptions of person and place and mapping complicated narrative links and Steinbeck makes the most of this in his novel. Cinema, by contrast, is an expressive medium that works best through registers of visual and aural metaphor, allegory and performance...and it's on this ground that I think the film version of "The Grapes of Wrath" more than merits its classic status. It is a magnificently "cinematic" film that uses the expressive capacities of the medium to produce a richly layered experience that is truly moving and that lingers long afterward, sometimes for years or even a whole lifetime. I first saw "The Grapes of Wrath" on TV one rainy afternoon in my childhood and it left indelible impressions that have impelled me to go back to the film time and again: The haunted eyes of Jane Darwell's Ma Joad as she sits in the truck cabin, lit from beneath, driving into an uncertain future, the winds of history howling oustside; the terrifying collision montage as the monstrous "cats" move in to destroy the Okies' homes; the soulless gas station attendants, standing together in uniforms like corporatized automata, muttering that the Joads are too miserable to be human. It's a film dense with iconic richness and an enduring testament both to the artistry of the many workers that created it, and to the democratic spirit of popular cinema at its very best.

As good a restoration as possible
This DVD restoration is probably as good as possible given that the original camera negative was lost. This is the one to get.

By the way, there is NO widescreen version of "The Grapes of Wrath." This DVD release exhibits the full frame aspect ratio of the original (1.33 to 1 ratio). Essentially, films made between 1917 and 1952 were filmed with a full frame aspect ratio. Standard televisions were proportioned 4:3 to copy the standard cinema ratio. Widescreen (Cinemascope, etc) was a gimmick introduced by Hollywood in the 1950s to compete with television. So if a film was made between 1917 and 1952 don't go looking for a widescreen version of it because there isn't any! ... Read more

Reviews (119)

An great comedy thriller classic.
When an ambitious Small Time Crook (Two Time Oscar-Winner:Robert Redford) steals $10,000 with his old age partner from an dangerous criminal (Robert Shaw), later on that day, The Crook discover his crime partner has been murder by the crime lord. Then The Crook meets his dead friend ex-partner a Veteran Con-Man (Three Time Oscar-Winner:Paul Newman), who seek revenge on the crime lord.

Entertaining comedy is directed by George Roy Hill (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Slap Shot) and Written by David S. Ward (The Program). Winner of Seven Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Art Direction/Set Decoration, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing, Best Score and Best Original Screenplay. The Film recieve Three Oscar Nominations, Including:Best Actor:-Robert Redford, Best Cinematography and Best Sound. The Sting has the Greatest Double Crossing in a Movie History, Complete with an Surprise Ending. Great Fun. Better to Wait for the Special Edition DVD in a Widescreen Version, which it will be 30 Years, Next Year. Grade:A.

The Quintessential Caper Flick
"The Sting" is an extremely well written story by David Ward ("Major League", "Sleepless in Seattle") and David Maurer about some smalltime grifters who attempt to swindle a mob boss. The film was nominated for ten Academy Awards in 1974 and won seven Oscars including Best Picture and Best Director. It reunited director George Roy Hill, Robert Redford and Paul Newman four years after their blockbuster, "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid". Strangely, although Butch and Sundance made it to number 50 on AFI's top 100 of the century, this film did not make that list. This is even more surprising since "Butch" did not win the Oscar for Best Picture in 1970 ("Midnight Cowboy" won it that year).

While I think "Butch" is funnier and more exciting, this film is more intriguing with interesting character studies and some unpredictable plot twists. Hill does a superb job of weaving the elements of the caper together and giving it a depression era feeling. The humor is more ironic than hilarious, but it fits the story well. The period props, locations, and sets are excellent, and the costumes are perfect. The costumes were done by the legendary Edith Head, who designed costumes for over 400 films in her 50-year career. She won an Oscar for best Costume Design for this film, which was one of eight she won in that category in a career marked by an astounding 34 Oscar nominations. The music by Scott Joplin and Marvin Hamlisch is also fabulous, bestowing an early twentieth century flavor on the film, and giving Hamlisch one of three Oscars he won that year (the other two were for "The Way We Were" also starring Redford).

Where "Butch" was probably a little more Newman's film, this film clearly belonged to Redford. Redford, who was nominated for best actor for the role, is marvelous in the lead, giving his character a charming, lighthearted personality to go along with his scheming intellect. Newman plays almost a supporting role as the veteran conman Henry Gondorff, who assembles the team for the caper and oversees its execution. Despite the smaller part, Newman gives an electrifying performance with his conniving tough guy portrayal. Robert Shaw ("From Russia With Love", "A Man For All Seasons", "Jaws") is also terrific as mob boss Doyle Lonnegan. Charles Durning ("The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas"), Ray Walston (TV's "My Favorite Martian") and Eileen Brennan ("Private Benjamin") round out a splendid supporting cast with fantastic character portrayals.

This film is entertaining and fun with a tight plot and wonderful period renderings. I rated it a 10/10. If you have never seen it, you are in for a treat.

THIS ONE REALLY STINGS!
"The Sting" is a classic throwback to Hollywood's golden age: a fish out of water tale about a couple of con artists (Paul Newman and Robert Redford) who seemingly meet their match in a cheating mobster (Robert Shaw). As the police close in from one end and the Mafia from the other, the stakes become higher, the comedy more hilarious and the ultimate con, more rewarding. The supporting cast is a potpourri of stellar characters including Dana Elcar, Eileen Brennan, Ray Walston, Charles Durning, and Harold Gould. Marvin Hamlisch provides a sophisticated score buttressed by Scott Joplin's ragtime jazz.

It is disheartening to see an Oscar wining Best Picture get so shabby a treatment on DVD. For starters, the film is presented in a full frame, pan and scan version only. The shortcomings of this format are that you are not seeing the film in a version director, George Roy Hill would have approved of. But apart from Universal's glaringly obvious oversight, the print quality of "The Sting" suffers from a poorly balanced color spectrum, age related artifacts, edge enhancement, shimmering of fine details and pixelization. Flesh tones are often weak and pasty. Blacks are rarely solid or deep. Fine grain can be excessive in spots. The audio is poorly mixed, sounding strident and tinny. There are no extra features.

Redford and Newman at it again
I just rented this DVD and watched the whole thing, but I've seen this movie several times before.

Johnny Hooker (Robert Redford) is a con artist who unknowingly swindles a lackey of crime boss Doyle Lonnegan (Robert Shaw). After Hooker's partner in the crime is killed, Hooker vows revenge against Lonnegan and seeks Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman), one of the best cons in the game to help in the big Sting. Hooker would love to do more than just hit Lonnegan for a lot of money, but "doesn't know enough about killin' to kill him."

It's not easy separating a crime boss from his money, especially when he owns half the politicians and police. They have to take him without him even knowing he was taken. What follows is an exciting deception, carried out with professionalism and ingenuity.

I don't think the chemistry between Newman and Redford is quite as good as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, but it's still pretty darn good. Lines like this:

Redford (first seeing his arch-enemy): "He's not as tough as he thinks."
Newman: "Neither are we"

The story is classic. You don't exactly know who's who, and you wonder how they're going to pull it off in the end. Scott Joplin's ragtime music, although somewhat anachronistic, is effective at keeping the movie somewhat lighthearted. There are a couple of instances of swearing and a stripper with pasties on, which gives it a PG rating.

The reason for four stars is the fact that the DVD has NO EXTRAS, and the only option is the full screen version, no widescreen. A movie as good as this deserves better, which is unfortunate.

Overall, this is a great movie with great cinematography (transition wipe effects and some tracking shots) and phenomenal acting. Enjoy.

Widescreen?
I love the film, but why is this not available in Widescreen on DVD? There's been a Widescreen VHS, and I've seen it in Widescreen on Turner Classic Movies. I know it was shot in Widescreen, so how about it, Universal? ... Read more

Reviews (103)

But you are, Blanche. You ARE in that chair!
This is one great movie! "What Ever Happened to BabyJane?" is, as stated in Amazon's description, the story of twoaging sisters, each in her own way connected with show business.

Now the good stuff. The sisters are played by Bette Davis and Joan Crawford (the only time the two ever acted together) to absolute perfection. Crawford is wonderful in the role of crippled sister Blanche, but Miss Davis absolutely walks away with the show as the former "Baby" Jane Hudson. The role is meatly and she revels in it! It is obvious that Miss Davis held the philosophy that, if you are going to go over-the-top, don't apologize. And she doesn't. She goes WAY over-the-top with a gleeful abandon that is infectious.

The way she taunts her wheelchair-bound sister (the title quotes one of Jane's best lines), serves her meals of dead rodents and ex-pets, kicks her in the gut, mocks her ever-so-proper speech, etc. It's all so delicious. And check out the ballet that she does to one of the songs from her childhood vaudeville act. Bette Davis was obviously having the time of her life, and so do the viewers of this classic.

For the DVD edition, there are disappointingly few extras, but Davis is credited with developing the absolutely hideous hair and makeup combinations she sports while slouching about the house in her scuffs and house coat (Director Robert Aldrich said that, while he loved the look, he never would have had the nerve to suggest such a thing to Bette Davis).

Joan Crawford was in fine form, as well. But for Jane to be able to be credible doing the things she did, Blanche had to be the "straight man". Crawford or Aldrich knew this and Blanche behaves accordingly. Consequently, it is Bette Davis' Jane who has the best lines and the showier part in general.

If you have never seen this movie, get it. If you have, go back and visit the Hudson sisters again. Then you might want to write a letter to YOUR daddy.

A Classic Psychological Thriller - Truly Sick!
This is the ultimate is psychological thrillers starring two of the greatest "top-billed turned has-been" movie actresses in history.

Betty Davis as Jane Hudson and real life nemesis Joan Crawford as sister Blanche Hudson make for comic and scary thrills. Quick retread: Jane was "Baby Jane Hudson", a child star who lost her popularity after puberty. Blanche Hudson was jealous as a child but becomes a top rated adult movie actress. Jane, of course, becomes an increasingly insane alcoholic. Trouble ensues when Blanche is mysteriously crippled in a car wreck forcing 'whack-job' case sister Jane to care for her. The plot thickens as quickly as Jane loses her mind. It's hilarious. But the sadistic scenes Jane carries out on Blanche are both scary and hilarious, making this film a true cult classic. The ending is a masterpiece of plot twists!

I can't get into more details other than to tell you that every time I've shown someone this movie, they goes nuts over it! It's frightening and comedic simultaneously. It's no wonder these two characters have been Halloween favorites for years!

Quality of 'black & white' is okay and sound is what you would expect from an early 60's nightmare, but it's worth it. Before you pick up your main course covered dinner plate, remember what Jane said to Blanche - "By the way Blanche, did you know we have rats in the cellar?!"

WHO the Hell is Norman?
Check out the editorial review "Sadistic Jane and their servant Norman????" The only servant, err, make that housekeeper in this saga is ELVIRA [No, NOT THAT one!] who meets ..... [Clunk!~ Thud!]

WELL, this utterly dark little Gem of Joy still pack many a wallop!

No quite dated, but such an acidic picture of Tinseltown - as a matter of fact you can still see these old [er] Dolls and Guys on Hollywood Boulevard - or Rodeo Drive [botox-powered] for that matter.

IT hasn't really aged that badly - Crawford is superb as the wheelchair bound glam queen Blance ~ utterly dependent on her increasingly insane sister Jane ~ Davis probably on a par with her turn in THE STAR. Davis sacrifices all for this role, including figure and looks, shuffling around the house in flip-flops, dragging on a cigarette and swigging booze has NEVER been this fun!

Bring along a creepy VICTOR BUONO [debut role] as a grifter with an accent and his dear old Ma ... nasty little jewels they are - check out the scene with Davis and Buono and the sandwich plate ... then the booze scene later! Priceless [It's almost Norman Desmond and Joe - the later years].

Superior lensing and direction etc. etc. etc.

Davis daughter BD HYMAN plays the teen next door.

Roaring fun for late at night viewing - double billed with Sunset Boulevard.

[Now wasn't there a musical version of this one ....?]

Betty Grable and Ginger Rogers
oh well it could have been betty and ginger
both blonde both musical stars (grable was more popular)

Ohh.. But Cha AAH, Blanche, Ya AAH In That Chair!!!
In "What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?" you really DO find out, indeed!

But what horrors you have to endure to see the truth and consequences! With twists, turns, torture & anti-climactic scenes all played to the hilt by the Miss Hudsons (Bette Davis and Joan Crawford), respectively, you will never be able to look at your pet parakeet the same way again.

Miss Baby Jane Hudson, played with great, grotesque gusto by Davis who was once the belle of the ball. Kind of a Shirley Temple of her era. Baby Jane was daddy's girl and Jane, therefore, has quite an Electra complex that is and has been exhibited her entire life.

Her sister, Miss Blanche Hudson, played "aptly and sapply" by Crawford, has a long and lasting career as an adult movie star but is now wheelchair bound because of a little "accident" betwixt the sisters many years back. Jane is the caretaker of Blanche since the "accident" and they both live off of the residuals of Blanche's long and prosperous film career before she became crippled.

After a local California TV station decides to run summer afternoon, back to back Blanche Hudson films, Baby Jane gets that ol' jealous feeling brewing again and wants desparately to revitalize her childhood career. Baby Jane hires pianist from the classifieds, Mr. Edward Flagg, played in a great understated role by Victor Buono, who has his own Oedipal yearnings and problems. They make a great and perfect pair of drunks and crazies, let me tell ya.

Jane is certainly unstable and is likened to a gin and vodka guzzling 60 year old broad with a six year old spoiled brat mentality. SCARY combo, right there! Let alone Jane's guilt of the "accident", her shameless jealousy, and her expressions of the antithesis of "SISTERLY LOVE".

Filmed in glorious black and white, it lends itself to the dark, somber and horrific things that happen to Blanche vis-a-vis Jane...

"Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?" is a cult classic and a true and genuine classic in it's own right.

Happy Watching! ... Read more

Reviews (62)

Great 70's movie
I used to watch Convoy over and over as a kid. It is unfortunate that it is not being produced on DVD or VHS considering how many movies not nearly as entertaining are being marketed. I think if you didn't see it when it first came out you'd find it silly and dated today, but I feel to those of us who saw it initially growing up, it is a classic. Modeled after a catchy country western song by C.W. McCall and with stars such as Kris Kristofferson, Ali McGraw, Burt Young and Ernest Borgnine, I'm surprised it is so obscure. It has some great 70's car/truck chase and crash scenes and a good soundtrack. Hopefully it will come out of moratorium soon and be available.

Breaker-19
CONVOY is the best trucker movie of all time. I've watched this movie 1000's of times when I was a kid and I enjoy it even more now. This movie has action, comedy and romance. Kris Kristofferson was great in this movie, he really brought out the excitement of being a truck driver. As for Ali MacGraw, she was also great and beautiful co-star. The director, Sam Peckinpah did an excellent job capturing the essence of truck driving. After so many years of searching for this movie I finally have a copy of my own thanks to Amazon.com. I'm impatiently waiting for it to come out on DVD(extended verison)....

Convoy
I bought the VHS version of the movie going off the other reviews listed.I received it yesterday and watched it twice.The quality is excellent.No fuzzy picture or sound.If you want a copy of this old classic movie,get one on video.

CONVOY
i havn't played my copy yet. the dvd i got, came from half.com which is a letterbox version, not digitally remastered and released by PACIFIC FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT. i paid less than $5.00 brand new.

The old days
When you seee this movie, you will realinze how life in America was not anoying. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Kathy Bates stars as an unhappy wife trying to get her husband's attention in this amusing and moving 1991 screen adaptation of Fannie Flagg's novel Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe. After befriending a lonely old woman (Jessica Tandy), Bates hears the story of a lifelong friendship between two other women (Mary Stuary Masterson and Mary-Louise Parker, seen in flashback) who once ran a cafe in town against many personal odds. The tale inspires Bates to take further command over her life, and there director Jon Avnet (Up Close and Personal), in his first feature, has fun with the film. Bates develops a real attitude toward her thickheaded spouse at home and some uppity girls in a parking lot, but dignity is generally the key to Avnet's approach with the story's crucial relationships. Tandy is a joy and clearly loves the element of mystery attached to her character, and Masterson and Parker are excellent in the historical sequences. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (88)

Fried Green Tomatoes
Reviewed Date: October 2003
Studio: Universal Studios
Genre: Drama
Exposure: Color
Running Time: 130 Minutes
Rating: PG-13
Release Year: 1991
Directed By: Jon Aunet

Starring: Kathy Bates, Mary Stuart Masterson, Mary-Louise Parker, and Jessica Tandy.

Co-Starring: Gailard Sartain, Stan Shaw, Cicely Tyson, Gary Basaraba, Grace Zabriskie, Richard Riehle, Grayson Fricke, Lashondra Phillips, Enjolik Oree, Nick Searcy, and Ginny Parker.

If you want to see a good movie for the whole family, "Fried Green Tomatoes" is the movie for you. It shows friendship, compassion, humor, laughter, and real life encounters.

The setting takes place in the late 1980's and takes you back in time a half century to the town of Whistle Stop, Alabama.

"Fried Green Tomatoes" is a movie for anyone. It can make the best of us laugh and cry through the entire movie. "Fried Green Tomatoes" is a movie that gives you two different stories within itself. One story takes you back to the 1930's. The other part of the story takes place in the 1980's between Ninny Threadgooda, telling the story of her past to help her new friend Evelyn get her life together.

The frienships made within the movie show that this woman do hold their friendships in very high regards. The friendship in the 1930's would help both women to get through some really tough times. The friendship in the 1980's between Ninny and Evelyn keep these two ladies on track.

I give this movie 5 stars because it is a movie for anyone. Also because it shows how good friends will help a loved one in need of there help at a drop of a hat. This movie is just a well rounded movie, filled with emotion.

Better than Steel Magnolias
Fried Green Tomatoes is two stories in one ---- depressed housewife Kathy Bates befriends an elderly woman (Jessica Tandy) who tells her the story of two best friends (Mary Stuart Masterson and Mary-Louise Parker) who ran a cafe in the 1930s. The tale of the friends depicts domestic violence, pregnancy, childbirth, and two accidents involving trains. But the courage and spirit that the women have, as told by Tandy to Bates, encourages Bates to stop being a victim in her own life, particularly to her all right but insensitive husband.

The movie does a great job of showing the trials and tribulations of being a woman but how female friendship can conquer all. It is even more riveting to see it set in a time when women -- particularly unmarried women of dubious sexuality --- have to overcome obstacles set by society in general and its views of what a woman's role is. TOWANDA!!!!!

fried green tomatoes, food for the soul
I have seen this movie probably 20 times in my life and I have to say it is definetly a personal favorite in my collection. This movie touches on so many emotions that it will have you angry, sad, touched, uplifted, empowered and roaring with laughter. This movie is told to a fed-up repressed housewife (kathy bates) by a sweet ,lonely ,vivacious old woman (ninny) during visits to a nursing home after a chance meeting. The intertwined story is about Idgy a Tom-boy who distances herself with the world due to a tragedy at a young age. As Idgy ages the only person she is close with is her "hired hand" Big George and his mother Sipsy. Idgy's mother becomes concerned with Idgy and decides to have Ruth ( a girl from idgy's past) come and stay with them to try to reach Idgy. At first Idgy is stand offish but soon they become best friends that is, until Ruth leaves because she marries. I dont' want to "spoil" the rest of the story so I'll leave that alone for the time being. As Ninny tells Mrs. Couch (kathy bates) they become close friends and Mrs. Couch begins to become empowered by the strong women in the stories and making some changes in her own life. It touches on tough topics such as racism, spousal abuse, death, tragedy, loneliness, fear of death, and fear of life for some. This dvd is a must watch and own for your dvd collection.

Great Southern Storytelling on the Screen
I'm always surprised how badly great storytelling makes it to the screen. Particularly, great Southern stories, which tend to make it to the big screen replete with caricatures and stereotypes. I recall, with particular sadness, the movie adaptation of Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. While this adaptation to the screen of Flagg's tremendously moving novel does have its share of simple, stereotypical southern "archetypes", these are largely drawn from Flagg's book, and are largely essential to the story. It is, without a doubt, one of the most enjoyable movies I have ever seen and, ten years after first seeing it, it still brings raucous laughter and tears to my eyes. It's the classic "story within the story", and begins with the introduction of a tenacious elderly widow to a repressed younger southern housewife in a nursing home in rural Alabama. What starts off to the housewife as polite and indulgent small talk of past acquaintances with a likely senile elderly woman turns rapidly into an engrossing story with what must be the best "hook line" in storytelling ("Why anybody would have thought she killed that man is beyond me!"). This story then becomes a parable which the housewife uses to change her life for the better.

While certainly a moral parable of the greater value systems of past times, and of loyalty and courage in the face of bigotry and oppression, the story never loses its infectious humor, despite some genuinely tragic events. The lesbian theme of the book is only mildly hinted at, and one would almost overlook it were one not to deliberately search for it. Some of the more brutal aspects of the book are retained, with the rampant racism and wife-abuse still harrowingly reflected, if toned down. Consequently, younger viewers may best appreciate the film in the company of an adult. Regardless, this is one of the best "feeling good" movies I have ever seen, and being a Southerner from an area very near that depicted in the book, makes me pine for the South in profound ways. It's a film about empowerment and, more importantly, the empowerment one gains through friends, and through standing up for one's friends, and through an unshakable belief in self-respect.

No little credit for the success of the film goes to the incredibly strong performances of Masterson as the tom-boyish Idgie Threadgood, and Marie Louise-Parker as Ruth Jamison, along with the underrated performance of Stan Shaw, one of TV's great character actors, as Big George. However, the film's strongest performances come from three grande dames of the screen (and stage): Cicely Tyson, as Sissy, Jessica Tandy, as Ninny Threadgood, and Kathy Bates, as Evelyn Couch. While Tandy and Bates have received their due, Tyson's performance, as always, is often overlooked.

To Wander!!!!
A story of friendship and love, and how they can both intertwin. Mary Stuart Masterson (Somekind of wonderful) and Mary louise-Parker (Boy's on the side) Displaying fabulous performance's along with Jessica Tandy (Driving miss Daisy) and Cathy Bates (Misery). The whole story surrounding a relationship that can not be defined. My Favourite film ever! However i think some people are wrong with one aspect surrounding Ninny and Idgie. That they are one and the same! Best Quote- " Face it girl's.... I'm older and have more insurance"
A film for any Mary Stuart masterson Fan. ... Read more

Reviews (499)

What else is left to say?
This is the greatest American film ever made, as entertaining as it is revolutionary.

When it was made, Orson Welles tackled a seemingly simple topic, a reflection back on a dead man's search for love and happiness in his life, and made a film that's epic in scope, gorgeous in its visual execution, brilliantly written, incredibly acted.

All in all, it's inspiring to filmmakers looking for a great debut film from a new director. "Citizen Kane" also works for regular moviegoers just looking for a good drama.

Using interviews with all his closest friends and colleagues, Welles uses flashback to create a portrait of the life of millionaire media magnate Charles Foster Kane. Kane was, in conflicting accounts of those who knew him, a man of great character and potential or a wealthy, cold, manipulative scoundrel.

What, if anything, can be learned about the man from his last word? What does "Rosebud" mean?

The answer makes for good mystery, and it leads the viewer to ask key questions about what defines our lives and gives them meaning.

This film is fantastic, one that should be watched once a year to help you keep perspective on life.

One of the Best.
Even after sixty years, CITIZEN KANE remains as one of the greatest movies of all time. Though it is true that some are bored by the movie because it's "just a boring black-and-white movie with no action", those who hold that opinion are in the minority. KANE is often held as the pinnacle of filmmaking by movie buffs not just because of the advances the movie made in film production, but also because it set the standard that all filmmakers wish to reach: the total director's vision; a movie made with total control and no studio intervention. With that said, what does KANE hold for the average film-goer? The movie has an excellent script (it won an Oscar), great acting, and a haunting score. The story, though loosely based on the life of William Randolph Hearst, is an old one: powerful man starts out promising and full of ideals, becomes consumed by greed and looses his vision, and ends up loosing it all (anyone read MacBeth or ALL THE KING'S MEN?). Overall, a deeply penetrating and thinking movie that film buffs usually love and that most everyone else will at least enjoy if they don't mind a strong drama filmed in black and white.

AFI got this one right
Can you imagine what the perception of RKO was at the time they made this decision? Let's see, how about we give complete control of a major film to a twenty five year old radio voice with zero film experience (whose claim to fame was scaring the life out of the public with a fake story about aliens landing on earth) and even better, let him staff the movie with actors who have little to no screen experience. On top of that, we'll let it become one of the most controversial pictures of its time because it mirrors the life of one of the biggest names in America today. Why, it may never be able to be released because of the lawsuits-- Great idea!

I have just described Citizen Kane. All of the above is true, which makes the fact that it is possibly the greatest film in American Film History even more amazing. Everything is perfect. The script (which Welles co-wrote), the actors (all relative unknowns except Welles and Joseph Cotton), the special effects (listen to Roger Ebert's Commentary on this special edition for details) and finally, the makeup-- You won't believe how great a job they do making 25 year old Welles look 60.

As for the story, it's done in a most interesting fashion. Charles Foster Kane (Welles) dies at the very beginning of the movie and utters his famous last word "Rosebud". A reporter is given the task of finding out just what that one word meant. So he goes and interviews all the people who knew Kane to try to learn the meaning of the word. In the process, we are shown Kane through the eyes of those who knew him. We never see Kane through his own eyes, always what his former associates saw.

This is interesting, because Kane is a tragic figure as seen by just about everyone. He is unhappy and lonely. We as an audience eventually learn the meaning of Rosebud. I have read reviews that complain that the movie is about this one thing (I won't reveal what it is). But long before we learn the identity of Rosebud, the film has made its point. What is the point? My opinion is that the film shows us basically the worthlessness and despair of materialism. Loving "stuff" or money will ultimately lead to unhappiness.

By the way, this movie almost was never seen. The man I spoke of at the beginning of the review is William Randolph Hearst, former newspaper magnate. He saw too much of himself in the film and sued to squash it. Fortunately he lost. The second disc in the set is a two hour documentary on this topic. It is also excellent and well worth a viewing.

One last thing. Although this movie has been ranked on the AFI list as number one American movie of all time, it did NOT win Best Picture in 1941. That film? "How Green was my Valley"

Review of Review
The best review of Citizen Kane - perhaps of any film - I've ever read is the one titled "Narrative and Eye Disconnect" posted by "A viewer from Richmond, VA USA" on March 21, 2004. I recommend searching through Amazon's reviews to find it, then watching Citizen Kane and re-reading that review. Even though the reviewer gives Kane just one star, s/he writes with great insight into the movie and cinema in general, and has enhanced my appreciation of Citizen Kane exponentially. Thank you, "Viewer from Richmond," whoever you are!

Works on the basic levels as well as artistically
So many of the films that critics unanimously pick as the greatest of all time are overrated, confusing, ponderous, overly symbolic art pieces that leave viewers scratching their heads. The collective reaction is, "What in the hell was the director smoking?" Arty camera work and tons of symbolism and metaphors can never take the place of good acting, solid direction and, most importantly, a good script.

Much has been made of Citizen Kane's technical brilliance -- Welles' use of overlapping conversations, Gregg Toland's deep focus photography, set design that incorporates ceilings, etc. However, none of this would really mean anything if the film didn't have a great story and screenplay. Citizen Kane may be a triumph in filmmaking technique, but it is also a deeply engrossing story with characters we can relate to and sympathize with. Welles' Kane is a selfish, unhappy, overly controlling dictator who has everything and yet still manages to make himself more and more unhappy. Most of us know the feeling of not appreciating someone or something good in our lives until he/she/it is gone. We see the promise and idealism in Kane's early life, like him and believe, as Joseph Cotten's Jed Leland does, that Kane is a great man who can do so much good in society. As Kane's life progresses, however, he becomes more and more bitter, alienates everyone who cares about him and dies alone, longing for the simplicity of his early life before he became wealthy. When Kane, as an old man, loses control when his second wife Susan Alexander (Dorothy Comingore) leaves him, we can't help but feel for him -- even though most or all of his unhappiness is his fault. That the audience feels such empathy for such a flawed character is Citizen Kane's greatest triumph and is the true basis for Kane's reputation as one of the greatest films of all time. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

This is the TV movie that put Steven Spielberg on the map, shortly before he made The Sugarland Express. Working from a script by Richard Matheson, the film stars Dennis Weaver as a mild-mannered traveling salesman who unintentionally angers the driver of a semi truck. Suddenly, the truck is not only riding his tail but trying to run him off the road. No matter what he does (pulling over, stopping at a diner, calling the cops), he can't get rid of it. Spielberg makes the wise decision of never showing the driver, even as he cranks the voltage on the film's suspense elements. As a result, the truck itself takes on an air of satanic menace--even a personality of sorts--as it seems to hunt its human prey. Spielberg made a lot out of a little, suggesting just how skilled a storyteller he would become. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (110)

High-octane suspense
Traveling businessman David Mann (Dennis Weaver) encounters an enormous, rusty, slow-moving tanker truck on a lonely stretch of desert highway, and passes it. The never-seen truck driver, who is obviously "a few gallons short of a full tank," responds by turning his truck into a terrifying murder weapon, trying to run Mann's tiny Plymouth Valiant off the road. That's the entire plot of "Duel." In the hands of a young director named Steven Spielberg, it's all the plot that's needed.

Spielberg got the green light to direct this made-for-TV movie because producer George Eckstein had seen and been impressed by Spielberg's directorial debut, the pilot episode of "Columbo." Working on a shoestring budget, Spielberg delivered a tale of suspense that puts many a big-budget Hollywood action thriller to shame. Equal credit has to go to Weaver, who superbly conveys David Mann's emotions to the viewer: His initial frustration when the truck passes him and slows to a crawl, his satisfaction when he thinks he's gotten the upper hand, his terror when he realizes the truck driver's intentions have turned deadly, his isolated helplessness as every person he encounters thinks he's crazy and/or refuses to get involved and, ultimately, his determination to survive his ordeal.

There is a great moment in this movie which no one else has mentioned: Mann, thinking his ordeal is over, is flagged down by a bus driver whose bus has broken down. While assisting the driver, Mann suddenly notices the truck, waiting in the shadows under an overpass. Then, the truck's headlights come on. At this moment, the truck resembles a yellow-eyed demonic apparition straight out of David Mann's worst nightmare.

Far less impressive is this film's monaural sound, although it does have its moments. This is a made-for-television feature film from 1971, so don't expect the aural impact of a modern-day surround-sound blockbuster. Anyway, the chances are good that you'll be so caught up in the movie itself, the (relatively) poor sound quality won't matter.

But be warned: When you're out on the road, and you look in your rear-view mirror and see a large truck closing in behind you, this movie WILL come back to you.

1971 classic
this movie is both funny and thrilling at the same time. I always laugh everytime I watch this movie even the part when dennis weaver turns his radio back on and that early 70s funky country music starts playing. I think they should put this on dvd I bought jaws on dvd and on the directors comentary steven spielberg said that jaws was the sequel to duel but on water the elements are simliar.anyway duel is about a nerdy salesman david mann (dennis weaver) who is traveling across the state to a meeting driving in a new at the time plymouth valiant (NOT A DODGE DART)!!when all of the sudden he gets behind this oily old peterbilt tanker truck that looks like it hasn't been washed in about a year. so mann tries to pass the truck couple of times and the driver of the truck goes nuts and passes although it seems like a silly little game at first but soon it worsens the trucker who you never see tries to kill david mann or run off the road and through the movie its pretty much that but there are other elements through the movie that is funny so do yourself a faver and get this movie on vhs. PS you do catch glimpse of the driver of the truck watch closely as mann tries to pass the truck the second time look closely in the the cab you'll see him!!!

"Duel" Of The Fates
"Come on you miserable fat-head! Get that fat-*ss truck outta my way!" - David Mann gets his road-rage face on & sta