Reviews (7)

Book vs. Movie
If anyone has read the book series than you will know that they are better than the movies. I personally like the book series better because they for one go into a lot more detail and they have better storie lines.Even though i am very excited about the new movie comming out, I wish they would have made the first and second movies related to the books.

I really do like the movies, but if you have read the book series than the movies are not as good. I am so excited to find out who Mia marrys in the second princess diaries movie! I wish too that the movie would have come out in movie theaters so then we could have seen the movie sooner!

Just different
Although I am an avid follower of the books, I realize that movies when adapted from books are often quite different. So then the question is the movie still enjoyable? While I was saddened by some of the changes in the first movie, it was still very entertaining. I think that this second movie, though now almost entirely different from the books, looks like it too will be entertaining. And I have to say that the Prince Nicholas guy looks more like what I imagined Michael to look. I was not impressed with the Michael from the first movie. He was really not like the character in the book, so I feel no loss at his removal from the second movie. My advice, enjoy the movie for what it is rather than moment by moment comparison to the books.

not as bad as you might think
When I had heard that there was going to ba a sequel, I was excited. I saw a six minute preview, and yes, she is 21. The story line is this: her grandmother is going to abdicate from the throne. Mia will become the queen, but she must marry within 30 days. There is a big hassle to find the right man, and it is down to two guys.I like the fact that they use the same people for the same characters, like Lilly and Joseph. And though other people might think otherwise, I think that this movie will be entertaining, though I agree that the plot does make the first movie pointless.

Look things up folks!
This movie is not strictly set with the books. It is basically a continuation of the 1st movie with a catch.

Other sources I have seen mention that Mia is 21 not 15. A college graduate to boot! Michael would have been a great catch for her except that he was older and graduated high school before she did.

I refuse to give movie spoilers.

No Michael, No movie
I think anyone who has read all 5 of the book series would agree with me that this movie is a waiste of time unless michael and mia are together. If this movie is about her finding another guy to MARRY, then why did they have michael and mia together in the first place? I am not interested in this movie at all, and it is a big dissapointment if you read the books, although the books are 10 times greater than the movies anyways. ... Read more

Reviews (35)

Avoiding Hip
It's easy to see why this film could be quickly classed as "one of those generation-x, college student, young men at a crossroad" films, and being instantly criticised on these grounds. Leonard Maltin did all of the above, but hey, check your old Maltin guide and you'll find that he's happy to rate the film 'Beverely Hills Cop' as a better film than 'Taxi Driver'. The fact is, this film manages to provide a very successful and humorous commentary on the state of despair and impotence shared by the characters involved. In addition, Baumbach writes with an notable awareness of the genre-based criticism under which the film may fall. At times, the film is hilarious, at times a little inexcusably slow, and there are some shots and sequences (notably the "flashbacks") with great subtlety and skill. This is a clear and intentional departure from any hip, pop-culture, angry young man-type film. It's true that Eigeman (one of my favorites) once again plays the "smug" role that may well define his career, but unlike in Metropolitan, his character shows a deeper vulnerability, which is to be further underscored in 'Mr Jealousy'. Hamilton impresses. I've heard Kicking & Screaming described by critics as "underrated", and there seem to be a few people who have really connected with the film, in either relating to the plot, or more likely, being impressed by the mature technique of Baumbach. Unfortunately, I write out of bias, as I truly did see something special in the way this film was composed. I find that the most common criticism draws reference to the "genre", and the term "one of those blah-blah-blah films" is invariably used. These are quite obviously unfair criticisms, in the same way had people commented, upon the release of 'The Searchers', "another one of those John Wayne westerns" as they rolled their eyeballs. The film is limited by a lack of plot, but compensated by a good sense of character, and an intelligence and eye for observation that may only be rivaled by Stillman in this genre. This film distinguishes itself from the hip&trendy implications of its perceived genre, and on nothing but dialogue alone, the film should receive 3 stars. One can only be hope that Baumbach continues to write his films, as one day, plot and dialogue will come together with the intelligence and subtlety of some of Woody Allen's most acclaimed pieces. Send me some e-mail if you're interested in discussing the film, but you've probably heard enough about it from me by now.

A personal favorite
What is terrific about the film is not merely how funny it is (and yes it is a very sharp piece of comedy)... but how much it stays with you after you watch it. Faced with the breakup of an old college girlfriend, a needy father, friends moving off into different directions, the characters face a very human set of emotional experiences: Love, longing, uncertainty, introspection.

There are two very unique bits of style which I found to be tremendously interesting:
(1) The film's dialogue is razor sharp and complex. You often enter a scene in the middle of a conversation, and it is not clear until it progresses. So, the punchline might come long before the riddle... and this makes it all incredibly engaging. Watching this film again and again is immensely enjoyable on a new level because of this.
(2) A key part of the story is told in flashbacks. Even as the main character and his girlfriend grow distant, you see the story of how they met. The effect is haunting.
I'm not sure where the director is today, but I give this movie the highest recommendation. It is by far one of my favorites.

A Joyous Good Time!
Few movies do I enjoy more than Kicking and Screaming. I own a copy and watch it every six months or so. It always makes me laugh but it also succeeds in making the viewer experience sincere empathy and sympathy for its characters. Anyone who went to college in the nineties can relate to these individuals at some level. Furthermore, just in case you're wondering, its not a Whit Stillman film but many of the same actors are used such as Chris Eigeman. Here we have a group of friends who have to be dragged kicking and screaming into adulthood. All of them appear to be deflated by their graduations from college. "What do we do now?" is their central question. By the end, nearly everybody discovers some kind of direction in which to take their lives.

kicked but and was a pleasure for me
I'm a big fan of Josh Hamilton, but hes not my favorite, hes done movies like The House Of Yes, The Bourne Identity, Urbania and the powerful 1993 Alive, and this part for him is good. it was a pleasure to see some good actors in here and it kicked with its funny moments and charm. Eric Stolz has never been better, Parker Posey is adorable, Olivia d'ABo is awesome, Chris Eigleman is hilarious and Carlos Jacott is uproarous, hes the guy the group asked him if he was wearing masscara and then he said no and then right after he said yes. a keeper

Ding! Monkeys, Monkeys, Ted & Alice!
This movie is an absolute classic for one-liners and odd dialogue. The themes are typical: pre-adulthood angst and the directionless "X" Generation, but the delivery is brilliant and real. It feels like you're watching a series of intimate conversations secretly taped of your friends. Or like you're let in on some private joke and that makes each viewing a little funnier.
You'll find yourself incorporating the quotes into your own life, and needing to share the film with select others so that they're in on the joke too.
Ding! Go Cougars! ... Read more

Reviews (275)

One Super DVD
Faster than a speeding bullet. More powerful than a locomotive. Able to leap the tallest building in a single bound. The world's greatest superhero has finally arrived on DVD with "Superman: The Movie" Special Edition. The film focuses on the young survivor of the doomed world of Krypton. After crash-landing on earth, the young alien is adopted by a caring farm couple and grows up with amazing superhuman abilities. Moving to Metropolis, he uses his incredible powers to protect the people and fight injustice. "Superman- the Movie" is probably the best superhero movie to date. The story is quite entertaining but does lose some strength during the second half though it still manages to preserve its entertainment value. The film contains some great performance by Christopher Reeve, Gene Hackman, Margot Kidder and Marlon Brando as Jor-El. The cast also includes Jackie Cooper, Terence Stamp and Ned Beatty. From daring rescues to superhuman feats of strength, the film contains some impressive action sequence and terrific visual effects.

The DVD honors the Man of Steel like it should. The comic book film is presented in 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen format. The DVD contains a sharp video transfer and a fine 5.1 Dolby Digital sound with great surround effects. This amazing DVD features an audio commentary with director Richard Donner and consultant Tom Mankiewicz, additional footage including an extended sequence inside Lex Luther's underground gauntlet, behind-the-scenes documentaries, theatrical trailers, deleted scenes and DVD-ROM extras. With such a striking DVD presentation, "Superman" earns an "A".

Super features, super options, JUST PLAIN SUPER!
I enjoyed the Superman DVD. 25 years after this movie came out and seeing it so many times on TV with pan and scan, the newly remastered print blows everything out of the water. The music only option works for the title sequence and hearing the extra tracks on Side B adds to the genius that was John Williams soundtrack.

The audio is remastered and put on a surround sound system instead of the setup I have at home would shake your house to the core. The extra scenes were a good touch as well. Behind the scenes added the great touch of mystique that was Superman. Having Marc McClure host the BTS stuff added a bit of credibility.

Until Spider-Man last year and Batman in 1989, this was the film on which Superheroes were judged. The Hulk disappointed and Daredevil and X-2 were moderate hits.

Superman still stands the test of time, no matter what your views.

Spider-Man has kind of surpassed it...
Well now that we have seen the two Spider-Man movies, I tend to belive that they are now the standards by which other comic book films (both Marvel and DC) will have to live up to now. In a way, Superman is now kind of the odd film out. It works better as an origin story in how Clarke Kent becomes Superman and Chris Reeve's effective perfomance in the title role still works, In the comics, Lex Luthor has always been a one dimensional cartoon character, the only time that he was an effective villian was when Gene Hackman played him in this movie. The final scenes of Superman turning the Earth backward to save lois lane, are what they are. It might be a bit far fetched to put in a movie, but that does not stop audiences from enjoying it. and it doesn't stop me from watching it over and over again.

Born on Krypton, raised by the Kents on Earth, Becomes Hero
The Man of Steel flys into the spectactular motion picture, Based The DC Comic and also appearing in Action Comics, Christopher Reeve stars as Clark Kent.Reporter in Metropolis,Illnois for the newspaper the Daily Planet,And trouble emerges Clark Kent flys to the rescue as Superman, a blue suited red caped powerful wonder. He takes on Lex Luthor played Gene Hackman and falls for Lois Lane played Margot Kidder and Marlon Brand as the Krytonian father of Superman Jor EL. This Film is a Great Superhero movie and great film all around, probably the most imaginative thing the Man of Steel has been in. Superman began as the comic, then a radio show, several 1950s B movies, TV show and in 1978 the true Superman ovie. Superman is imaginative in everthing because hes an imaginative character. A pop culture icon on screen and in everthing else. the Special Effects are incredible, This a Super high flying ride. You Want a good superhero movie before Batman and Spider-Man this is it. If it wasn't for this classic we would'nt have superhero movies like Spider-Man 1&2,Batman,Hulk and X-Men 1&2. Thank Hollywood for making a great superhero film that lauched other superhero films. A thrilling Film of one of the greatest heroes of the 20th century, The Man of Steel, SUPERMAN.

Release Superman into our 21st century!
Very bad film.
They released Spiderman into the 21st century, why not Superman?
I've always found him to be the most appealing comic book character. He is sure for an amazing performance.
RELEASE HIM INTO OUR CENTURY! ... Read more

Reviews (55)

Brilliant, And Bittersweet
Sergeant York is one of the great films of all time. Justly heralded for the performances -- especially the superb Gary Cooper -- and writing, direction, Max Steiner's score, etc. What isn't often mentioned is how bittersweet is the ending. Prior to going to war, Alvin York had been too poor to purchase a piece of bottom land for farming. Called to war, he resisted. He was a pacifist, against killing. However, in a stunning scene on a mountain ledge, York finally agrees to fight the German enemy. He single-handedly captures 132 prisoners, and kills dozens of others. For this, he is hailed a hero and becomes America's most-decoarated WW I soldier. And finally gets his bottom land. However, he has only earned this bottom land because he went against his pacifist beliefs -- "thou shall not kill". The land is given to him for the very act of killing. How ironic and bittersweet. How apt is Cooper's closing line: "The Lord sure does move in mysterious ways." Don't miss this film.

A great classic movie!!
This movie is based on a real life story about a man who is saved by Jesus Christ and then goes off to war. Unlike the war movies made today, the plot revolves around the man's faith in God, (which might be why they never show this movie on the networks, although its a classic).

Sergeant York gets saved in a church after being struck by lightening, and after he is saved he is drafted, and spends time reconciling doing what Christ commands with killing people during time of war. (This isn't an easy thing to reconcile, and perhaps especially for a newly saved person, even if most movies act like its nothing.)

After reading the bible however, York finds the answer, and goes to war, becoming one of America's great heroes, and in the end, he and his future wife are greatly blessed by God.

If all this sounds too heavy, it isn't. Sergeant York is from Tennessee and the movie is actually quite light hearted. I also enjoyed hearing the hymn 'Give me that Old Time Religion'.

One of my favorite movies, and worth getting if you are tired of the trash they put on tv, and want some films with Christians in them.

As Good As It Gets
Next to "Red River" this is Howard Hawks' greatest achievement, which is to say one of the greatest American films ever made. A relatively true-to-life depiction of the Tennessee hill farmer who found himself caught up in the nightmare of WWI, it would be memorable enough just for its wonderful re-creation of the the back-country life and dialect. Gary Cooper and Walter Brennan never surpassed the performances they gave here as Alvin York and his neighbor and pastor Rosier Pile, and the rest of the cast shines just as brightly, particularly Margaret Wycherly as York's mother, and George Tobias as his comrade in arms. York won international fame when he accepted the surrender of more than 100 German soldiers about a month before the end of the war. Although York showed amazing heroism and marksmanship in the encounter, both he and Hawks knew full well that the German army was played out by that point and in many areas was surrendering en masse. Some sense of that is built into the project, to everyone's credit, and the picture's finest moment comes when Cooper says firmly "I'm not proud of what when on over there." Both Howard Koch of "Casablanca" fame and John Huston worked on the script.

Mom and Apple pie
Don't judge this movie by millennium standards; this was a simple movie from a simpler time. Sgt York was a hero. The film is missing some spots. I remember a particular scene during training when York's backpack was filled with bricks, while the other men had loaded theirs up with straw (don't laugh I've known Marines who actually load their rucks up with heavy gear). But overall, it's a good representation of early genre. Please note that a War Movie used to also include the home coming, the fiancée or wife or mom back home pining away with worry and doubt. It's all here, too. Great entertainment? Not really, it's more in line with a historical review of early cinema.

I'm not an American and still think this Movie is the best.
I think this is the best Movie I have ever seen! I watch it all the time when I'm bored and it never fails to lift me. I shed tears of joy at the morals of the man. I think Gary Cooper was one of the best actors from the black & white period and own this and other movies made by him. I cry, I laugh, I think, what more can a movie do for you?
Absolutely Brilliant.
PS I live up in the outback on mountains too!!!! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

The satirical sensibilities of writer Peter Shaffer and director Milos Forman (One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest) were ideally matched in this Oscar-winning movie adaptation of Shaffer's hit play about the rivalry between two composers in the court of Austrian Emperor Joseph II--official royal composer Antonio Salieri (F. Murray Abraham), and the younger but superior prodigy Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (Tom Hulce). The conceit is absolutely delicious: Salieri secretly loathes Mozart's crude and bratty personality, but is astounded by the beauty of his music. That's the heart of Salieri's torment--although he's in a unique position to recognize and cultivate both Mozart's talent and career, he's also consumed with envy and insecurity in the face of such genius. That such magnificent music should come from such a vulgar little creature strikes Salieri as one of God's cruelest jokes, and it drives him insane. Amadeus creates peculiar and delightful contrasts between the impeccably re-created details of its lavish period setting and the jarring (but humorously refreshing and unstuffy) modern tone of its dialogue and performances--all of which serve to remind us that these were people before they became enshrined in historical and artistic legend. Jeffrey Jones, best-known as Ferris Bueller's principal, is particularly wonderful as the bumbling emperor (with the voice of a modern midlevel businessman). The film's eight Oscars include statuettes for Best Director Forman, Best Actor Abraham (Hulce was also nominated), Best Screenplay, and Best Picture. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (363)

Rock Me Amadeus
Milos Forman's Amadeus is a hugely entertaining adaptation of Peter Shaffer's play. The movie is told in flashback style from the memory of Antonio Salieri. Salieri was a successful and popular composer who was a rival of Mozart's. History has speculated on the death of Mozart and some people are of the opinion that Salieri had a hand in his death (possibly even murdered him). The film explores this angle of the legend. Salieri is consumed by his jealousy and hatred of the infantile Mozart. Mozart is a musical genius, but a wild spending and is always looking for the next good time. His operas are utterly brilliant, but are unsuccessful. He is in constant debt. Salieri concocts a plan for Mozart to compose a requiem. This work is actually planned as Mozart's own requiem. Mozart is shown as slowly going mad and at the end of the film, Salieri helps him by writing the musical score down for a very weak Mozart. The morning after Mozart and Salieri work together, Mozart is found dead and we are left speculating whether he died through natural causes or if Salieri did something to him. F. Murray Abrham is absolutely amazing as Salieri. He brings across the jealousy and hatred, but doesn't make Salieri a fiend. He has major respect for Mozart's musical talents, but doesn't understand why God would give them to such an obvious heathen. Tom Hulce is equally as good as Mozart. He plays him with a reckless abandon and in an over the top fashion that is perfectly suited for the role. The film took home the 1984 Best Picture Oscar, Mr. Forman won Best Director and Mr. Abrham beat out Mr. Hulce for Best Actor. This was a case where a tie would have been more than appropriate. The new director's cut adds 20 minutes of footage, but the real standout is the remastered sound. The Dolby 5.1 version brings alive the sounds of Mozart in brilliant detail.

Memorable cinematic achievement gets a new look
I was way too young to have seen AMADEUS in its original cinematic release (unfortunately), but it's not hard to see why it not only took home the Best Picture Oscar, but caused a rebirth of "Mozart mania". The story, although fictionalized, is an intriguing one. Salieri, the pious man who prayed to God to be given sublime musical talent, has to face the fact that God has given it to Mozart, who is exuberant, childish, and bawdy. Salieri's subsequent jealousy drives the entire movie. You can see his character becoming more and more consumed by his extremely negative feelings. The character of Mozart, on the other hand, is fun, even though the real Mozart wasn't really that over-the-top. I might add, however, that the distinguishing giggle is actually historically accurate. Listen to the commentary on the DVD and Peter Shaffer himself even mentions something to that effect. Although it was delightful to see the film in its entirety, I could see why some of the scenes were deleted. They simply weren't that strong or they distracted the viewer from the main focus. The only real complaint I had was that there weren't more extras. It does have the commentary, the original trailer, and the short featurette which consists of various people looking back at making the film, but I would have liked to have seen an actual "making of" documentary from around the time the film was being made. Overall, though, a worthy addition to any movie collection.

a mythical, fabulous portrait of genius
Peter Shaffer wrote the "Amadeus" screenplay based on his play, which is a quirky, fanciful vision of Mozart and Salieri, and how God gave Mozart the gift of musical genius despite his character flaws, but bypassed Salieri, who tried to strike a deal with the Almighty, vowing pious devotion, if He would only grant him brilliance and fame.
F. Murray Abraham is marvelous portraying Salieri's pride and envy, and having to suffer the indignity of mediocrity; the part garnered him a Best Actor Oscar and a Golden Globe, among other awards, and as Mozart, Tom Hulce is stupendous, with his high pitched raucous giggle, fluffy wigs, and energetic appeal.
Others in the cast of note are Elizabeth Berridge, excellent as Mozart's wife Constanza, and Roy Dotrice as his stern father Leopold.

The biggest star of the film however, is the music...the glorious sounds of Mozart's operas, and his magnificent Requiem. Many of my favorite scenes are depicted, from the ballet music from "The Marriage of Figaro", to "Don Giovanni a cenar teco", as well as portions of "The Marriage of Figaro", "The Magic Flute", and much more.
Some of the great voices heard are Samuel Ramey (Figaro), Richard Stilwell (Count Almaviva / Don Giovanni), June Anderson (Queen of the Night), Brian Kay (Papageno) and Gillian Fisher (Papagena), though the parts on screen are played by actors, and not those singing.

Twyla Tharp's choreography is fresh and exhilarating, Miroslav Ondricek's cinematography is exquisite, and Milos Forman's direction imaginative and well paced.
As well as Best Actor, the Academy bestowed Oscars for Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Art Direction/Set Decoration, Best Costume Design, Best Makeup, Best Sound, all well deserved.
Total running time is 160 minutes.

As close to "perfect' as a movie can get
When I saw this movie in its original release in 1984, it was only due to the fact that I was dragged to the theatre. (A movie about Mozart -- BORING!!) I have never been so quick to change my mind. From the opening moments, hearing F. Murray Abraham shout out the word "MOZART" I was hooked, and my eyes never waivered from the screen. I anxiously awaited the release of this Director's Cut, due primarly to the extras that were purported to be included. The extras more than deliver on their promise.

Not only did I get the joy of watching once again one of the best movies to have ever been released -- to remember how enthralled I was by the performances of Tom Hulce, F. Murray Abraham and Elizabeth Berridge (unfortunately, most reviewers tend to exclude her contribution to this movie, but her performance as Constanza, Mozart's wife, is as powerful as the others) -- but the extras (behind the scenes, the commentaries) added to my delight.

I truly find it hard to put into words how wonderful this movie is. I have spent the last 20 years telling people "Trust me, just watch it, and you will understand what I am talking about." It is more than just a grand journey through the worlds of these two men (yes, granted, told from a "movie" point-of-view). The entire package, from the scenery, the costumes, the story and THE MUSIC, THE MUSIC, THE MUSIC!!! shows you how a movie should and can be produced. Even if you can't stand classical music, you will adore the wonder that is Mozart.

Please -- I'm begging you -- WATCH THIS MOVIE. You will NOT be disappointed!!!

Love it, warts and all
I loved "Amadeus" the first time I saw it and every time thereafter, on tape, DVD and now in this DVD package. It is a very great film, exceptionally worthy of its Oscars, and the role of a lifetime for Tom Hulse. The operatic and musical scenes in this film succeed on a scale never seen before. The finale of "Don Giovanni" is better in this movie than in the two live performances I've seen and the performance Herbert von Karajan led that was shown on PBS in 1990. The direction, acting, script and locations are all sumptuous. It apparently does not follow the play on which it is based, but artistic difference is the basis of enjoyment. Having said all this, I would caution viewers not to judge the real-life Mozart by the portrayal of Hulse in this film. The real Mozart, I have read, was a prudish workaholic that would never go out drinking with his buddies. He also played by the rules of the day and adored Salieri, respecting his role as the musical director in Vienna. Still, it's fair to set history aside in a work of art this fine. Anyone that likes great music or great movies will enjoy this. ... Read more

Amazon.com

After their brilliant collaborations on Howards End and The Remains of the Day, director James Ivory and Anthony Hopkins reunited (along with producer Ismail Merchant and screenwriter Ruth Prawer Jhabvala) for this controversial film about the life and loves of the great artist Pablo Picasso. Hopkins is outstanding in the title role, portraying Picasso as a brilliant, manipulative egotist who used his power over women to fuel his artistic impulse and voracious sexual appetite.

But Surviving Picasso is not intended to be a screen biography and, as many critics noted in mixed reviews, this 1996 film fails to provide any substantial insight into Picasso's complex personality. It's more about Françoise Gilot (Natascha McElhone), the aspiring artist who was one of the few women to "survive" Picasso's love and emerge as a stronger, more confident person with a life of her own outside of Picasso's often destructive sphere of influence. McElhone is impressive in this breakthrough role, conveying the seductive effect Picasso had on women, but also holding her own against the artist's unpredictable temperament.

Surviving Picasso was based on the unflattering book Picasso: Creator and Destroyer by Arianna Huffington, so the Merchant-Ivory team did not have the cooperation of Picasso's estate. The result is a film that shifts its focus away from the artist and onto his positive and negative effect on those who entered his inner circle. It's a fascinating portrait of a fascinating man and his equally passionate lovers, fueled by excellent performances. Even though you know you're not getting the whole story of Picasso's best and worst behavior, the movie grabs and holds your attention. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Enduring Picasso
I find Anthony Hopkins to be a master at becoming whatever he intends to create. He was just as believable as President Nixon in "Nixon", as he was a madman in "Silence Of The Lambs". Here again, he does not dissapoint me. The movie is dark, and I would tend not to agree with the accuracy of the historical aspects of the film, but I did find Hopkins to be a compelling Picasso. And, yes once again, I found myself watching Pablo Picasso. I enjoy biographies of painters and creative souls, and I would be hard pressed to find a biography that is uplifting and has a happy ending. I found the same in "Surviving Picasso". It is a little long in the tooth, but I found the cinematography to be beautiful and again, Sir Anthony Hopkins' performance is beautiful. I would reccomend this for any Hopkins lover.

No me gusta all that mucho
While Anthony Hopkins is a good actor, you know, he's really not like Lon Chaney, Man of a Thousand Faces. By which I mean, there's a limit to his versatility, and "Surviving Picasso" is a case in point. I really didn't believe him as the Spaniard painter. He sort of reminded me of Otto Preminger's Mr. Freeze from Batman rather than the most famous painter of the 20th century. Try it for yourself to see if you survive to the end; I almost didn't.

Is there anybody better than Anthony?
If you love Anthony Hopkins and you love stories based on real (and very interesting) people, you will love this movie. Its a movie with a story of a man that has it all and wants more, he loves hard and paints beautifully, and Anthony Hopkins pulls it off beautifully playing Picasso. I was amazed at his ability to be romantic and seductive one moment, playful the next, and suddenly turn to a madman. It was beautiful.

MOSTLY A GREAT ARTIST
It's a common fact that great artists often make poor human beings, unable to connect with real life in a decent way.It was certainly the case with PABLO PICASSO and we knew that before this movie was made.The film seems to say that he only loved women for the sake of his art.Being SPANISH, he was a latin man with a deep inclinaison towards his own ego.His control over the people he knew really destroy them in many ways.While it is a work of fiction, the performances keeps it interesting ,even if we don't have to take it all too seriously.

Intriguing
I've watched this movie many times because I'm fascinated by the man, especially hoping to get a better understanding of what his life was like. The more I learn about him though, the more this movie is so one dimensional and inaccurate. It was based on the harshest biography of Picasso which is unfortunate because it gives a false impression of what he was really like. I would still buy it because the scenes are filled with his studios and artwork, however it would have been one of my all-time faves if it focused more on his work and his passion. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

They call it Giant because everything in this picture is big, from the generous running time (more than 200 minutes) to the sprawling ranch location (a horizon-to-horizon plain with a lonely, modest mansion dropped in the middle) to the high-powered stars. Stocky Rock Hudson stars as the confident, stubborn young ranch baron Bick Benedict, who woos and wins the hand of Southern belle Elizabeth Taylor, a seemingly demure young beauty who proves to be Hudson's match after she settles into the family homestead. For many the film is chiefly remembered for James Dean's final performance, as poor former ranch hand Jett Rink, who strikes oil and transforms himself into a flamboyant millionaire playboy. Director George Stevens won his second Oscar for this ambitious, grandly realized (if sometimes slow moving) epic of the changing socioeconomic (and physical) landscape of modern Texas, based on Edna Ferber's bestselling novel. The talented supporting cast includes Mercedes McCambridge as Bick's frustrated sister, put out by the new "woman of the house"; Chill Wills as the Benedicts' garrulous rancher neighbor; Carroll Baker and Dennis Hopper as the Benedicts' rebellious children; and Earl Holliman and Sal Mineo as dedicated ranch hands. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (62)

The quintessential Texas epic loaded with stars!
This 202-minute slow-paced drama exemplifies the lives of three generations of cattlemen on a grandiose west Texas cattle ranch at the onset of the oil boom. Being a native Texan with relatives living close to the area near Marfa, Tx where GIANT was filmed, I LOVE this movie for the sheer drama and myth of our state. (and yes, there ARE some exaggerations) But it's also a well-crafted movie with exemplary performances by Rock Hudson, Elizabeth Taylor, James Dean, and a very young Dennis Hopper! Viewers seeking a fast-action adrenaline-pumping film probably will be bored by GIANT, but viewers who enjoy classical performances, historical sagas, (and old movies) will cherish this movie. It's sort of like a western "GWTW"! They don't make 'em like this anymore!

A gigantic screen presence
What about this movie isn't big? Big stars (Elizabeth Taylor and Rock Hudson); big state (Texas); big ranch (2 million acres of prime cattle land), and big length; at 202 minutes, this film runs about 45 minutes too long. The story is the familiar one about grandiosity run amok; the moral, which has been done to death, is that the simple life is the one best worth living. We've seen it all before. So why see this movie? In two words: James Dean. In his last film before his tragic death on the Freeway at the age of 24, Dean showed that he was what his legion of fans always claimed: a true genius. Try to imagine anyone else in the role of Jett Rink , and the character remains a cipher - lifeless, dull, nothing. It took Dean to bring it to life and make it his own. In this movie, James Dean and Jett Rink become indistinguishable from each other. And perhaps only an actor as brilliant as Dean could turn Rink from a character we love in the first half of the film, to a character we hate at the end. His drunken tirade near the movie's end is a tour de force. Dean's magnificent performance doesn't take away from the very creditable acting by Rock Hudson as the millionaire rancher Bick Benedict, Elizabeth Taylor as his wife Leslie, the young Sal Mineo, and especially Mercedes McCambridge as Bick's bitter, sexually frustrated sister with an unrequited passion for Jett Rink; but next to Dean's knockout performance, they pale into mere adequacy. Forget everything else; this is Dean's movie.

This is Texas?
I recently decided to view this film. Let's see - a reference to Neiman-Marcus - some wide open spaces, some cattle and oil wells. O.K. - but this film does not really tell about Texas and Texans. Thankfully, Chill Wills (from Seagoville, TX) was in it. He was the most Texan thing about this film. I wish I had something more positive to say - but I don't.

Giant Is Not A Widescreen Film
The product information here should be carefully read, as it reveals that this edition of Giant has been transferred in a 1:1.66 letterbox transfer. This is a travesty. Giant was filmed and released in the classic 1:1.33 "Academy" aspect ratio, which also happens to be the aspect ratio for NTSC analog television. George Stevens disliked widescreen processes, although he was forced to use them by studios on later films.
The time has come to put a stop to these unnecessary, phoney "restored" versions of classics. It's just a marketing ploy to squeeze more money out of old warhorses. Going back to the good old days of the laserdisc, I never much cared about the extras that were first introduced by Criterion and later imitated by the major studios. I've always responded to a high quality video transfer taken from the best film elements available. Getting the aspect ratio wrong and mutilating the images of Steven's classic film makes everything else irrelevant.
Thank goodness I still have my laserdiscs. Failing that, grab a copy on VHS.

FANTASTIC!
The DVD is superb -- I do not know what all the complaints about sound, etc. are all about! My goodness, this film is almost 50 years old -- and I think it is in wonderful shape!

I purchased this video because I have become a big James Dean film, but the acting of Elizabeth Taylor, Rock Hudson, Carol Baker, and Dennis Hopper were splendid.

To think that Hudson was a mere 29, Taylor 23, and Dean 23 and could play characters who age 30 years with such reality is a true testament to their genius! Of course, the makeup artists must also receive recognition.

The most disturbing portion of the film to me is when Hudson confronts "Sarge" the restaurant owner in a fist fight and when "Sarge" lands into the juke box, "The Yellow Rose of Texas" begins to play. However, this epic film is full of irony and subtle twists and nuances -- to really grasp the entire message this film needs to be viewed more than one time.

The irony of the Mexican children singing The National Anthem during the funeral of Angel (played by a very young Sal Mineo) touched me. Little Angel was a person who died for the United States and yet was the focus of bigotry from his impoverished birth until his death.

Or course, in my opinion, there was and never will be another James Dean -- it is heartbreaking to watch this dramatic genius in the final film performance before his untimely demise. Like Buddy Holly, I will always wonder where Dean's career would have gone.

Carol Baker is fantastic in her first film role and the very young Dennis Hopper's performance is equally memorable.

This film speaks to the injustices of racial bigotry that unfortunately will always exist except in a utopian world.

The additions to this DVD make it a must-buy!

Please don't hesitate to purchase -- this DVD is worth every penny -- and then some!

Oh, the editorial review refers to Elizabeth Taylor as a Southern Belle and this is incorrect. Leslie Benedict is from Maryland and even makes the comment to Hudson and his crownies that she was from the "Center of Politics" when Hudson tries to push her aside so the men can talk "Business and Politics". ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

John Hughes's popular 1985 teen drama finds a diverse group of high school students--a jock (Emilio Estevez), a metalhead (Judd Nelson), a weirdo (Ally Sheedy), a princess (Molly Ringwald), and a nerd (Anthony Michael Hall)--sharing a Saturday in detention at their high school for one minor infraction or another. Over the course of a day, they talk through the social barriers that ordinarily keep them apart, and new alliances are born, though not without a lot of pain first. Hughes (Sixteen Candles), who wrote and directed, is heavy on dialogue but he also thoughtfully refreshes the look of the film every few minutes with different settings and original viewpoints on action. The movie deals with such fundamentals as the human tendency toward bias and hurting the weak, and because the characters are caught somewhere between childhood and adulthood, it's easy to get emotionally involved in hope for their redemption. Preteen and teenage kids love this film, incidentally. The DVD release includes production notes, cast and crew bios, widescreen presentation, Dolby sound, closed captioning, optional French and Spanish soundtracks, and optional Spanish subtitles. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (213)

2 thumbs down
I found John Hughes' 1985 movie The Breakfast Club to be an extremely generalized, heavy handed, piece of trite filmmaking that may or may not have been relevant to teenagers fifteen years ago, but is certainly nowhere near on target now.
Obviously it was by design that his five main characters were one-dimensional character sketches of so-called 'traditional' high school stereotypes. You have Andy the jock (Emilio Estevez), Claire the princess (Molly Ringwald, a John Hughes staple), Bender the criminal (Judd Nelson), Brian the nerd (Anthony Michael Hall), and Allison the basket case (Ally Sheedy). In my opinion, for Hughes to insinuate that these five people come from completely different backgrounds and had absolutely no contact with each other or anyone else from their particular 'type' during school is just plain silly. For example, it is quite likely that Claire and Andy, being popular people, would know each other, or at least that princesses and jocks would interact on a regular basis. Same thing goes for Bender and Allison as social outcasts. Only Brian, being the brain, would logically be shunned by all other classes.
For another thing, these categories have little relevance today because in today's modern society, and indeed this has always been true, teens simply cannot be categorized and labeled, even by their peers, in this manner. I myself saw elements of my personality in every one of the characters, and neither I nor anyone I know would fit neatly into these stereotypes.
The last thing I'm going to gripe about in this review is, logically enough, the ending. For a film that tried so hard to be edgy, the denouement was awfully hackneyed and predictable. Four out of the five characters hook up at the end? Gosh, I never saw that coming! Also, the treatment of Allison was laughable. This girl has serious psychological issues that have been with her all her life, but all she needs is a little makeup, a nice dress, and a clean-cut boyfriend to set her to rights? I don't think so, pal. Willful suspension of disbelief is all fine and good, but to trivialize Allison's pain and emotional trauma in this manner is irresponsible and does a disservice to those young people who do identify with her character. I think that's enough bashing for this film; while it had its moments, it certainly is by no means the 'classic' that it is reputed to be.

One for the ages
This movie is a classic and it will stand the test of time. This is the second "teen coming of age" installment from John Hues, and round 2 for Molly Ringwald and Anthony Michael Hall. The first installment, Sixteen Candles, was more of a sexual coming of age movie whereas The Breakfast Club is more of a coming of age for one's character and social awareness. Where they are "teetering" with; do they stay with the social allegiances of their perspective pack, or do they listen to that inner voice...the voice of reason, maturity and human compassion that's not bound to any "click". I also like the choice of actors here; I think they all fit like pieces in a puzzle and make their characters totally believable. I am in the same age range as almost the entire cast and I was a senior in High school when this film came out. Allot of reviews seem to put this film within the Junior High crowd but I feel it's much more mature than that. The very message that it's trying to get across isn't understood in real life until we get close to 18 or so. The story is simple; 5 kids have to come into school on a Saturday for detention. At first they try to segregate themselves according to their school social standings. Inevitably they find out that they are more alike than they ever thought. The movie, in my eyes, is broken into 3 parts; the first part is pure character development. This is where you (the viewer) get to know each person they way they are supposed to be seen with their everyday face. At first, they act the way they think they should act, and stand up for what they always had, with out question or defiance. They stay true to their cause never steering away for a second. The second part of the film is where the movie itself develops. These 5 separate entities realize that they are variations of the same person. They have the same desires and anguishes. Their pressures and stresses are the same even though it's generated from very different sources.
The jock (Emilio Estevez) has the pressure to be on top of his sport (wrestling). In return for this he gets attention from his dad, coaches and keeps his standing within his social group. This is his priority in life and he doesn't stray.
The Princess (Molly Ringwald) has to conform and obey the rules of her social group in order to be accepted and keep her standing within the group. She keeps her eyes closed; mouth shut and goes along for the ride.
The Metal Head/criminal (Judd Nelson) is an angry guy! He wears the physical and mental scars of growing up in an abusive house. He hates most people, like the ones Emilio and Molly play, because in his eyes, they have had a free ticket and earned nothing...things are handed to them because of their social and/or economical standings. On the other hand, he feels that he's on a whole other plain because his eyes have been beaten open and he was forced to grow up a little faster than he wanted too or was ready too. I feel that Judd Nelson's character is the most crucial to the movie. He is the key to this whole new self-awareness for everyone, including himself.
The nerd (Anthony Michael Hall) is the quintessential geek. His every woken moment is spent learning. He hides behind his grades and in fact, he wants to be more accepted by the "cooler" groups. He also is a little "cocky" about his better grades and academically superiority to the other people in the room.
The weirdo (Ally Sheedy) is a loner and an outcast. She doesn't have friends that we (the viewers) know of. Because her parents ignore her, She feels ugly and without a place in the world. She is starving for positive attention. I think her character was needed in this movie to balance off the cast. It would have left out a very critical part of teen angst!
Richard Vernon (Paul Gleason) is the "Villain" of the movie. To the kids, he represents the out of touch older generation and the mean spirited, high testosterone adult. For Richard Vernon, these kids are the source of his anger and agony. He has lost touch with the younger generation for 1 reason, he got older...and the older you get, the harder it is to relate to youth. Youth recycles right before your eyes, but you keep getting older. His character is the key that releases these kids. He helps them to strip away the blindfolds and to take a fresh look at every thing and everyone (including themselves).

This leads to the 3rd and final part of the movie. Where they cleanse themselves of all the pentad up anger and prejudices. When the kids realize that they all have the same goal, they were just taking different roads to reach it. I highly recommend The Breakfast Club and it should go down as one of the all time great teenage movie!

A little time - a little perspective
I first saw this movie at a cinema in Austin in March, 1985. Just a year out of high school, I thought this was a deep, moving motion picture with a quality cast that really showed the feelings of different groups of students in schools. I could relate to the characters.

Move forward more than 19 years. This movie has not aged well. I read on the IMDB that John Hughes wrote this script in two days. After watching this movie again, I find that very easy to believe. It is horrible! - and this coming from a man who loves all things 80's! Was Judd Nelson about 35 when he made that movie? He looks about 20 years older than Anthony Michael Hall. Unbelievable characters and dialogue. Then they tie it up nice and neat at the end - with 2 unlikely couples pairing off leading us to believe there's no social caste in high schools.

With the small cast and lack of location shots, I'm amazed that I've never read about some high school drama club doing a stage production of this disaster. In any case, I've got a Breakfast Club DVD I'll never watch again - I'll post it used "New & Used" above.

Still relevant after all these years
Some question the durability of "The Breakfast Club," saying that the themes and plotlines do not hold up in today's teen society. As a 15-year-old, I would like to say that that is thoroughly untrue. 19 years after its release, "The Breakfast Club" is still a truthful, relateable account of teenagers and their personalities, and the ways in which they interact with each other. Sure, the stereotypes of the characters may be a bit exaggerated -- but that's necessary in order to get the point across. Watching this movie, I feel as if I know these people, or at least I've run across them at one point in my high school career.

The plot, as most people know, involves five different kids being assigned Saturday detention together. Each kid represents a typical high school stereotype -- a princess (Molly Ringwald), a jock (Emilio Estevez), a brain (Anthony Michael Hall), a basket case (the excellent Ally Sheedy), and a criminal (Judd Nelson). At the beginning of the day, none of them know each other, except for the princess and the jock. Throughout the day, they learn more about each other and work at tearing down the stereotypes that pit them against each other. As for the reviewer who said this isn't realistic that they would open up so much to each other -- it absolutely is. Put five kids into a room without an adult for nine hours, and they will talk about anything.

The beauty of this movie is the depth of the characters beyond the stereotypes -- particularly the nerd, Brian, who as we find out in the movie has problems well beyond what people think of him. He is the one that I most relate to in the movie. Watch "The Breakfast Club," and see who you most relate to. It's a great experience. Beyond the social commentary aspect, it's also just a funny movie. The jokes come at breakneck speed, especially for the first half of the movie (before it gets somewhat serious). The actors are also very enjoyable in their roles, particularly Ally Sheedy and Anthony Michael Hall. Highly recommended.

Must have to any collection.
The quintessential John Hughes film. I remember in my English class my junior year (1987) we had to analyze this movie. Only 2 years after it's release it was had all the qualities needed for a class analysis. I will spare you the report that I did back then.

Since then I have watched this movie at least once a year (and contrary to popular believe it is not for the panty shot). The characters are very well done. There is something that anyone who went through high school can relate to, even if we fit more than just one character. The interactions between the teens towards each other and then towards the principal as a group is classic. It's got love, teen angst, popular kids, geeks, dweebs, outcasts and the ever popular kid that doesn't fit in but always tries to get the attention. Nothing like dumping out your bag for people to go through to get attention.

Of course you can't forget the star cast of strong 80's actors, Emilio Estevez (Andrew 'Andy') Anthony Michael Hall (Brian) Judd Nelson (John Bender) Molly Ringwald (Claire) Ally Sheedy (Allison) and Paul Gleason (Principal). Great acting, John's look at teenagers and a great script all make for a very enjoyable look at the interactions and 'attitude' typical of the high school years.

I truly could go on about this movie but I won't. I'll just say that this is a much have for any movie buff and if you haven't seen it you must. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This 1943 version of thehorror story is more Technicolor musical than scare piece. Claude Rains plays the unfortunate, masked anti-hero, but he doesn't get the room to showcase a promising and sympathetic performance. Susanna Foster and Nelson Eddy, on the other hand, get plenty of screen time to warble. Well worth a visit just for the look of the film, which won an Oscar for cinematography.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (44)

A cute but not particularly deep little flick
I wanted to see this because it had Claude Rains mostly, but also because I wanted to see Nelson Eddy as a person after hearing him in the Disney short "The Whale Who Wanted to Sing at the Met". Besides, I've been a fan of the book by Gaston LeRoux and the musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber for some time, have seen the silent movie version of this story, and wanted to chalk up another credit to my Phantom experience.

Overall, this wasn't a bad little movie - I felt that the fact that it was in colour rather detracted from the sombre, ominous mood this kind of tale needs - it should really be sort of Victorian film-noir, shot in black and white. But then, I felt that they really changed the story so much in this film version that it can only be looked on as a story independent of the book which was its inspiration, and so for that reason the colour is okay. I also felt that Claude Rains' character seemed as though it was going to be a main character at the beginning of the film, but then he seemed to disappear from the film for much of the rest of it. Also, the progression of his adoration complex for Christine was sadly overlooked throughout the film, and we are to understand his descent into bitterness toward mankind from the few scattered minutes of screen time that he has?

Although the rival banter between Raoul and Anatole was very amusing, it seems a little out of place in a story of such tragic dimensions, and draws one's focus completely away from the relationship between Christine and the Phantom of the film's title, which really is the core of the entire book and should be the same or similar in the movie. As another example of distraction - I like hearing Nelson Eddy sing, but at least two of the operatic numbers could have been shortened to make room for some more character development and depth in Erik and Christine's relationship.

I felt that the silent version of the film not only followed the plot of the book more accurately, but that the emotions and experiences of the characters were ones easier to "jump into", even despite the common (for a silent) over-acting of its players - but at the same time, this 1943 version was easier to watch. It's not as long or nervewracking. Still, I would recommend you to do it all - read the book, watch both films, and listen to the original London cast recording of the musical if you can't go and see it. Each one of these things will enhance your appreciation and enjoyment of the story in some way or another.

A Beautiful Film
I saw the 1943 version of "The Phantom of the Opera" before I read the book and (last) saw the 1925 version. I have to admit that it was not like the book at all, but the Lon Chaney version was a little. Claude Rains was very convincing as the tormented and lovesick Phantom, and was always more interesting than Lon Chaney. But Claude Rains was not given very much screen time, except near the beginning and end of the film. The sets were fabulous. Nelson Eddy and Edgar Barrier were almost constantly trying to win over Christine, and even though these scenes were funny, I've noticed that they can very easily become distractions that seem designed only to de-emphasize Claude Rains, which only hurts the film. Susanna Foster and Nelson Eddy sang a lot, and while these numbers were very nice and a joy to listen to, they were the only time Nelson Eddy really got a chance to shine, which is unfortunate. However, Susanna Foster fared well throughout the entire film. I would not recommend this film to anyone who doesn't like opera, or to anyone who wants to see a lot of the Phantom.

Horror fans will be disappointed
This film is more about the opera and the courting of an opera singer by two suitors than a deranged murderer running amok in the hidden chambers of the Paris Opera House. A great deal of screen time is devoted to the pursuit of the lovely Mademoiselle Dubois by a baritone and a Paris detective as both men are comically inept in trying to win the woman's favors. Claude Rains' phantom is a poignant figure, his madness notwithstanding, and he also has designs on the opera star and spirits her away to the catacombs under the building to possess her forever and have her sing the concerto he composed especially for her. The lush color and sets give the production a professional and polished look but the movie lacks suspense and thrills and is strictly for aficionados of the opera.

Pretty Good
Not my favorite interpretation of Phantom, but still good. Susanna Foster kind of bugs me, but that's okay. And they really changed the story. It's not at all like the origional novel, but it's about Phantom, and that's a good enough excuse for me! Anyways, it was pretty nice. The Raoul character was most realistic. I just don't like Susanna. :)

The Phantom Goes Musical
Gaston Leroux's penny-dreadful novel was hardly the stuff of great literature, but it did manage to tap into the public consciousness with its gas-light-gothic tale of a beautiful singer menaced by a horrific yet seductive serial killer lurking in the forgotten basement labyrinths of the Paris Opera. Lon Chaney's silent classic kept the basic elements of the novel intact'-and proved one of the great box office hits of its day, a fact that prompted Universal Studios to contemplate a remake throughout most of the 1930s. Although several proposals were considered (including one intended to feature Deanna Durbin, who despised the idea and derailed the project with a flat refusal), it wasn't until 1943 that a remake reached the screen. And when it did, it was an eye-popping Technicolor extravaganza, all talking, all singing, and dancing. The Phantom had gone musical.

In many respects this version of PHANTOM anticipates the popular Andrew Lloyd Webber stage musical, for whereas the Chaney version presented the Phantom as a truly sinister entity, this adaptation presents the character as one more sinned against than sinning'an idea that would color almost every later adaptation, and Webber's most particularly so. But it also shifts the focus of the story away from the title character, who is here really more of a supporting character than anything else. The focus is on Paris Opera star Christine Dae, here played by Susanna Foster. In this version Christine is not only adored by the Phantom; she is also romantically pursued by two suitors who put aside their differences to protect her.

Directed by Universal workhorse Arthur Lubin, this version is truly eye-popping in the way that only a 1940s Technicolor spectacular could be: the color is intensely brilliant, and Lubin makes the most of it by focusing most of his camera-time on the stage of the Paris Opera itself and splashing one operatic performance after another throughout the film. But in terms of actual story interest, the film is only so-so. Susanna Foster had a great singing voice, but she did not have a memorable screen presence, and while the supporting cast (which includes Nelson Eddy, Edgar Barrier, Leo Carrillo, and Jane Farrar) is solid enough they lack excitement. And the pace of the film often seems a bit slow, sometimes to the point of clunkiness.

The saving grace of the film'-in addition to the aforementioned photography, which won an Oscar-'is Claude Rains. A great artist, Rains did not make the mistake of copying Chaney, and although the script robs the Phantom of his most fearsome aspects, Rains fills the role with subtle menace that is wonderful to behold, completely transcending the film's slow pace, the lackluster script, and "sanitized for your protection" tone so typical of Universal Studios in the 1940s.

Like most "Universal Horror" DVD packages, this one is superior. The centerpiece of the bonus material is a very nice documentary, "The Opera Ghost: A Phantom Unmasked," which details the origins of the novel and the numerous film adaptations of it'and which is actually quite a bit more interesting than the 1943 film itself. There is also a nice, if somewhat perfunctory, audio commentary track by historian Scott McQueen, trailers, stills, and the like. But when everything is said and done, it's the film that counts'and unless you're a diehard Phantom fan you're likely to be unimpressed. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

an unfairly treated ELVIS " movie.
from the very first time i saw this film, i've been convinced that Elvis can act as well as sing. Unfortunately, he was not given too many chances to do so. His performance is credible, noteworthy, and unforgettable. The up-state NEW YORK scenery is beautiful,the veteran actors also in the movie- GIG YOUNG, CHARLES BRONSON, ED ASNER, all give outstanding performances.
The songs may have been few, KING OF THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD, I GOT LUCKY, etc, but still Elvis at his best.This movie is my favorite Elvis flick hands down. PLEASE MGM produce this movie on DVD FULLSCREEN AND WIDESCREEN 5:1 DOLBY DIGITAL . DO IT SOON, FOR I WANT TO ADD IT TO MY COLLECTION. THANKS,oldugly1911

Not enough meat on the bones
This was Elvis' first "bad" movie, in my opinion. The reasons for this lie in the awkward, and unnecessary, interpolation of musical numbers which bear little relevance to the on-screen action. While the film has a nice look, the locale is especially pleasant, and the supporting cast is good (particularly Gig Young) "Kid Galahad" strays from its original dramatic source to focus more on current youth fads such as tight sweaters and the Twist.
The film is burdened with lightweight, disposable songs (with the exception of "King of the Whole Wide World"), and concentrates more on standard boy-girl frolics than on the central dramatic story of a seriously gifted prize-fighter. Even with Charles Bronson and an uncredited Ed Asner in the supporting cast (indicating that the original intention was to make a solid action-drama film)"Kid Galahad" is the first serious mis-step in Elvis's film catalogue. With few exceptions, his subsequent films virtually jettisoned drama in favour of pop-gloss.

Elvis' best from United Artists.
"Kid Galahad" stars Elvis as an ex-G.I. who comes back to his hometown in upper state New York. Beautiful scenery, I might add. He wants to be an auto mechanic after returning from the Army, but instead he's reluctantly roped into being trained to be a boxer. Elvis has an anvil-fist and an iron jaw. Soon, he becomes boxing champ nicknamed "Kid Galahad". Joan Blackman returns and plays Elvis' love interest and the sister of the boxing camp owner Gig Young. Great picture formula, great songs and beautiful and breathtaking mountain scenery. Recommend this must-see to everyone.

Excellent Boxing Movie
KID GALAHAD (1962) is an excellent boxing movie. If you liked the ROCKY series, you will enjoy this movie of an ex-GI who has a winning knock-out punch. Elvis is credible as a boxer. The rags to riches story also rings true.

The opening scene is unforgettable with Elvis riding on the back of a Mayflower truck singing KING OF THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD. There are six songs including I GOT LUCKY.

This is a remake of a 1937 movie that starred Humphrey Bogart and Edward G. Robinson. The 1937 version was directed by Michael Cutiz who directed Casablanca and the Elvis movie King Creole. The movie examines the corruption of boxing and the gambling and crime associated with it.

Oscar-winner Gig Young is excellent as the promoter and DEATH WISH's Charles Bronson gives a spectacular performance as the trainer.

Elvis' acting is very good here. The song sequences are excellent especially one where Elvis and Young and Bronson are riding in a jalopy that Elvis restored and then painted red.

A man who can sing when he ain't got a thing, he's the king of the whole wide world. Indeed. Nobody proved it better than Elvis, the King of Rock and Roll and the Artist of the Century.

Kid Galahad- A Pleasant Surprise
I have not seen the original "Kid Galahad", but this one was very good, compared to anything, not just Elvis' other movies. I wouldn't agree with the "Oh well, at least it's not as bad as his others" angle that many seem to take. I think anyone would enjoy it. It has a good cast surrounding Elvis, most notably Gig Young and Charles Bronson. This movie also further proves that Elvis was a good actor, given the chance. The whole movie just seems to click, somehow. And about the songs, give them a break! It's an Elvis movie. The man can sing! Let him! Be thankful it wasn't a musical. It had a few songs, yes, but that fact is not nearly as annoying as others try to paint it. It had a great depiction of the corruption of the boxing industry, and some good fighting scenes. Elvis looked like he enjoyed his part and was interested, contrary to many other opinions, and by no means was he "chubby". He was very well-built, and worked with a real-life boxing trainer, who said that Elvis could've been a professional fighter. So anyone who says he wasn't convincing as a boxer should take a second look. Watch this movie, not compared to anything, but just as the movie itself, and there's a big chance you'll enjoy it. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Before making Batman, director Tim Burton and star Michael Keaton teamed up for this popular black comedy about a young couple (Geena Davis and Alec Baldwin) whose premature death leads them to a series of wildly bizarre afterlife exploits. As ghosts in their own New England home, they're faced with the challenge of scaring off the pretentious new owners (Catherine O'Hara and Jeffrey Jones), whose daughter (Winona Ryder) has an affinity for all things morbid. Keaton plays the mischievous Beetlejuice, a freelance "bio-exorcist" who's got an evil agenda behind his plot to help the young undead newlyweds. The film is a perfect vehicle for Burton's visual style and twisted imagination, with clever ideas and gags packed into every scene. Beetlejuice is also a showcase for Keaton, who tackles his title role with maniacal relish and a dark edge of menace. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (107)

Say it once, say it twice, third time's the charm!
When this movie first came out about fifteen years ago, my father owned a video store and every Wednesday night was "Beetlejuice" night. I'm older now, obviously, but I still cannot get enough of this movie.

Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis play Adam and Barbara Maitland, two Connecticut yuppies who die prematurely in a car wreck. Within a couple weeks, their home is overrun by an ultra-trendy New York City family, Charles and Delia Deetz, and their Goth daughter, Lydia (played respectively by Jeffrey Jones, Catherine O'Hara, and Winona Ryder). Adam and Barbara want their house back, and attempt to scare the Deetz's out of the house by wearing sheets and even by possessing them over dinner, making them sing and dance to Harry Belafonte's "Day O." Those attempts fail and enter Michael Keaton as Betelguese, "the afterlife's leading freelance bio-exorcist." The movie is dark without being scary and funny without being ridiculous.

In my opinion, one of the real gems in this film is the late Sylvia Sidney as Juno, Your Case Worker. Sidney was pushing eighty when this film was made, but turns in a great performance as the embittered equivalent of an afterlife social worker. Love how the smoke from her ever-present cigarette comes out of the slit in her throat.

If you've never seen this movie, see it. If you have seen it but don't own it on DVD, get it. The picture quality is better than ever.

tim burton=a classic movie
a couple dies.they live in a house as spirits and then some people move in.the dad is a dork.the mom is a control freak,crazy women who sculpts.she is a similar character in home alone but in that one shes a unbelivably terrible and neglectful psycho mom.the daughter is a dark depressed girl played by wyona ryder.she looks very sexy in thisone.a cool line is:my whole life is a dark room.one big dark room.they get constant visits from other weirdos also.the 2 dead people-some dork and a belive it or not somewhat sexy geena davis play them.they spirits try to scare the living out but are too good natured to suceed.so they hire michael keaton-beetlejuice-to get rid of them.he is more forceful.it is a tim burton movie which of course means its awesome.most everyone could like this.wyona ryder looks awesome in a red wedding dress late in the film.that stupid child hater of a mom lady is this movies only flaw.shes such a bitch.this movie is full of well written mastery and great special effects.it is great!

beetlejuice
this movie was really good, it was so creative, like edward scissorhands. i loved the story and the underworld scenes were great. i think that winona ryder did an excellent job as Lydia, the troubled daughter. betelguese was hilarious! this is not your mainstream kid movie, be aware of that if if you plan on showing it to your kids.

Remains one of my favorites
Re-watching Beetlejuice more than a decade after it thrilled, frightened and enthralled me as a child makes me sad about Mr. Tim Burton's transformation into a Hollywood favorite semi-quirky remake-director (Planet Of The Apes, Sleepy Hollow) in recent years (Big Fish indeed signals a hopeful recovery - if only Charlie And The Chocolate Factory doesn't spoil it...!) At the young age of thirty, and in only his second full length feature, Burton created a cult favorite that is one for the ages. In this bizarre, off-beat script by Michael McDowell (who collaborated with him before on an episode of the 'Alfred Hitchcock Presents' television series) he found the ideal vehicle for his unique and strange imagination - and indeed, Burton's unique vision is more apparent here than in any of his movies, The Nightmare Before Christmas being the happy exception. Though it's true that it's not as personal a creation as 'Nightmare' or Edward Scissorhands, this is the movie that would place Burton on the map as a major director, and would earn him his breakthrough job - directing the first Batman feature film. It is on Beetlejuice that he would also start several long-time collaborations with actors who would work with him again in the future - Michael Keaton (Batman & Batman Returns), Winona Ryder (Edward Scissorhands), Jeffrey Jones (Ed Wood, Sleepy Hollow), Glenn Shadix and Catherine O'Hara (both of whom did voiceovers for Nightmare Before Christmas).

So, again, while Beetlejuice isn't as deep and personal film as we would see in Nightmare Before Christmas, Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood or Big Fish, Beetlejuice is an incredibly imaginative and captivating film and is a perfect black comedy. Geena Davis and Alec Baldwin are both more than adequate, but Michael Keaton in the title part is of course the real star of the show - although in reality his part is much smaller than those of Davis and Baldwin. Keaton is electric and mesmerizing as the bio-exorcist or 'the Ghost with the Most', Beetlejuice (spelled BETELGEUSE!), probably the greatest and most memorable performance of his career (with the possible exception of the part of Batman). Keaton really let loose in Beetlejuice, and he and Burton were seemingly having a blast - they created one of the most memorable horror and comedy characters on the big screen. Seventeen year old Winona is also terrific as Goth-girl Lydia, fascinated and repulsed by Betelgeuse's extreme personality. Similarities between her character here and the one in Edward Scissorhands are easy to find, but for my money her performance as Lydia is the better one.

And in conclusion, if there's any movie that I'd recommend to own on VCR or DVD, it's Beetlejuice; because Burton at his best made films that are well rewarding in repeated viewing, and Beetlejuice is Burton at his very, very best, even if it's not his best film. So even if it's not an essential masterpiece like Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice is one of the classic cult films of all time, and I can't imagine going through life without it - that is, if you have the tiniest bit of a sense of fun and humor.

This is the dumbest movie I ever saw...
I can't see why so many people liked this movie. I think it stinks. It has no script, Burton's story telling is lost in bad effects and cheesy dialoge and Keaton gets to act like a goofball. These two were no way the right ones to make Batman. ... Read more

Reviews (156)

An Excellent Adaption of One of Broadway's Best
One of the classics of the American musical theater, "My Fair Lady" is brought to us with amazing grace and sensitivity by legendary dirctor George Cukor. This musical has it all: a classic score by Lerner and Loewe (including "I Could have Danced All Night," "The Rain in Spain," and "Get me to the Church on Time"), an interesting story, and great characters. Rex Harrison proves to be nothing less then supurb as Henry Higgens, the speach teacher who vows to "never let a woman in my life," but finds himself falling for flower girl Eliza Dolittle. The supporting cast is in top form, with special mention going to the hysterical Stanley Halloway as Alfred P. Dolittle, the charming Wilfred Hyde-White as Pickering, and Jeremy Brett as Freddie. My on real complaint is Audrey Hepburn, who plays Eliza. While she is far from bad, Miss Hepburn has no voice, and I can't stand it when they use another actress to dub the voice of a star. Why can't they just hire a singer in the first place? The part should have gone to Julie Andrews (who originated it on Broadway). All in all, agreat film for the whole family. Check it out!

For the most part, excellent.
First, the wonderful score. Frederic Loewe's glorious music is perfectly complimented by Alan Jay Lerner's lyrics, as on the Broadway and London stages, and almost every song is memorable and great. Second, the gloriously witty script, filled with great lines, many taken directly from Shaw, on whose play "Pygmalion" this was based, and sharp commentary on Britain's class system. Third, the all-around wonderful performances, from Rex Harrison's arch, arrogant, gleeful Henry Higgins to Audrey Hepburn's charming but unrefined flower girl who becomes a sophisticated (and stunning-looking) lady, to Stanley Holloway's lovable amoral father of Hepburn, to Wilfred Hyde-White's Colonel Pickering, to Gladys Cooper's Mrs. Higgins, just as acerbic as her son. Fourth, the much-lauded stunning look of the film, with gorgeously stylized costumes by Cecil Beaton and fine sets by Beaton. All the ingredients are there for a great film, and under George Cukor's direction, that's pretty much what you get.

And yet, the film is noticably flawed. Hepburn, while charming and, of course, stunningly dressed, does not give a bad performance by any means; it's just that she's not overwhemingly sympathetic. And her voice double, Marni Nixon, has a lovely voice, but doesn't really put any emotion into her songs, forcing that ever-present question to re-emerge: Would Julie Andrews, the Broadway and London Eliza, have been a better choice? Also, Nixon and Hepburn really do not sound alike, which is slightly annoying. (Nevertheless, most of Nixon's songs, especially "I Could Have Danced All Night," do come off well, and if Andrews had been cast, there'd be no "Mary Poppins") "On The Street Where You Live," which I consider the best and most beautiful song in the score, is given a rather flat reading by Bill Shirley, the voice double for actor Jeremy Brett; it is the only song in the movie that is truly forgettable, but that is Shirley's fault entirely, NOT Lerner or Loewe's. Too bad. And yes, the movie is a bit long. But overall, it's a vastly entertaining, enjoyable, romantic, and great experience, just not without flaw. But, oh, well.

How do you do? And which DVD version to buy ...
MFL is a marvellous film about a professor who turns a common flower girl into a lady. It is full of sing-a-long songs and funny moments. It is basically a classic for all the right reasons! Plenty of re-watch factor makes it a film to own.

In 1994, the film was restored and thank the lord they did! The film's negative was almost lost forever. In fact, the film hade had become yellow-tinged and full of scratches, blotches and all the rest! It would have been a very sad day for the movie industry if a flim like this had been lost.

The original DVD that featured this new restoration was released in the late 90's. This DVD included a 9 minute featurette, actor profiles, audio commentary, and Audrey Hepburn singing in 2 scenes.

This original 1-disc DVD h