Reviews (14)

TARZAN AND HIS MATE is SPECTACULAR!
Johnny Weissmuller was the king of movie Tarzans to the generation of the 30's who wore the loincloth for nearly 2 decades. In my opinion he's one of the best but the ultimate Tarzan is MIKE HENRY the last of the classic movie Tarzans in the late 60's though he only did 3 movies before not wanting the role any longer, only one of Henry's movies is really good, another fair, his last the weakest. THIS Weissmuller Tarzan movie is one of the only GREAT films in the whole run since the silent films up to the present! TONS OF ACTION to satisfy by today's standards. One of only two or 3 Weissmuller movies where Tarzan and Jane sport the more true to the books skimpy animal skins. In an age when seeing wild animals on theatre screens was thrilling, this movie SOCKS IT TO YOU! Weissmuller shows you why he was the lord of the jungle. If you're an adventure movie buff or like super heroes, you hav'nt seen it all without seeing this movie!

Good Tarzan movie with adult overtones.
This film is considered by many to be the finest of the Johnny Weissmuller MGM Tarzan movies. It's a crackling good adventure story that is a real roller coaster ride. The African jungle, considering the B&W photography and primitive special effects, is vividly portrayed as a savage place indeed. Wild animals abound: charging rhinos, stampeding elephants, lions with an attitude, and a tribe of fearsome great apes. An annoyance for Tarzan purists is the portrayal of Tarzan as a hulking brute that only speaks in halting, broken sentences. The character written of by Edgar Rice Burroughs is an intelligent white ape that is fluent in several languages, including native dialects and the animal "language" of the great apes. The Tarzan yell is overdone in this movie, too. Depending on the viewer's tolerance level, it may start to grate as chalk on a chalkboard, especially when Jane (Maureen O'Sullivan) gets in the act with her combination soprano Swiss yodel and the familiar "ape call." Again, ERB's Tarzan only gave this fierce victory cry as he stood bloodied and dirty over a vanquished foe, animal or otherwise. In personal combat, Tarzan reverts to his primitive self and truly becomes a denizen of the forest primeval.

This film stresses the marriage relationship of Tarzan and Jane more than subsequent entries in the Tarzan series. The sex is implied, of course, but one can easily infer that the jungle couple is not celibate. The costumes (especially Jane's) are very revealing for the time period in which the movie was made. There is a riveting "nude" swimming scene that is a wonderful erotic interlude. This segment had been censored for years, but is included in the restored version. The plot involves two wordly white men (including Jane's old friend) that show up to entice Jane away from Tarzan, and to desecrate the elephant graveyard for the valuable ivory. Tarzan takes a dim view of these unfriendly intentions. Lurking in the brush there are fierce savages that stalk the safari. Just when things can't get any worse, the natives openly attack the safari, kill the porters, murder the two white men stealing the ivory, and, as Jane is about to be devoured by lions, well, you get the idea. Before anyone dismisses this movie as a typically trite Tarzan movie, it's fair to mention this was only the second film in the MGM series and it set the pattern for much that followed. The fast pace of the story, the almost nonstop action, the sexual overtones, and the primitive setting all make this an entertaining jungle adventure film. Don't expect subtleties of plot and character development, and you will be pleased.

The Best of the Best !
I'll make this short: After King Kong was made (my father saw it 54 times while working as a stage hand at the Hippodrome Theather in Baltimore City back in '33)MGM knew that they had to come up with a picture that would top the mighty Kong-and guess what-they did! Tarzan and His Mate is not only the Greastest of the Weissmuller films but I do believe it is about one of the Best Movies of all times! Real animals,the most real lifelike natives ever filmed (even the Gabonie Natives were enough to freak you out). Great lines like "Who did this? Gabonie Barrona, arrow always hear wit Gabonie" while the lead boy is pointing to his forehead ! Enough said, this is the best it gets do yourself a favor and pick this one up. "ENJOY"

Classic Tarzan adventure is the grandest of them all
This 1934 MGM release is the crown jewel in Edgar Rice Burroughs' screen adventures of Tarzan and is the film against which all other Tarzan movies are measured. Johnny Weissmuller is perfect as the socially backward ape man who knows all there is to know about the jungle's dark interior and its animals. Maureen O'Sullivan is just the right compliment as Jane who eschews the comforts and advantages of civilization to spend her life with Tarzan and Cheetah. A safari of ivory hunters braves warlike natives and a treacherous plateau to find an elephant graveyard to secure the ivory tusks that would guarantee great wealth in English society. Jane has a an extended nude swim with Tarzan that viewers are privileged to see and there is a ferocious and determined attack by savage warriors and lions on the safari that is blunted only by Tarzan's call to the elephants that saves the day in the nick of time.

this is more like it!
let me cut to the quick... easily the best tarzan movie ever made,the first fifteen minutes delivers as much fabulous over the top violence as you could wish for,arrows in the face,and giant crazy rock throwing gorillas are two highlights,naked Jane and an awesome rubber croc....if this movie was remade today,uncut,it would recieve an R rating,no problem. all in all top notch entertainment....where is the DVD? ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Delightful ghost story based on a classic tale
Based on a short story by non other than the legendary Oscar Wilde this version of the "The Canterville Ghost" makes really delightful viewing boasting top notch production values, a superb cast in fine form, and a terrific look that gives the film an appealing and enjoyable appearance.

Being in theory a ghost story the story is full of much well seasoned comedy and really is a film suitable for the whole family to enjoy. I tend to watch this film around Christmas each year and never fail to enjoy the high spirited carryings on of Charles Laughton in what I feel is one of his most appealing roles. "The Canterville Ghost", set in one of those far off misty castles that only MGM could cunger up, tells the story of how Sir. Simon de Canterville through an act of cowardice is walled up in a room of the castle and is doomed to walk the face of the earth for all eternity unless a relative can commit an act of bravery to lift the curse from him. The story jumps ahead a few centuries to the present (1944) where the castle is occupied by visiting soldiers involved in the war. Among them is Sir. Simon's distant relative Cuffy Williams (Robert Young at his most endearing) who is the one selected to perform the brave deed to free his ancestor from his ghostly imprisonment. The tale is an amusing one as Laughton's character first tries to scare and then win over his cynical relative to help him. Charles Laughton is wonderful as the cowardly ghost appearing out of nowhere, screaming, rattling chains and showing his own failings only too obviously. He is surrounded by a terrific supporting cast beginning with gifted child actress Margaret O'Brien as Lady Jessica de Canterville the present owner of the castle. O'Brien, at the peak of her career around this time with triumphs in "Journey for Margaret", and "Meet Me in St. Louis", is a cute delight as the spunky little girl who is not afraid of Laughton's over the top bellowing and corny scare tactics. Robert Young in his last MGM film is also in top form as the young soldier who first is in danger of falling into the same habits as Sir. Simon but who in the end comes through to succeed in freeing his ancestor from his ghostly sentence by an unselfish act of bravery.

"The Canterville Ghost" is about as English a tale as you can get and came along during the war years when all things British were revered in Hollywood. Keeping company with such British outings as "Mrs. Miniver", and "The White Cliffs of Dover", "Canterville' also boasts a superb supporting cast of stalwart British performers so popular in Hollywood during these years. Headed by Laughton himself the film contains great work by the likes of Reginald Owen, Una O'Connor and Peter lawford who give just that right British feel to a production which because of the war had to be filmed in the USA. Technically the film is a superb achievement with Laughton's ghostly special effects a remarkable effort. The sight of Laughton disappearing through walls and flying across a room remind one of that great 1930's ghost story "Topper". Being a product of MGM the film boasts top flight production values in every department and has superb settings with the castle interiors appearing wonderfully spooky and beautiful on the eye.

Among the many versions filmed of "The Canterville Ghost", I feel this is by far the best. Centred on Charles Laughton's unforgettable ghost the production is enjoyable and a fun way to spend a couple of hours. Before computers created all the special effects this film proved what the old Hollywood was capable of achieving. A totally delightful film to be enjoyed by the whole family.

A Charming Bit of Hollywood Fluff
Very, very loosely based on a short story by Oscar Wilde--so loosely that he is probably turning in his grave--THE CANTERVILLE GHOST is nonetheless a charming bit of 1940s Hollywood fluff about an English ghost who runs afoul of American pragmatism. In the film version, the Americans arrive in the form of WWII soliders, including Robert Young, who are billeted at a notoriously haunted castle where they encounter a legendary spectre much given to theatrical materializations.

Although the story is very, very slight, the cast makes it enjoyable. Child star Margaret O'Brien gives a typically enjoyable performance as the unwilling heiress to the castle, and Robert Young and his fellow actors mug their way through the script with entertaining aplomb. The greatest pleasure, however, is Charles Laughton as the ghost, which he plays most delightfully. The emphasis is on comedy rather than ghostly thrills, and although the comedy is quite mild it is expertly done. THE CANTERVILLE GHOST will never make any one's short list of "great cinematic art," but both grown-ups and kids alike will have a good time with it; recommended for an old fashioned family night.

How could it miss?
This is a movie that could cure a rainy day. Great story, great cast, fun SFX (even by modern standings). I think this is the kind of movie they're trying to make again, with mixed success. Funny without being coarse, outrageously sentimental without being cloying, and, my goodness--the "chemistry"! Entertainment you don't have to feel guilty about enjoying.

Very Enjoyable!
By far the Best version of the many made of Canterville Ghost! Robert Young plays his part so well! And the little girl is an inspiration! Many laughs! ... Read more

Description

Jan Schlichtmann is a cynical, high-priced personal injury attorney who only takes big-money cases he can safely settle out of court. Though his latest case at first appears straightforward, Schlichtmann soon becomes entangled in an epic legal battle ... one where he's willing to put his career, reputation, and all that he owns on the line for the rights of his clients! Also featuring Robert Duvall, William H. Macy, and John Lithgow -- this gripping, widely acclaimed hit delivers edge-of-your-seat entertainment! ... Read more

Reviews (58)

Riveting and Powerful Cinema - An Eye-Opener for All
This is the most incredible movie ever made about trying a wrongful death case and the accompanying emotional roller coaster the process generates for attorneys. The opening scene will plant you firmly in your chair as Jan Schlichtmann (played by John Travolta) explains the financial calculus behind accepting and declining potential clients with personal injury claims. Jerome Facher (played by Robert Duvall) is infuriating with his unending legal maneuverings designed to extract his corporate client from an untenable legal position permeated with liability. The traitorous conduct of Schlichtmann's partners will make you wretch with disgust as they scramble to save themselves at the expense of righting a terrible wrong evidenced by a dozen dead children. Engrossing, to say the least.

Yes, the movie isn't perfect. Travolta's portrayal of Jan Schlichtmann doesn't completely mesh with the character in the book, there isn't a practicing attorney alive who doesn't know Rule 11 (court-imposed sanctions for unethical conduct), and the legal proceedings aren't quite right. Who cares? If the director had included the day-to-day minutiae involved in getting a case to trial, the film would have been three years long! My fellow reviewers are unreasonable in their unrelenting critiques.

If you're involved in the legal profession, this film will make you step back and reassess your brand of client representation. Are you taking the right cases? Are you serving the needs of you clients - or yourself? Are you willing to give your all to the law? Interesting, and always stimulating, food for thought.

If you're a lay person, hold on - you're in for the ride of your life.

Well-adapted story with terrific acting
After recently reading Jonathan Harr's book A Civil Action, I eagerly awaited seeing the movie version of this sad and absorbing story. The film version condenses the story and leaves out several interesting portions of the book, but is fine nevertheless. John Travolta is a perfect choice to play Jan Schlichtmann, the egotistical, free-spending attorney who dives headfirst into a damages case against the corporate giants Beatrice and W.R. Grace, who are accused of poisoning the drinking water of Woburn, Massachusetts and causing a leukemia outbreak. William H. Macy, Tony Shalhoub, and Zeljko Ivanek co-star as Schlichtmann's partners in the firm, and one only wishes that they would have protested his actions, which led to the financial ruin of him and his firm.

Robert Duvall gives another terrific performance as Jerome Facher, Beatrice's attorney, who is the complete opposite of Schlichtmann. In a scene at a fancy hotel conference room, the frugal Facher is not impressed by any of the lawyers or their arguments, but the free pen that he can take home. It's a subtly funny scene that illustrates Facher perfectly. John Lithgow does a terrific job as Judge Walter Skinner, who Schlichtmann believes is siding with the enemy.

A Civil Action is a story where the winners and losers are unclear, and it must have been difficult for writer-director Steven Zaillian to condense Harr's technical-laden novel. The result is a solid drama with powerhouse acting. Highly recommended.

Intelligent and Compelling Courtroom Drama
Jan Schlichtmann (Travolta) is a Boston tort lawyer and something of an ambulance chaser who is initially reluctant to take on an industrial pollution case involving some children dead of leukaemia in rural New England. He changes his mind when he realizes the likely defendants are a couple of big companies with particularly deep pockets and smells the possibility of serious money. Over time, however his interest in the case becomes a moral obsession. The cynical becomes a crusader, refusing offers to settle as his company's finances spiral downwards towards bankruptcy.

If you like courtroom dramas, this is highly recommended. It's one of the best specimens of the genre to come out of America since 'The Verdict'. It's interesting to compare it to 'Erin Brockovich' released a couple of years later. EB is about how a heroic small timer takes on the big boys of corporate America and how her pluck and determination triumphs over all obstacles, something of a legal feelgood movie in other words. Which this, to its great credit, is not. Its central character, for starters, is far more amibivalently likeable: initially just out for a fast buck, moral seriousness has to creep up on him and take him by surprise (perhaps reminding writer/director Zaillian of Oskar Schindler whose story he scripted for Spielberg a few years earlier) and the story's development paints a significantly more ambivalent picture of what pluck and determination can accomplish. It's a highpoint of Travolta's acting career even if he is comprehensively upstaged by Robert Duvall, on brilliant form as his quietly cynical adversary, bigshot lawyer Jerome Facher who knows far better than to look for the truth in a courtroom...

The book is SO MUCH BETTER
The movie is fine... but the book is an amazing read. There is so much detail and nuance lost in the adaption to a visual medium.

A Civil Travolta
This is a really good film that didn't get near the attention it should have. A great story, a terrific premise and plot. And Travolta nails his performance as a man faced with the dilemna of doing the "right thing" at great personal expense, or walking away with what he has left. This is a morality play of sorts and Travolta is the conscience of us all. We're thrilled when he triumphs; we breathe a sigh of relief and unclench our fists. Yet, we probably wouldn't have blamed him if he had walked. A nice film. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

A classic
This is simply one of the greatest films ever made. Olivier and Hepburn, George Cukor, and a brilliant script. Does anything more need to be said? I have seen it repeatedly since its appearance in 1975 and still marvel at it. A masterful performance by all.

Olivier and Hepburn were great
In this made for TV movie, Olivier and Hepburn were wonderful as two elderly people reunited by his love for her. The costumes, writing and acting are excellent. These two show us that great acting can be done no matter the age of the actor. The story is sentimental and hilarious and made us laugh and cry. If you haven't seen this one, do so.

Two of the greats!
The joy of watching two of the greatest actors in the world? Hard to describe. The balance, the verbal thrust and parry of these two remarkable people. There is a terrific script, beautiful settings and costume, remarkable acting and great music. Never a tedious or tiring moment. I have watched this movie many times and always find nuances to these performances that I had missed. A must see for lovers of great acting.

A masterpiece in every respect
I remember seeing this film while a graduate student at West Virginia University and bursting into tears at the end because it was such a perfect and beautiful film. I now proudly own the VHS of it and have watched it several times and each time I see it, it gets better. Olivier and Hepburn are perfectly matched and the score by John Barry is incredibly beautiful. Thank goodness Katherine Hepburn made the comment on Dick Cavett's show that Olivier was one star with whom she had not acted and would like to and that George Cukor and ABC had the smarts to do
something this beautiful. It will forever remain one of my favorites and is one of the great events of TV history.

Olivier Does It Again!
Just in case you ever thought that old men can't play anything except "old grandpop in the corner over there", you should cast a glance at "Love Among the Ruins", starring Laurence Olivier and Katharine Hepburn. Larry's just wonderful! And Kate's no slouch, either.

Forty years before our story begins in Edwardian England, the young Larry was without prospects but had a torrid three-day affair with free-spirited actress Kate in Toronto. Although they pledged their love, they parted. Now, all these years later, wealthy widow Kate has been brought to his highly successful barrister's office for defense in a breach of promise suit. The shocker: while Larry's been carrying a torch for her all these years, she hasn't the foggiest idea what he's talking about; can't remember a blessed thing about it! Fun gender-bender twist on the usual "ship in every port" experience familiar from movies like, "Letter from an Unknown Woman". It's supposed to be the man who's love 'em and leave 'em, you know!

For me, the real joy is to see Olivier do a parody of himself as he was when he was younger. As he tries to kindle the memory of Kate while recounting their all-too-brief liaison, he uses all the same gestures and delivery that are visible in "Pride and Prejudice" and other earlier films where he had courtship scenes. We see an old man turn young again, and see his old love flare up as hot as coals. Proof that much of romance is in the mind after all.

Excellently rehearsed by director George Cukor, the film seems actually like a filmed play. If indeed this had been brought to the West End or Broadway, it would have been a great stage triumph. Nothing ruinous about these performers or this movie, believe you me. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The hit Broadway musical by Peter Stone and Sherman Edwards became the basis for this 1972 film about America's first congress and the nation's declaration of independence from Britain. Most of the original cast members are aboard, including William Daniels as John Adams. The film is a little stodgy and moves stiffly from scene to scene--the adaptation to the screen is not a smooth success. But it is nonetheless captivating, considering that so few films have dealt directly with America's birth. Directed by Peter H. Hunt.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (202)

For God's Sake, John, Sit Down...
First, let me say that I'm not a big fan of movie musicals. However, I've always made an exception for 1776. I suppose it's my abiding interest in history, and in the popular presentation of history, that keeps me coming back to this film. For the uninitiated, 1776 is the story of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, and was first presented on Broadway in the late 1960s. Set in Philadelphia in June and early July of 1776, the action centers around John Adams's attempt to get a reluctant Continental Congress to declare the 13 colonies independent of Great Britain. Adams, and his allies (including Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson), is opposed at every step by the conservatives in Congress, led by John Dickinson of Pennsylvania. Although we know the ending, it is to scriptwriter Peter Stone's credit that we realize things may have turned out rather differently.

My first recorded version of this movie was taped off of a local television station that had drastically edited it for length and content. When I finally got around to buying the VHS version of 1776, I was amazed at what had been left out, particularly when it came to the earthier dialogue. Imagine my reaction to the new DVD director's cut edition of this musical; it was like watching a completely new movie. Bridging scenes that had been edited out now provide a nearly seamless narrative flow, and the musical number "Cool, Considerate Men" has been restored, providing for greater balance between the conservatives and radicals in Congress.

The cast, a number of whom reprise their roles from the Broadway production, is nearly flawless. William Daniels IS John Adams, hard-headed, driven, passionate, "obnoxious and disliked". Howard da Silva is equally effective as Benjamin Franklin, elder statesman and earthy man-of-the-world, while the rest of the actors do very well by their characters. Of necessity, the film's emphasis is on Congress, and therefore on the male of the species; women are limited to two roles--Martha Jefferson, played by Blythe Danner, and Abigail Adams, played by Virginia Vestoff. Of Danner's role, there is little to say beyond the fact that the actress is a luminous screen presence. Vestoff, on the other hand, has a rather more substantial role as John Adams's wife, confidant, and sounding board. The film effectively portrays the correspondence between John and Abigail, a partnership that was, in many ways, remarkable in American history.

Director Peter Hunt keeps things moving along at a lively pace, propelled by the music of Sherman Edwards, who also wrote the lyrics. It's hard to pick a favorite song, but two stand out in my mind--the chilling "Molasses to Rum to Slaves" and the poignant "Mamma, Look Sharp". The former underlines the flawed nature of the American Experiment--that a new nation established on the principle that "all men are created equal" would also keep hundreds of thousands of people in chains. The latter song brings home the fact that while Congress engages in endless debates, men (and boys) are dying on the field of battle.

I could dwell at some length on the historical inaccuracies embodied in this movie--the character of Judge Wilson, for one, and that of Richard Henry Lee, for another. However, purism aside, what 1776 makes clear is just what a close run thing independence really was, that there was, indeed, a significant proportion of Americans (and their representatives) who wished to remain loyal to the British crown. Better yet, the Founding Fathers are portrayed mot as marble men, but as the passionate, flawed, flesh-and-blood individuals they were.

Delightful History
While obviously a stage play transfered to the screen, "1776" is an interesting movie on several levels. While I can't swear to the accuracy of the history on a micro level - although, from what I've seen in the academic sources, it's pretty accurate - this brings some pretty stodgy material to life.

The cast is intriguing - Howard daSilva(who was blacklisted during the McCarthy era) as Benj. Franklin; William Daniels(St. Elsewhere's Dr. Craig)as John Adams; Ken Howard(The White Shadow)as Thos. Jefferson; Blythe Danner; John Cullum; and others. To see daSilva, Daniels and Howard singing and dancing on the stairs of Independence Hall, debating who should write the Declaration, is a delight.

A few famous one-liners - "Gentlemen, if we do not all hang together, we, most assuredly,will all hang separately." And some commentary, which may not be completely accurate, but is indicative of the personality involved - "Rhode Island's in the 'necessary'."

This is no where near a great movie, but it is both educational and entertaining. And there is little funnier in film than Adams' and Franklin's discussion of sex.

Good Muscial. Good History. Good Fun.
"Is anybody there? Does anybody care? Does anybody see what I see?" John Adams (William Daniels, St. Elsewhere, among other things) musically muses in 1776. He is frustrated and believes that the cause of independence may be lost over the issue of slavery.
1776 is a good musical. Maybe it's not the best musical of all time, but pretty darn good. It's fun, it's witty, it's a little naughty in places, and it's very close in historical accuracy. It is a tradition in my household to watch it every 4th of July, to remind ourselves that the holiday is more than just picnics and firework displays.
The music is special too, because it has meaning to the character(s) that sing it and meaning for us. For instance, when Martha Jefferson (Blythe Danner) sings her song, "He Plays the Violin", it has a poignancy to it, because she sings "Say I died loving bride, loving life, loving wife..." and we are reminded that she dies before Jefferson ever sees the Presidency. The exchanges between John and Abigail Adams show us both the love and friendship they shared and the hardship that the wives and families of the revolutionary leaders suffered. When Edward Rutledge of South Carolina (John Collum, Northern Exposure) incredible performance "Molasses to Rum to Slaves", tells us both something about the economics of the times, the compromises that policymakers have to make, and the tragedy of slavery that haunted our nation until the American Civil War and still has repercussions resounding in our ears. He chastises Thomas Jefferson (Ken Howard) on Jefferson's hypocrisy, "You, sir, are a practitioner." Tough words there but true!
1776 isn't only about colonial history; it was written during the American involvement in the Vietnam War. The young messenger (Stephen Nathan) that carries the dispatches from George Washington, sings "Mama, Look Sharp." This sad, dirge-like song is so moving, because it tells us that while the policymakers are quibbling and quarrelling in Philadelphia (or Washington, D.C.), someone is out there dying for the policies and decisions they have implemented. Something to note is that the song "Cool, Cool, Considerate Men" comes right before the Messenger's song and he walks through them, but the cool men don't even seem to see him. No wonder Nixon wanted it taken out of the picture!
But stop all the doom and gloom. There are fun, rousing songs as well like "Sit Down, John", "The Lees of Old Virginia", and "The Egg". I love this musical, because it makes the founding fathers seem more real than any history book has ever done. This musical captures perfectly the anxiety that shadowed the birth of the United States of America. Whether they were on the left or the right, I feel such love for the idiosyncratic, irascible, dynamic men that helped create this ever-evolving democratic republic.

Never Thought History Could Be So Much Fun!
Witty and wonderful songs help tell the story of the trying times leading to the writing and signing of the Declaration of Independence. Definitely helps explain how America's founders could want independence, while still tolerating slavery.

The sound quality is far superior to earlier releases. This is an opportunity to see "Cool, Cool, Considerate Men," the production number which President Richard Nixon had Jack Warner cut from the original production. It certainly adds to the impact, and should NOT have been cut!

Includes Screen Tests and Trailers. Best of all, it also includes an option to hear a full Director and Screenwriter Commentary on the production.

Why were'nt our history classes this informative AND FUN?!

A Patriotic Lump In The Throat
What a wonderful combination of history, theater, and music. "1776" has been one of my favorite musicals since the late '60's. To some, a musical version of the signing of the Declaration of Independence must seem odd and truly out of place, perhaps blasphemous. True, the music is not by Rodgers and Hammerstein, so there will be nothing from this film to whistle in the shower. But I can imagine this film, to most viewers anyway, ranking up there with "Yankee Doodle Dandy" as required viewing every 4th of July.

I am impressed with how the film (and play) stay close to history, although, for the sake of art, some details are changed. The characters come alive, away from the dusty history books, and show humor and a great desire to do something wonderful for the world.

The commentary is very informative. How interesting it is to learn that, on President Richard Nixon's suggestion, friend Jack Warner (the film's producer) cut all references in the film showing conservatives standing in the way of independence. Fortunately, the original, director's cut edition has been restored to DVD, and presents a film more fluid than what was found on the edited, pan-and-scan tape.

If you don't care for the music, at least watch this great film to see what our Founding Fathers were up against in "1776". If patriotic films bring a tear to the eye, keep a box of red, white, and blue tissues handy. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Ben and Danny Forever
This movie starts directly after Willard Stiles dies. The Police decide to kill all the rat that Willard trained. The rats move to leave Willard's house and live in the sewer. One day Ben gets hungry so he goes to The house of a boy named Danny's house.Danny makes friends with him and Danny gives him food. Danny writes a song called ''Ben's song'' for Ben. Ben shows Danny his home in the sewer. The police find out where all the rats live and Kill them all. Danny goes home Heartbroken.
Then Danny sees Ben in his room with a broken Leg. Danny Tends to it while Micheal Jackson is singing "Ben's Song" in the background and as the credits roll.
THIS IS A GREAT MOVIE. SEE IT NOW!

Embarassingly dated,yet endearing
Like many who've seen this movie decades after it's release,the theme song sung by Michael Jackson is what made me check it out.Whereas Willard was a straight horror film,Ben is a mixture of cute and chills.
Picking up where Willard left off,Ben and his rat army retreat to the sewers while the police try to hunt them down after Willard's murder.In the process,Ben befriends an ill boy,Danny Garrison(Lee Montgomery),which is more endearing than the relationship between Willard & Socrates.
Aside from a view of circa 1972 for pop culture junkies,the best thing about Ben is the friendship between the boy and his rat.The acting,the score and the effects(recycling the same scenes of rats over) are pretty bad.The ending scene with the Jackson sung theme could make you misty eyed.Almost like a precurser to 2001's A.I.
Now that Willard has been remade(with a larger,nastier Ben)and became a box office disappointment,chances for a Ben remake are pretty non existant.It would be interesting to see one,even with a three legged Ben.

The sequel to the original killer rat army film, "Willard"
.... this is just a recycled killer-rat movie where the attack sequences are more polished than in the original, but the originality is gone. The plot picks up right where "Willard" ended, with the army of rats attacking Willard (Bruce Davidson), who made the mistake of falling in love with a girl and forgetting his real friends. The rats hide out in the city sewers while their leader, Ben, goes out looking for food. This is how he encounters Lee Montgomery (David Garrison), another lonely young boy just looking for a little friendship in a cold world. The two indeed become friends, while Ben's rat army (now numbering about 4,000) go out on fun little raids.

This 1972 film from director Phil Carlson, who would go on to do "Walking Tall" the next year, does have the virtue of coming up with a different boy-rat relationship. Poor Lee has a heart condition so there is actually some pathos to his relationship with Ben, whereas Willard lost our sympathy once he had his rats starting eating people. The rat attacks a little more creative, but the end result is somehow less effective that the pure gross-out of the original. If you can find both of them, then this is an obvious double-feature, and with the remake of "Willard" coming out soon I would have to think there will be cheap copies of both films readily available again. I am sure the new film will use awesom CGI effects for all those rats, but there is something to be said for the good old days of rat wranglers.

Sequel to Willard - more a friendship story than horror
Michael Jackson song the theme song into our hearts and history, while Lee Montgomery reminded us of what it was like to not have friends.
A sequel to the highly successful horror movie, WILLARD. The story begins with Willard and Ben arguing at home & moves to the touching friendship between a lonely, ill boy and an intelligent rat.
The rats may scare the young children, but if they can handle them and the very G rated killings, I do recommend this movie for children over 8. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This first part of the critically acclaimed 1976 television miniseries focuses on the early lives of Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt, concluding on their wedding day. The story is mostly told in flashback, as the first lady receives word of the death of President Roosevelt and, while making funeral preparations, reflects on her life with him. Distant relatives in the wealthy and sprawling Roosevelt family of New York, young Franklin and Eleanor met several times during their childhood, and much of the action in this installment of the drama utilizes young actors, including Mackenzie Phillips, who plays Eleanor at the age of 14. Playing the main characters as young adults, Edward Herrmann and Jane Alexander are brilliant in portraying the great American love story, as the privileged yet socially awkward Franklin finds himself completely captivated by the brainy and conscientious Eleanor. The miniseries was based on a Pulitzer Prize-winning book by historian Joseph P. Lash, and interspersed with the human drama are vignettes out of American history, such as cameo appearances by Eleanor's uncle Teddy, whose enormous personality suits his job as president of the United States. Eleanor and Franklin won 11 Emmy Awards, and its intelligent screenplay and fine acting have aged very well, making this a thoroughly enjoyable film. --Robert J. McNamara ... Read more

Reviews (1)

excellent look at the real Eleanor Roosevelt
the actresses portraying Eleanor in this film were well picked to play the part, Eleanor is portrayed as a real woman not just a political figure with no feelings- it kept my attention the whole 3 hours 22 min of the entire movie VOL1 & 2 included ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Stands with the Best
Featuring a no-name cast, a ludicrous title, and coming at the height of 50's camp, it's understandable how this little gem got lost in the shuffle. Nevertheless, the story continues to unnerve after all these years, reaching down to deepest fears about ordinary processes gone suddenly awry. Seldom has middle-class complascency been so eerily attacked as when we witness the husband's role and breadwinner's status shrink slowly out of sight amid an Ozzie and Harriet living-room. Cult director Jack Arnold makes the most of a modest budget, deploying the special effects in highly suspenseful fashion. Here the effects mean everything as Robert Scott Carey's descent into ever smaller worlds exposes him to fresh terrors among the commonplace, and it's truly odd to transition from normal surroundings into a subterranean world at the same time the former becomes alien to both him and us. Other sci-fi classics of the period threatened us with external enemies to which the military was an appropriate response. A few threatened internally with a loss of personal identity. This movie, I believe, is the only one to threaten with a loss of significance. It's horrifying to think that physical size is more important to our evaluations than simple humanity. Yet this is what we experience as Carey grows ever smaller and less significant to the normal sized world. We are glad when the wife is finally rid of him. Like Hitchcock, this film confronts us with our own deeper and less desirable emotions.

The battle with the spider is an epic one, showcasing effects that continue to impress, now as then.The central performances are quite good, with Randy Stuart's anguished wife a standout. However, Grant Williams as Carey, deserves special mention. He brings just the right combination of grit and melancholy to a role that demands equal parts of both. Judging from other performances in a brief career, the melancholy came natually to one of the most blandly handsome faces in the business. The scene that lingers for me is of Carey's running through a gantlet of lawn sprays, having learned that the process has started again and knowing that the sprays can soon drown him. Though less well known than other 50's classics such as The Thing or Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Arnold's film (minus the rhapsodic ending) is at least their equal and ranks with the very best of any period.

Sci-Fi Classic
When I was about to see this first time around I thaught it would be childish and a little boring but how wrong I was.

This movie's about a buisness man who gets shrunk by a mysterious radioactive myst. Everyday he gets smaller and smaller and his relationship with his family goes on the rocks and finds everyday household objects a struggle. Firstly it's just embrasment of walking down the street and then it turns much worse from his cat to a spider.

At the start it's a little boring as not a lot happens, but it starts to get really intresting when he gets chased by his cat into the celler.

The special effects are stunning for its era and the storyline gets you involved.

A part where the effects really shine is when there's a flood in the celler and Scotts brother and his wife come downstairs. They persume Scotts dead. Scott trys to get his brothers attention when he comes downstairs. He almost steps on his own brother in the process and the scale between the shoe and Scott's pretty stunning.

If you can see this film, do. It's well worth watching especially the later half

Gripping Journey Into A Frightening Oversized World
"The Incredible Shrinking Man", is one of the great Sci Fi movie titles from the 1950's thats not as well remembered as other landmark efforts of that time like "The Thing From Another World". That is unfortunate as here we have a really ground breaking effort that not only boasts stunning special effects, but also restrained performances and an interesting premise that is handled with integrity by director and cast. The film of course will always be talked about for the innovative and at times quite frightening process by which the main character shrinks away to practically nothing. Equally amazing in my mind after a viewing of "The Incredible Shrinking Man", is how this film gives us a view of the "normal", everyday world suddenly becoming a dangerous and potentially lethal environment where everyday things like the family pet or a spider in the basement take on life threatening personas.

The story starts out innocently enough with young couple Scott and Louise Carey (Grant Williams and Randy Stuart), who are spending some time on Scott's brother's boat. While Louise is below getting some refreshments Scott notices a strange mist approaching the boat and before he can take cover it envelopes the whole boat and he is covered in a strange glittery substance. It is just passed off as some unexplained happening and then the story jumps ahead six months to when strange developments start to occur. One morning Scott notices that his shirt seems too big for him and blames it on the cleaners. However it is not long before many other strange things begin to happen that arouse real fears in him. Going to his local doctor (William Schallert), Scott gets a clean bill of health and Louise feels that it is simply a lack of proper diet that is effecting her husband. To be sure however Scott is referred to a specialist Dr. Silver (Raymond Bailey), who gauges that Scott is actually loosing height over a number of weeks of examination and tests. The source of this strange occurance is narrowed down to the now forgotten glittery mist on the boat which further testing reveals to be some sort of radioactive body that causes the body to shrink. Dr. Silver injects Scott with a serum that will hopefully stop the shrinking process. Meanwhile the media have latched onto the newsworthy story of the "incredible shrinking man" and Scott and Louise become prisoners in their own home as curious busybodies begin making their life a misery. Scott is replaced in his employment which makes it dificult to live and causes further friction between he and Louise. Soon Scott's shrinking begins again and he experiences a rapid and terrifying drop in size. Back at the house Scott is reduced to living in a doll's house and one day when Louise by mistake leaves the door open and the family cat gets inside a new nightmare begins as Scott is hunted by the now "Giant", cat and after falling into the cellar having to face terrors like a hungry "Giant Spider". Everything in Scott's existence now holds unknown terrors and after Louise believes that Scott has been eaten by the cat he is now all alone with no assistance from anyone. After facing all of these terrors in his own home Scott does make his escape and now too small to be detected by any human beings begins a new existence where survival is his sole aim.

The story of "The Incredible Shrinking Man", may read like your usual sensationalist 1950's science fiction however it is far from that. It presents a quite thought provoking idea that we could all possibly imagine ourselves in. Noticeably absent in this film are the usual 1950's invading aliens or oversized creatures. Instead here the really frightening elements in the story are the simple household features that we encounter everyday like the family cat, a stray spider in the room or a leak in a water heater. Because of the shrinking of the main character these elements take on quite terrifying proportions. Director Jack Arnold wisely stays away from the more sensational potential of this story and in his direction even makes the scene where Scott's wedding ring rolls off his finger a seemingly frightening occurence. The performances here are first class and Grant Williams does a sterling job as the young husband who finds himself fighting for survival in his own home. His fear mixed with developing personal strength intent on survival makes for a great performance. Randy Stuart as wife Louise also deserves special mention as she delivers a well thought out performance as the first disbelieving wife who has to take over the leader role in the household as her husband literally shrinks before her eyes. The cast also features supporting performances from future comedy series regulars in Raymond Bailey and William Schallert who will always be rembered for their work in "The Beverly Hillbillies", and "The Patty Duke Show", respectively. "The Incredible Shrinking Man", contains many memorable scenes that boast special effects achievements that even today still cause amazement. Foremost among them of course are Scott's ongoing battle with the ferocious spider in the celler and his terrifying flight from the clutches of the family cat which is now 10 times his size. Those scenes present images that have rightly gone down into Science Fiction folklore.

Despite the films almost surreal ending which plays almost like a sermon delivered by Grant Williams the rest of the film dates amazing well despite the passage of over 47 years. Even the introduction of computer technology to achieve incredible special effects in my belief has not dulled the sheer genius evident throughtout this gripping sci fi tale. It certainly is one of my favourites of these efforts in the 1950's and deserves to be better remembered. For a thrilling piece of sci fi action from the golden era of these movies in the 1950's you can't get better than Jack Arnold's "The Incredible Shrinking Man".

THE GREATEST SCI-FI/FANTASY FILM OF ALL TIME!!
THIS MOVIE IS VERY IMPRESSIVE IN THE SPECIAL EFFECTS DEPARTMENT, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT IT WAS RELEASED IN 1957!!
FROM LOOKING AT THIS MOVIE, YOU'D NEVER THINK THAT IT'S THAT OLD!!
IT HAS AN OLD-MOVIE QUALITY TO IT, HOWEVER, BECAUSE IN TODAY'S SOCIETY, MOVIES LIKE THIS DON'T EXIST ANYMORE!!
THE ACTING IS QUITE IMPRESSIVE AND THE BELIEVABILITY FACTOR IS QUITE CONVINCING.
IT IS A FANTASY FILM, HOWEVER DUE TO THE GREAT ACTING AND FANTSTIC EFFECTS AND SETS, WE CAN'T HELP BUT BELIEVE WHAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF US.
THIS IS MOST DEFINETELY THE GREATEST SCI-FI/FANTASY FILM OF THE 50'S AND 60'S BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT IS SO MUCH MORE BELIEVABLE THAN IT'S COMPETITION!!
SEE THIS CLASSIC AS SOON AS YOU CAN!! ENJOY!!

HONEY THEY SHRUNK YOUR MAN .
If you ever applied for an overdraft, you'll know how THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN feels . The poor guy only wants some sun and sugar , alone with his honey ,out at sea . When he gets sprayed with a strange mist , plus a letter with a key informing him that he's in line for a large cash amount, if he buys a toaster . Back home he starts to notice suttle differences in him self . His shirts are too big , his slippers fall off his feet , he can no longer reach his secret magazines on top of the wardrobe . At first he puts it all down to a head cold , but when he has to wear high heals ( and he's not at the club ] to kiss his wife . He decides to see the doc . At first the non addictive antidepressants appear to do the trick , but unfortunately its a brief respite , and all too soon he's falling down the pot again . His shrinking continues until he is forced to move in with a plastic doll , this is fine until her G I JOE boyfriend ,beats the tar out of him .Later he is attacked by a cat , a spider ,and a very nasty letter from the electric company . Smaller and smaller until he as no alternative , but to wander in the great unknown . Earth, space , cleathorps ? who knows . ... Read more

Reviews (87)

Good Entertainment if not Historically Correct
I enjoyed this movie. If you read all the newspapers seems like all the critics want to do, is criticize Disney for claiming it is based on a true story. Well if I remember correctly, if a movie is all true, it is probably a documentary. Hollywood always takes libertys with the truth in the sake of good entertainment. There is even one website devoted totally to trashing anything about Mr. Hopkins. Regardless I liked it!
Viggo Mortensen plays Frank T. Hopkins, mostly just a lover of horses, but happens to have gotten a nice mustang named Hidalgo, a horse known for his fortitude. After an incident at Wounded Knee, and a stint in Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show. Mr Hopkins is propositioned by a few gentleman about competing in an endurance race of 3000 miles across the Middle Eastern deserts. His mates in the Wild West show chip in the entry fee, and off he goes. Encounters with many cultures and sandstorms , thirst, thievery, kidnapping, murder etc; follow. Viggo's performance is good, although much different than Lord of the Rings. Check out the performance by Omar Shariff, playing the Sheik of Sheiks. A good escapist movie in the realm of Indiana Jones et. all.

Good, old fashioned adventure in a faraway place
Last year, we had MASTER AND COMMANDER: FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD and PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN, old-time adventure epics produced just for pure fun (and box office receipts, of course) and lacking any overt social or political correctness agendas. Now, we have HIDALGO.

Frank Hopkins (Viggo Mortensen) is one of the acts in Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West Show on the basis of his reputation as the world's greatest cross-country horse racer. But Frank, the son of a U.S. Army scout and an Indian woman, is drinking himself out of a job, tortured by self-guilt over a tangential and relatively innocent association with the Army's massacre of Native Americans at Wounded Knee. Hopkins is challenged by an Arab sheik to participate in a grueling, 1000-year old horse race across the deserts of the Middle East. To redeem his self-esteem, Frank signs-on with his horse, Hidalgo, a mixed-breed Spanish mustang. Arriving in Arabia, Hopkins is despised by the locals for his infidel status, while Hidalgo's small size and lineage are held in contempt relative to the purebreds he's running against.

Omar Sharif appears as Sheik Riyadh, the Sheik of Sheiks whose own stallion is the favored entry in the race. (I guess Omar has been wandering the desert these past 42 years since appearing in a similar role in the sandblown epic LAWRENCE OF ARABIA. He looks weathered.) Zuleika Robinson plays the sheik's daughter, Jazira, unnecessary to the plot except that she provides Frank with a Damsel in Distress to rescue, but little else.

HIDALGO is perhaps 15-20 minutes over-extended. The Jazira In Peril bit could've been left in the digital-editing trashcan quite handily without sacrificing too much of a story that's otherwise everything anybody could want in escapist entertainment for the whole family.

The real darling of the film is, of course, Hidalgo, who pluckily braves a host of perils to win the prize purse: sandstorm, concealed pit with sharpened stakes, attack leopards, sniper, horde of locusts, broiling sun, blistering heat, and human treachery. (Hmm. Sounds like my hometown on a daily basis.) By the movie's conclusion, you just want to take Hidalgo home with you and to hell with zoning ordinances.

Not that impressed
My biggest mistake was probably going into the theater with high expectations, and by the end of the movie, i was thoroughly disappointed. I expected more action, and a more interesting storyline. Sure, there were some really cool scenes, but most of those can be seen in the theatrical trailer, so there were no surprises there. I found the dialog to be boring, especially with Viggo Mortensen's monotone voice. Also, since I have never really been a horse lover, i haven't really been interested in horse-racing, which the whole story revolves around. Some people will really like this movie, but as for me, i would much prefer to see Viggo in LOTR.

Great western with a twist
I loved this movie so much. This movie reminded me of all those westerns my dad would watch when I was younger. Finally an adventure movie WITHOUT the language, lame acting, poor story line, & over done special effects. It reminds me of "Quigley Down Under" only better. This movie has breathtaking shots throughout and a solid lead character. And did I mention Viggo is hecka fine in it! Don't pass up this one. Get it! Do it! Do it!

Hottie
Viggo Mortensen is a hottie!!!!!!!!!!!!! And so is Hidalgo!(but mostly Viggo!) The tower boy is kinda cute too! ... Read more

Reviews (103)

Masterpiece!
If you somehow missed this one, do yourself a favor and make time available in your schedule for viewing this masterpiece from director Bernardo Bertolucci! Nine academy awards, including Best Picture [1987], only gives partial credit to this magnificently epic and absolutely unforgettable true story. It is the story of Pu Yi, who at the age of 3 comes to the Imperial Dragon Throne to become the Last Emperor of China. His whole life is spanned in this film, from his childhood, to his ultimate fate as an unskilled gardener in the streets of Bejing. Throughout this film we are treated to a cinematic feast for the senses, so rich in detail and imagery, you will be compelled to see it again as soon as possible (I saw it again the very next night!). You will have felt the full range of emotions from having experienced this movie, and few others in recent memory have mesmerized me so totally in an almost 3 hour (164 min) time span. Truly one of the greatest films of all time! Masterpiece!

Bertolucci's Last Epic!
By that I mean with great respect! Bernardo Bertolucci is known for such cinematic extravaganzas as 1973's LAST TANGO IN PARIS and 1977's 1900; and to add to his credits, 1987's Best Picture winner THE LAST EMPEROR!

A film of major diversity. An Italian director (Bertolucci), a predominately Chinese cast including frequent costars John Lone and Joan Chen, British actor and seven-time Oscar nominee Peter O'Toole, an American producer named Jeremy Thomas, and distributed by an American studio, Columbia Pictures!

John Lone is the title character, Chinese emperor "Henry" Pu-Yi, who became the last Emperor of China at the age of 3, and would be the "Lord of Ten Thousand Years!" Nothing would prepare him for the change that would eventually occur when he is forced into abdication, forced into retaking his kingdom, and forcing him to attempt suicide after his arrest and capture by Chinese and Russian communist troops after World War II. Eventually, after serving his time for conspiracy, he released from prison and lives out the rest of his life in 1967 -- as a simple gardner.

Imagine. From Emperor to gardner, totally heartbreaking! Heartbreaking is the fact that it cost him EVERYTHING! His wife "Elizabeth" Wan Jung, played with grace by the gorgeous Joan Chen; his kingdom and his freedom. But, you can't simply hate the guy! He is, of course, a man who was spoiled by his servants and soldiers as a child.

The film has both an epic scope and an excellently-written character story. (Though most historians believed that the film embellished on certain facts, like Pu-Yi's homosexuality.) It is played competently by an Asian cast and a wonderfully witty Peter O'Toole, who should have been nominated for Best Supporting Actor that year, as the Emperor's patient tutor Reginald "R.J." Johnston.

Needless to say, I cried at the very end of this film! I LOVED that scene between the elder Pu-Yi and a little boy who appears to be just like the Emperor as a child. And the symbolic message this film taught with the cricket in the jar, as the little boy opens the jar to reveal the insect (by then, Pu-Yi has magically disappeared). An epic film with a heart (like my PRISONER OF WAR)!

Winner of all 9 of its nominations including: Best Picture - Jeremy Thomas, producer; Best Director - Bernardo Bertolucci; Best Adapted Screenplay - Bertolucci and Mark Peploe; Best Cinematography; Best Art Direction/Set Decoration; Best Costume Design; Best Score; Best Sound; and Best Film Editing.

THIS FILM IS APPROXIMATELY: 2 HOURS AND 40 MINUTES.

But well worth it!

great film, awful dvd
I had the misfortune to buy this BEFORE I read the Amazon reviews and discovered that the DVD looked awful-a particular injustice for a film that won Best Picture. It's only 17 years old; there are films from the 30's that look great on DVD! I see though that in the U.K. they released a 2-disc version with commentary and both the original theatrical cut as well as the director's cut. I assume it's also restored and anamorphic and can only hope that we get an American version soon. The movie gets 5 stars, even at 219 minutes. The DVD gets 1 star, so that averages out to a generous 3.

Breathtakingly Beautiful, Decadent and Misconceived.
I revere every Bertoluccifs work tremendously, and this lavish film is no exception.
I was completely mesmerised by the view of the Forbidden City, beautiful period costumes of the Emperor and the Imperial family with which the director says he really cared about the historical accuracy to recreate as well as other things.
The historical accuracy is, however, not necessarily applied to the part of which Japan was involved. The foundation of Manshu-koku, (Manchukuo is the Chinese word) and the restoration of the Manchu Emperor Pfu Yi, and the alleged atrocities made to the Japanese Imperial Army, namely, gRape of Nankingh, etc. It is so because both Bernaldo Bertolucci and the producer Jeremy Thomas seem to have truly believed in the auto-biography of Pfu Yi, gFrom Emperor to Citizenh that written for propaganda purpose, and the Frank Caprafs U.S. propaganda film; gThe Battle of Chinah at their face values.
First thing is first, Chinese Communistfs gbrainwashingh undeniably exists. In the same year this film first came out, 1987, gFrom Emperor to Citizenh was re-published by Oxford University Press with new comprehensive general introduction and chapter introductions by W.J.F. Jenner, the translator of the original 1964 gdeliberately restricted editionh published by Foreign Language Press, BeiJing.
Jenner explains; gThe special consideration shown Pfu Yi and other high-ranking Manchukuo(sic), Japanese, and Nationalist officials cannot be regarded as typical of Chinese prison conditions. These were all people of potential value in winning over others in future, and political considerations saved them from the harsh justice that many lesser figures received.h And, Jenner continues, Pfu Yifs gsuccessful thought reformh which made him gusefulh and able body to work like other ordinary people, that Bertolucci praises vigorously, was, in fact, gsomething of ritualh. Pfu Yifs fourth wifefs account of his incapableness of looking after himself, even after his release of 1959, reveals some part of the truth.
His fifth and final marriage to a well qualified nurse was garranged by the Chinese Peoplefs Political Consultative Conference and the Communist Partyfs United Front Department. [cccc] He was even protected from the Cultural Revolution by Chou En-laifs intervention, and the local police kept Red Guards away. [cccc] Pfu Yifs presentation to foreigners as a living advertisement for the Peoplefs Government and the Communist Party began in 1956, while he was still in prison; and after his release he was often required to meet foreign visitors to China.h Those facts show that Pfu Yi was not successfully remolded@into an ordinary citizen after all, but made a perfect gmouthpieceh of the Communist Party Propaganda Department.

Bertolucci may never have read this revealing version of the Pfu Yifs gauto-biographyh. (In fact, the book was re-written before it was published in 1964 by Communist Propaganda Department writers based on the gconfessionsh Pfu Yi and Pfu Chieh had made in the prison as outcome of gbrainwashingh.)
But, in any case, the directorfs knowledge on the so-called gRape of Nankingh is awfully wrong.
He believes; gThe Japanese killed 300,000 Chinese people in *2 or 3 days* in Nanking.h (How did he think it was possible as the matter of reality?)
In fact, however, the *200,000* civilian refugee in Nanking were well protected by the Japanese Army and decrease of the number never recorded by the gobjectiveh foreigners of the International Committee of the Nanking Safety Zone, who, by the way, are assumed by many people including scholars as gthe witnesses of the Rape of Nankingh. They, on the contrary, recorded *increase* of the population to 250,000 within a few weeks after the capture of the city. No one saw such barbaric massacre except the Chinese propagandists and, actually, some members of the Committee who were hired by the Chinese Nationalist Party as international propaganda agents. Some ordinary Chinese people (genuine citizens of Nanking) even condemned the Chinese soldiers for the wrong-doing in Nanking.
Apart from gRape of Nankingh, the gnewsreelh in the film Pfu Yi and his co-inmates had watched is full of errors and, I dare to say, pernicious propaganda.
The planes that bombed Shanghai International Settlement and killed thousands of civilian was actually the Chinese. (Page 352 of The China Year Book 1938, edited by H.G.W. Woodhead, North China Daily News) And, the gexecutionh scene of the Chinese civilian is, I am sure, taken from the famous propaganda film by Frank Capra; gThe battle of Chinah that shows, in fact, the executioners are the Chinese Nationalist Party Army. Because of the fact the scene was gtrimmedh to ghideh the true identity of the executioners, I think Bertolucci did know they were using propaganda material.
What I do not know is their purpose. It may have been to get permission to make the film in Beijing under ghawk-eyeh of the Communist Party authorities they might have pretended to be pro-communist. In either way, this filmfs authenticity was sullied and that is very a shame.

Still, to me, this special edition is very interesting as a resource to understand the Cultural Revolution and the nature of brainwashing because it includes first-hand interviews of aging Pfu Chieh and the real life prison governor. Only one thing I would desire is subtitles, for the sake of clarification of the dialogues spoken by non-English speakers.

Good movie.... Awful DVD
Enough comments have been made on the movie so I'll just tell you my opinion on the DVD edition. It is one of the worst DVD transcription I have ever saw. I really had the impression to watch a DivX. Do I need to tell more about the resolution? Only the english soundtrack is available (I wish the movie had been shooted in Chinese or Mandarin but that's not the point) and no subtitles. The DVD presents the director's cut which makes the movie 3 and a half hour instead of 2 and a half. The theatrical version is not available on the DVD... Otherwise there is no additionnal material. ... Read more

Amazon.com

William Hurt is perfectly cast as an arrogant surgeon who treats patients like interchangeable cogs in the machinery of his medical practice. Then he is diagnosed with throat cancer and, as the title of the memoir on which it is based tells us, he gets a taste of his own medicine. The subplot involves the solidarity between doctors, which is shattered when the newly conscious physician discovers that one of his partners (Mandy Patinkin) is trying to cover up a case of malpractice. Hurt is solid, as is Wendy Crewson as the doctor who treats him and Elizabeth Perkins as a fellow cancer patient. Interestingly, Hurt's fellow actors Patinkin, Adam Arkin, and Christine Lahti all wound up playing doctors on TV's Chicago Hope. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (16)

Moral, moving, and marvellous movie...
Every doctor - and every patient! - should see this movie; the difference is that, not all doctors will understand *why* they should see it..

I use The Doctor when teaching my medical students how to avoid becoming a certain kind of doctor; the kind who is so detached from humanity that they never feel anything of the pain, fear - and the hope - that their patients feel. They have forgotten how to care, and they don't care to remember it.

This is a film about a medical `Everyman`; Jack (played by William Hurt with great integrity and skill)is redeemed as a human being - and as a doctor - by his own experience of serious illness, and by that of his friend - her death frees him from the blinkers of self-absorption. The scene where the two of them dance in the Nevada desert is breathtaking.

Supporting cast are excellent; especially Mandy Patinkin as Jack's unscrupulous surgical partner. Jack's initially dysfunctional family life is a central part of this movie, and the roles of his wife and son are well played.

The last scenes are amongst the best; especially where Jack is explaining to his interns why they are going to spend the next 24 hours not as doctors, but as hospital patients - wearing hospital gowns, undergoing all the appropriate tests, and (horror of horrors) eating hospital food.

The following and final scene is simply beautiful, as Jack stands on the roof of the hospital and dances by himself, revived and renewed.

Anyone involved in medical or healthcare education should have this video - and use it! Others should watch it to understand better what can happen to medical students along the way to becoming doctors.

beautiful film
William Hurt's performance as a cold and arrogant doctor who finds out he has cancer and gets a lesson of life is wonderful(no surprise) as well as the whole cast including Elizabeth Perkins,Christine Lahti,Mandy Patinkin,Adam Arkin(yes, the doctors of chicago hope).Then you think: "but it's a doctor film" but actually this film is for all audiences not only for doctors. The scene where he gets a letter from a patient(Elizabeth Perkins)and he reads it on the roof of the hospital with pigeons flying is so beautiful and I couldn't hold the tears from tumbling down.

THE MOVIE THAT KILLED M.A.S.H.
The Doctor was another of those excellent, well-made 1990-91 releases pre-empted by laser-guided bombs and missiles of the 1990 Gulf War and forced into the video occult. But that's not stopped it from a second chance via DVD where it may get well-deserved recognition and revenues for each actor and crew's excellent contributions.
The cast drove home messages that health care professionals need take a good look at "because one day you'll be sick to" ... So "physician, heal thyself" and thereby prepare to heal others all the way down to your bedside manners. The Word is eventually sent via Jack McKee and partner whose cavalier professionalism ("Get in, cut it out and couldn't care less!") is callously unsuited to genuine warmth patients need communicated to them. And then there's the insurance companies who, like them, run on "stats" and "the bottom line" to coldly determine who lives and dies on the medical production line.
You don't know what it's like until you hear those 3 words "You've got cancer"; they'll floor you -especially if you're a physician who knows the realities of catastrophic illness. So "a taste of my own medicine" (subtitle to book movie is based on) engages McKee when he's told that. I've walked hospital hallways like McKee on the way to radiation therapy and sat with the terminally ill, knowing I'd likely survive (Or would I?) and that others were terminal, and encountered my own death watch. The disingenuous reassurance McKee gave others is sheer hypocrisy and his facetious talk of golf antagonizes "the herd," whom he'd felt beneath his ivory tower profession and HIS herd of incompetents. But now, his relation with a dying patient, whom he actually befriends, turns him inward and he admits his and the profession's shortcomings - then he falls out of love with himself - all too late to save her but soon enough to save himself and his family from the same callousness engulfing all but a few.
It sends a strong message to those who profit from medicine at the deadliest expense to others whom it's supposed to save! My only complaint is that Amazon.com hasn't mailed me my DVD of it yet. How long will it take?

A dose of your own medicine
After getting over the initial shock of seeing half the cast of Chicago Hope (when it was still a good show...and not the pale imitation of itself that it later became: Alan Arkin, Mandy Patinkin, Christine Lahti), this movie evolves into a fine, quiet, character driven drama. There are no great heroics, apart from June (Elizabeth Perkins), and even those are real, not manipulative, cliched, corny or obvious.

This is a movie that works to develop its characters and plot simultaneously and without artifice or obvious (groanable/cringe inducing) plot devices. None of them are in anwyay what you would call 'extreme' or cliched. They are just very normal people placed is a very stressful situation- the doctor being diagnosed with a growth in his throat and the changes in many lives this growth causes. The changes are both good, bad and 'educational' for most of them. The subplot- hospitals, statistics, malpractice cases, protecting each other- is subdued, never moralized or sermonized on but explored in a way whereby you can make your own judgements, based on some realistics situations (imagine a situation where somebody's life was worth less than $1000). The cast compliment each other and really connect. This movie is quite subtle at times and doesn't use in your face methods to make a point.

This is a movie then that is honest, beautifully made, accessible and at times really funny, and at times really raw and saddening. It isn't an episode of ER. So if you're looking for high medical drama look elsewhere. But if you're looking for real multi-layered human drama then look here. Honesty is the key word and theme in the movie (which if you watch it you'll understand what I mean). Honesty to oneself, others and just to the concept in general. And how too, sometimes we find spiritual and psychological 'healing' in the midst of the greatest physical peril.

The DVD contains no special features, only the movie, scene selection and set-up. Though it was made in 1990, it doesn't look too dated (apart from the cell-phones).

I have to admit watching this movie, I looked at the clock on the DVD player and actually hoped it wouldn't end. How many movies can you say that about?

I think the best moment in the story is when the doctor reads the story June gave him. I think there is a lesson in that that is relevant to all of us. Hopefully you'll get the opportunity to see what I mean by watching this movie.

SO in all, a brilliant, engrossing, poignant and real human drama built around believeable characters doing normal things and suffering typical tragedies that are enormous in our own lives. These are people we can understand and relate to, not the superficial and stereotypical larger-than-life, weirder-than-fiction characters designed to play with our minds and strum on our heartstrings. These people do touch your heart and mind for the right reasons...And maybe, if only for a moment, it causes you to question and reassess how you deal with others and the face you present the world, then maybe it has helped heal you a little bit too...If you need it, as most of us do.

One of my favorite films
"The Doctor" is one of my favorite films. I have seen it maybe 10 times (on VHS) and know much of it by heart. There is nothing artificial about this film. It is a human story about real people, well directed and edited, and with sincere, fleshed-out performances from everyone in the cast.

At the opening we see the successful heart surgeon Dr. Jack McKee, quite full of himself, performing another major operation while "Let's Get Drunk and Screw" plays in the background. We see him as he makes his rounds, failing in his attempts to interact on a human level with his patients, substituting crude attempts at humor for genuine compassion. We see him failing at home as well, as his professional life alienates him from his wife and son. All this begins to change when a seemingly minor throat irritation is diagnosed as laryngeal cancer. Then he learns what it is like to be on the other side of the medical profession, and it changes his life.

William Hurt, a fine but perhaps somewhat limited actor, is perfect as Jack McKee, and he is wonderfully supported by Christine Lahti, who plays his wife, and Elizabeth Perkins, who gives an amazing performance as June, a young woman with a grade 4 brain tumor who has a powerful impact on Hurt's character. June and Jack share a scene in the desert at sundown that gives me a lump in the throat every time.

Also worth mentioning are Wendy Tewson, who plays a rather nasty ENT surgeon who gives Jack a dose of his own medicine (so to speak), and Adam Arkin as Dr. Eli Blumfield, "the Rabbi", who has often been the butt of Jack's humor around the hospital, because he talks to his patients while they are anesthetized.

The Doctor is a film that illustrates the importance of treating people as human beings and not as objects or numbers on a chart. Highly recommended! (I've pre-ordered the DVD too.) ... Read more

Reviews (35)

Doesn't stand up to the original
Despite fine performances by all, especially Jack Lemmon in the Fonda role, this remake does not even come close to the original. It lacks the punch of the original and not all the actors meet the standards set by the original actors. Even the great Hume Cronyn, as good as he is, doesn't compare to his predecessor. Maybe I am disappointed in this movie because I saw the original first and judge it by that standard. On it's own, it's not a bad film but once you've made a classic why remake it? Do you really think you can get it better. Don't waste your money. Buy the original.

What a remake!
I consider myself a very demanding movie watcher, and this one definitely satisfies my expectations. I had the chance to see both 1957 and 1997 versions for "12 angry men", and I must say my vote goes to the recent one. Friedkin manages to create a whole atmosphere which seems much more realistic to me than the rather rigid and sometimes mechanic performances shown on the earlier version. In my opinion, Friedkin's cast looks so natural in their expressions and personality, they don't seem to be 'acting', which is a fault often seen in older movies. Characters and psychological profiles were improved so that you recognize and identify everyone of them, and you have a feeling no man's missing and no man's unnecesary. Jack Lemmon and George C. Scott offer an astonishing display of talent, and Scott's final monologue makes Lee J Cobb's performance look pale and opaque. If I were to choose a lawyer, I'd take Lemmon instead of Fonda, no doubt about it. The variety of the cast brings a refreshing, believable and solid mosaic of personalities I just don't see in Lumet's film (1957). Don't turn your back on this remake. You may be missing a great movie.

Nice effort, but doesn't stand up to the original
I really don't think a masterpiece like 12 ANGRY MEN needs a remake. This remake of the classic 1957 film makes many good efforts, but falls short in many points. First of all, I think Scott is excellent, and could stand serious comparison with Cobb in the original. (Alright, maybe his final monologue isn't quite as cyclonic as Cobb's, but perhaps Scott was wise in not trying to emulate that.) Many of the other actors are also very good. But some of the actors miss the mark on their characterizations. Olmos' watchmaker is a confused mess. (Who is he? Where is he from? What is his social class?) Gandolfini's Juror # 6 is surly and disagreeable, unlike Edward Binns' kindly original. The actor playing Juror # 5 is too confident and bold; in the original, this character was a scared and self-conscious young man who identified with the defendant. I admit that making Juror # 10 a former Nation of Islam member was a creative choice. But why does the judge (female in this version) not set up the atmosphere of physical discomfort and indifference, which are important themes in the movie? And why does # 10 decribe the defendant as a "common ignorant slob"? His appearance and dress do not suggest this! In the original movie, ALL the actors were superb and perfect for their parts; there were no weak links.

Another problem I have with this movie is that in some places it fastidiously modernizes, while in others it sta