Reviews (12)

EARLY SCREEN APPEARANCES OF TODAYS STARS
This movie has alot of fun catch phrases and looks inside the thoughts of kids just outta high school.

What are you supposed to do in life....PARTY!

Hear Eddie Van Halen compose the sound track. If you're a Van Halen fan you'll enjoy hearing licks and riffs to songs that you know off of 1984 up to the present. Of course this is a corny coming of age movie. But with Eric Stolz, Leah Thompson, Rick Moranis and Chucks' little brother from "Weird Science" Check this movie out. Its a keeper.

This is THE definitive mid 80's teen flick!
I've been a HUGE fan of this movie for nearly 15 years...From the storyline to the soundtrack provided by Mr. Eddie Van Halen, this movie delivers! While some might say this is a sequel to Fast Times At Ridgemont High, the only resemblence I see is this movie stars another Penn brother, actor Christopher Penn. Penn is excellent as the neanderthal-like Tommy, a high school wrestler who is always looking for the next party..Eric Stoltz plays his straight laced roomate that is happy to be out on his own...even if it is just a couple of blocks away from Mom's house. Rick Moranis plays an over zealous retail manager with BAD hair hopelessly trying to win the affection of Tommy's girlfriend...The movie includes a scene in strip club that provides the background for Tommy's so-called bachelor party...Little do his friends know, he has no fiance...This movie is fun in an era where too many people thought too much about themselves AND their appearance...I can't wait until the DVD version is released!!

Ultimate Eighties flick
Dont be mislead by the views of most. If youre into eighties flicks and you DO like Fast times at Ridegemont, This is the movie for you!

I have owned this movie multiple times on VHS, Laserdisc and now am looking for the original 16mm film! Chris penn is hilarious as is Randy Quaid who intensifys his character as the burnt out vietnam vet! Its from a time in cinema where the "teen" movies ruled as this is a circumspect example! Out of hundreds of movies from the eighties era, this is CERTAINLY one of my all time fav's - HIGHLY reccomended!

See this movie for two reasons: Kitten Natividad's "assets".
A film forgotten amongst the pile of teen 80's fair, I thought this film notable for the big screen performance by one of classic strip-tease's most well-endowed performers. Hey, it wouldn't be an indulgent 'Ridgement High' style flick without a little skin, and Natividad certainly has the merchandise to sell even this script. Or maybe I am being too harsh? To be sure, this film sports some stars, like Stoltz and Quaid, and there are some funny moments. I admit that when I was an 80's teen and saw this movie, I sometimes identified, especially with the 'Nam-fixated younger brother. But as an adult, I seem to have lost my taste for such sophomoric hijinx. Really, this kind of film was done better. If you're gonna see it, see it for the strip club scene. That's about all I remember it for after all these years anyway.

Pretty bad, but you might as well rent it
When I think of 'pretty bad' movies I've seen, Cameron Crowe's "The Wild Life" comes to mind. Don't get me wrong; after you've run out of Hughes, Coppola, amd other, better Crowe movies to watch when you want some 80's-style movie fun, then "The Wild Life" is good for a rent. But unlike many other teen comedies from the 80's, this one lacks the sense of joy in life, the sense that we're witnessing a perfect memory from our teenage years, be it happy or sad or embarassing or whatever. "The Wild Life" boasts an emsemble cast of 80's movie regulars, including Chris Penn, Sean's little brother. But unlike Spiccoli of "Fast Times at Ridgemont High", this token-dumbass isn't anywhere near loveable. Eric Stoltz's character is a straight-laced "adult" who is moving out of the house for the first time, into a bachelor pad, which will no doubt serve as the setting for a wild party later in the film. (One wonders how he affords this lovely furnished apartment on his bowling alley salary...)His ex girlfriend, played by Lea Thomson, is an issue for him as well, and she's pathetic to watch as she allows herself to be used cruelly by a sleazy cop, the quintessential "older man." Like "American Grafitti", the subplots of this movie seem to have very little to do with one another, but unlike the nostolgia classic, these one's are incredibly inane. The only interesting branch of the plot involves Stoltz's character's younger brother, a Vietnam-obsessed, camaflogue-clad 15-year-old who learns (we suppose) an important lesson from a war vet. Ilan Mitchell-Smith portrays Jim in a highly romantic fashion, with as much detail as possible. The mannerisms he uses are, in a way, fresh, compared to the stereotypical "street urchin" often seen in movies. In fact, it is a shame that a movie wasn't made revolving entirely around this character; THAT would be interesting.
Unfortuneately, Jim is the only character that is truly likeable; we end up not caring what happens to the others. Actually, nothing really does happen. This film documents a really wild couple of nights in the lives of a group of teenagers. So rent it - don't buy. Because it's not THAT wild. It's not even casual. ... Read more

Description

War correspondent stumbles on a little known fact that an honored American war patriot had in fact worked for the Fascists; wife urges writer to expose the facts for history. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Flameout
Hard to imagine Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn being lousy together: until you see them in this Popular Front catastrophe fron 1942. The conspiracy theory of those days among Hollywood leftists was that there were Fascist fifth columnists under every bed and they had to be rooted out. Reporter Tracy is rooting under widow Hepburn's bed to get the goods on her late husband. Tracy was not politcally sympathetic to the project and he looks thoroughly discouraged and annoyed from scene one. The crummy script and abominable sets didn't help any. Politics is always a touchy subject in the movies; it usually doesn't date well. Some films, like "For Whom the Bell Tolls," can shrug off the rhetoric and still be great years later. Others, like "Keeper of the Flame," sink like a stone.

Keeper of the the Flame reminded me vaguely of "Citizen
Kane". This film was made a year later in 1942. The techniques, the tone & general production just seemed siniliar. Kate Hepburn is the widow of the famous, popular, charismatic World War I hero, Robert Forest. Apparently he's also become fabulously wealthy. A bridge washes out from a storm the night he is to meet with other powerful men to plan a takeover of the United States. He's a closet facist & very few people know. Anyway, he's basically dead in an auto accident before the movie starts. Could he have been saved? His marriage to Hepburn hasn't been going too well & she being a patriotic American, has a probelm with his facisism. None of this is known of course. Along comes Spencer Tracer a famous reporter to do a biography on the great man. A few sparks fly & as a Hepburn/Tracy flick, this is not their best effort. There are a few slow spots but its a thriller that keeps your attention. There was a war on when this movie was made but thankfully the anti-facist message was pretty subtle. Overall, they could have done better, but then, they could have done worse. 31/2 stars.

National Hero?
A journalist (Spencer Tracy) investigates the strange circumstances surrounding the death of a national hero. But he runs into a wall of silence. Everybody seems to hide something and the strange behaviour of the widow (Katharine Hepburn) puzzles him: her mourning seems not very deep. No wonder, since her husband planned to take the U.S. Government over with a fascistic coup, and this poor woman did what she considered her patriotic duty...

Good thriller that could have been great. The warning of totalitarianism is subtle - the young adherents who beleaguer Hepburn's home never use martial rhetoric - but the film is plodding and drags on. Tracy spends nearly the entire film running and sometimes riding on horseback from one house to the other, from one taciturn witness to the next. The denouement is squeezed into the last 10 minutes. Hepburn is even declared an american hero although her motives were not entirely selfless: her husband despised her because she could not bear him children. The flaws in this film are all the more disappointing, since, with this plot and this cast, the film could have been on the level of NOTORIOUS.

one of the best
This one of the best no matter what! My dad told me to watch this movie because he thought I would like it, and I did. It might not be the best Known movie but it's still a thriller. If you love Alfred's movies I promise you will love this!

Tracy-Hepburn vehicle warns of the Fascist threat at home
This is an interesting choice for the second Tracy-Hepburn picture, following the success of "Woman of the Year," but then all of the films Katharine Hepburn made during World War II were interesting choices. In "Stage Door Canteen," while other stars performed, Hepburn shared in the film's main dramatic scene and in "Dragon Seed" she played a Chinese peasant girl. However, "Keeper of the Flame" is clearly Spencer Tracy's film. He plays Steven O'Malley, a famous correspondent who has returned from Europe to cover the death an American national hero, Robert V. Forrest. Hepburn plays the reclusive widow, a role that eerily foreshadows Jacqueline Kennedy in some regards, whom O'Malley comes to suspect of having murdered her husband. However, to his surprise, O'Malley discovers that Forrest's supernationalism was merely a facade for fascism. There is more going on here than meets the eye. Based an "unwritten" novel by I. A. R. Wylie and scripted by Donald Odgen Stewart, the choice of George Cukor to direct the film is quite surprising. Cukor and cinematographer William Daniels do their best to create a Hitchcock-type film, but the overall effect is a pale imitation at best. Hepburn seems ill-suited to the role of the widow with a secret, although certainly her political sensibilities would support the point of the film. Tracy is a bit subdued, no doubt because of the conflict between his feelings for Christine Forrest and his desire to uncover the truth no matter what the cost, but this is still a solid performance from one of the greatest film actors.

Overall the fascist threat seems too muted in this film. Darryl Hickman as the young Jeb Rickards, who had belonged to Forrest's youth organization (which looks less like the Boy Scouts and more like the Hitler Youth as the movie progresses), is the true emotional heart of the film. Yet in the end you feel more that he was mislead than actually endangered by his membership. The idea that fascism could succeed in America only as a third front sort of thing is dangerously misleading, as demagogues like Huey P. Long were in the process of proving. The nation surely could have used a solid anti-fascist film from Hollywood, but "Keeper of the Flame" was ultimately too shallow an effort. At the end you might understand that Robert V. Forrest was a fascist, but you really have no idea what that means beyond the fact that it is a very bad thing.

This is arguably the weakest Tracy-Hepburn film and was certainly not the formula followed in their more successful efforts. Given the subject matter the romantic elements between the two is sadly misplaced, getting in the way of the film's message as much as the reporter's investigation. Hepburn would be served a little better by her next foray into the suspense genre four years later in "Undercurrent." ... Read more

Reviews (17)

One of the most Underrated films of the 1980s!
RECKLESS is an overlooked classic, and quality wise, it is far superior to most of the better known teen angst classics of the eighties.

Aidan Quinn gives a fantastic early performance as Johnny Rourke, who he plays as a pensive combination of James Dean and Steve McQueen. Daryl Hannah gives her second-most-memorable performances (after Pris in Blade Runner) as the popular but unsatisfied girl who is attracted to Johnny's rebelliousness. There are several other young actors who would go on to fame (including Adam Baldwin and Jennifer Grey).

But the film's biggest draw is it's amazing soundtrack (ironically enough, there never was an "official" release of it)...

When I first saw the film, I was a big fan of INXS' current (at that time) release, Shabooh Shoobah, and I was thrilled by its extensive use in the soundtrack to this film. "The One Thing" and "Soul Mistake" play during opening scenes, and later in the film, director James Foley transcends the usual bubbleheaded attempts to copy MTV editing in films (most notable in megahits like FLASHDANCE and FOOTLOOSE) with a truly BRILLIANT use of the song "To Look at You" that actually manages to further the plot stricly through visual + aural means.

Also brilliant is the prom sequence, when Quinn turns off the wimpy music and cranks up some Romeo Void in its place, then pulls Hannah into an uninhibited dance while the camera circles them at an increasing speed.. it's a truly exhilarating moment that ranks (in terms of cinematic choreography) with the famous "Do You Love Me" scene in DIRTY DANCING, and the classic moments of SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER.

I love this film, and I still watch it often. It's like an old friend that I like to revisit now and then. It gets my highest recommendation!

An intense and sexy film!
This is a very early Aidan Quinn film. And I have to say, he is very good in it. The film is not that original, plot-wise: poor boy from the 'wrong side' who rides a motorcycle falls for rich girl who has a lot of friends and is very popular. In this film, however, the love story is one of the most intense and explosive to ever be placed on screen. As Johnny, Quinn delivers a smart and sexy performance. He is full of equal parts pain and love, which is fueled when he secretly hooks up with Daryl Hannah's character. Hannah is a cheerleader who can't stand living on the "right side of the tracks," and Quinn offers a perfect escape for her inner rebellion. However, when she falls for him, she is painfully stuck between the world she's always known and the world that Johnny offers her. Which one will she choose in the end? This question is answered in a very climactic scene in their high school, when both factions come together in a tense moment. It is a great film, one that I have watched over again and have loved every time.

This film is extremely underrated.
Reckless has been underrated by the film industry due to it has not yet been released on DVD as of 7/5/04. Of all the coming of age films ever made this one is my favorite. This film is more dangerous than any of the other films of this genre and it captures what many people have felt growing up, but most have never acted upon(which the actors in this film do act upon). It really is a very modern and updated version of 'Rebel Without a Cause'. Hopefully this film will get the recognition it deserves and be released on DVD. I never hear any film critic's talk about this particular film and it may remain sort of a cult/under ground film which might not ever be released on DVD. Too bad because this film is a gem.

Picture of a generation
That movie shows a generation that still lives and in the new future some scenes on it can explain a lot of atitudes of the future parents, and after then, older grandparents....

This is one of the best movie i ever saw and, as explained before about the music, they stil bring me enjoyable moments to hear then.

Great Ones
Yes, Quinn and Hannah were both early in there careers when this was shot...and yes, it is the princess/roughboy donetodeath premise, but...the brilliant, raw sensuality of that one dance scene (RomeoVoid)...all of a sudden, that black carnation fits her, and acts as an allegory for Tracy's acceptance of Johnny Rourke.
The supporting cast of McMillan (Dune), DeYoung (Flashback), Havilland Morris (16 Candles), Lois Smith (Twister), a VERY young Jennifer Gray (Red Dawn), Hedaya, Baldwin, and Springsteen(whatever happened to her?) turn in somewhat superficial performances...except Ken McMillan, who was brilliant in everything he did.
Disregarding the glaring fact that this film is better suited to the midnite show at the drive-in, this one attracts me back every couple of months or so, which is why I've gone thru 3 copies in 20 years. Hannah and Quinn create fire on the screen, and show exactly what the director intended...the mutual exploration of that first true passion for a lover. As Stephen King wrote, "...it's the one thrill ride they let you take only once." ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

The Front Page, Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur's classic 1928 newspaper play, has had three official film versions and contributed structural DNA to half the movies ever made about professional camaraderie and fierce love-hate friendships. Lewis Milestone's 1931 movie is well respected (Billy Wilder's 1974 version isn't), but this is one case where the remake towers brilliantined head and blocked shoulders above the original.

Howard Hawks had the inspired notion of making Hildy Johnson--the ace newsman whom demonic editor Walter Burns is trying to keep from quitting and getting married--a she instead of a he. What's more, she's not only Walter's star reporter but also his ex-wife. When Hildy (Rosalind Russell) comes to tell Walter (Cary Grant) she's leaving the newspaper business, he bamboozles her into carrying out one last assignment--a death-row interview with a little nebbish (John Qualen) convicted of killing a policeman. It sounds like a snap, but before you can say screwball comedy, the press room of the Criminal Courts Building has become ground zero for all the lunacy a jailbreak, a shooting, an impromptu suicide, a corrupt city administration, and the most Machiavellian "hero" in the American cinema can supply.

His Girl Friday is one of the, oh, five greatest dialogue comedies ever made; Hawks had his cast play it at breakneck speed, and audiences hyperventilate trying to finish with one laugh so they can do justice to the four that have accumulated in the meantime. Russell, not Hawks's first choice to play Hildy, is triumphant in the part, holding her own as "one of the guys" and creating an enduring feminist icon. Grant is a force of nature, giving a performance of such concentrated frenzy and diamond brilliance that you owe it to yourself to devote at least one viewing of the movie to watching him alone. But then you have to go back (lucky you) and watch it again for the sake of the press-room gang--Roscoe Karns, Porter Hall, Cliff Edwards, Regis Toomey, Frank Jenks, and others--the kind of ensemble work that gets character actors onto Parnassus. --Richard T. Jameson ... Read more

Reviews (76)

Witty and entertaining
(Please note that the DVD version I am reviewing is the Laserlight release that features an additional documentary on the life of Cary Grant as well as an introduction by an even-more-confused-than-usual Tony Curtis.)

With Laserlight you can never predict from the outside case exactly what the quality of the film itself is going to be in. I've watched good quality prints from them in the past, but I've also seen some truly awful releases that aren't worth the plastic that they're pressed on. Fortunately, their version of HIS GIRL FRIDAY is quite excellent, with a crisp picture and a clear soundtrack. Their budget releases are usually worth the risk, and in this case, you end up with a great movie that's quite well preserved and all for a fairly low price.

The movie itself is simply fantastic. The dialogue comes flying at you so fast that'll be afraid to laugh for fear of speaking over the next line. The story itself is also intensely funny, and deceptively dark. What begins as a seemingly light romantic comedy slowly becomes more and more twisted until the final scene, where the reinstatement of the romance subplot reminds us of how far we've come. It's a testament to the skills of the director, Howard Hawks, that the result is not only coherent, but also highly enjoyable. The story flows effortlessly from moment to moment, with each scene being slightly more frantic than the last, yet still together enough to be extremely entertaining.

The acting from the two main leads is also a delight. In the past I had thought of Cary Grant as always playing the same sort of character in every film. Although, you'll see some similarity to other roles that he played, he's incredibly amusing in this film and playing a far more manipulative character than I'd seen him perform. It's a nice change to see the usually easily befuddled Cary Grant actually running rings around the rest of the cast.

As for the DVD extras, they don't distract from the feature, but they won't be the deciding factor in whether you purchase this DVD or not. The included documentary, CARY GRANT ON FILM: A BIOGRAPHY runs about 28 minutes long and consists mainly of random trailers that span Grant's entire film career. It's fairly interesting, although not terribly riveting. The introductory remarks by Tony Curtis are as bizarrely entertaining as always. The film contains Spanish, Japanese and Chinese subtitles, but does not include an option for English, which is a slightly annoying oversight.

In the end, it's not the extras that you should be buying this disc for; it's the wonderful film that's packaged with them. Kick back, relax, and watch the dialog fly across the screen. You'll want to keep the remote control handy so that you can rewind to catch all the great moments that you missed while laughing over them.

which version to buy? There's only one!
OK, we all know that 'His Girl Friday' (aka 'The Front Page') is a terrific movie which belongs in every DVD collection. But there are some really bad, almost unviewable versions out there. Fortunately, I chose the right version, and it's a clean crisp image, tightly-focused sound -- a joy throughout. So if you want 'His Girl Friday', make sure you get the Laserlight DVD version, complete with a Cary Grant biog documentary and an unvelievably hokey intro from Tony Curtis on a bad day. I got the Laserlight disc from Amazon for around $7 -- the really bad dubs other reviewers have complained about from other companies cost more! I've found Laserlight transfers of old films are generally ok -- their cheapie Hitchcock transfers of 'The Lady Vanishes' and 'The 39 Steps' are almost as good as as Criterion in image, though pretty scratchy in sound. For a budget label, they do a good job compared to the absolute garbage put out by Madacy and others. So remember -- 'His Girl Friday' has to be from Laserlight or you're wasting your money and buying something totally unviewable. And no, this is NOT a paid ad! Just trying to steer people towards a good edition of a classic comedy. If Laserlight wants to thank me, they could prepare a DVD edition of my favourite of all Billy Wilder comedies, 'The Major and the Minor' with Ginger Rogers and Ray Milland. Love those 1940s comedies!

brilliant film--dreadful DVD
Don't buy this DVD. The sound quality is terrible--a loud hissing noise overshadows the film's trademark fast, witty dialog. $5 seemed a small investment at the time, but I should have saved my money. Surely someday those who own the rights to "His Girl Friday" will release a DVD worthy of this wonderful classic.

Get The Girl
1940's His Girl Friday is a fast-paced comedy from director Howard Hawks that is has brilliant pacing and performances from Cary Grant & Rosalind Russell. The film is based on the play, The Front Page and had been previously made into a film and those versions concern the professional relationship of two men, Walter Burns & Hildy Johnson. In this version they changed the gender of Hildy to a female and the professional tension of the original is replaced by sexual tension. Though it seems tame today, the erotic electricity & innuendo between Mr. Grant & Ms. Russell was quite groundbreaking for the time. The screenplay has been one of the most influential in film history, with Quentin Tarantino citing it as an inspiration for his script's pacing.

VINTAGE SCREWBALL SPARKLES ON DVD FROM COLUMBIA
"His Girl Friday" is Howard Hawk's inspired remake of the award-winning Broadway play and previous movie release of "The Front Page". It's the story of a rapid fire newspaper editor, Walter (Cary Grant) and his star reporter and ex-wife, Hildie Johnston. Hildie has decided to retire to the country with her soon to be new husband (Ralph Belamy). But when a prison break captures the imagination of a troupe of cutthroat reporters, all rabid for the real scoop, Hildie sets aside marital bliss for one last hurrah behind the desk as a cub reporter.
THE TRANSFER: BEWARE OF THIS DVD! There are no less than 12 bootlegged versions of this film being sold through various vendors on DVD. In all but one case the image quality looks as though the entire print had been fed through a meat grinder. The version you want is the one from Columbia Tri-Star Home Video. Its packaging features a disclaimer that reads "mastered from the original camera negative." This version of "His Girl Friday" exhibits - in short - exemplary video quality. The B&W picture has been completely restored. Age related artifacts are nonexistent. The gray scale, black and contrast levels are perfectly realized. Fine detail will astound. There are no digital anomalies. The audio is mono but very nicely cleaned up.
EXTRAS: This version also includes some very nice - if all too brief - featurettes on the careers of stars Rosiland Russell and Cary Grant and the making of the film. There's also the original theatrical trailer.
BOTTOM LINE: This girl is worth seeking out! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Lust for Life is appropriately titled, for mere passionseems inadequate when describing this superb fictionalized biography (based onIrving Stone's popular novel) of Vincent Van Gogh. In a deservedly Oscar®- nominated performance, Kirk Douglas is physically and emotionally perfect as thetormented Dutch painter, whose life is chronicled from his ill-fated stint as apreacher to Belgian miners in 1878, to his Impressionist-inspired artisticawakening and psychological descent to suicide in 1890. Having triumphed with1952's The Bad and the Beautiful, Douglas, producer John Houseman, anddirector Vincente Minnelli brought vigor and vitality to this blessed project,which centers on Van Gogh's stormy friendship with fellow artist Gaugin(Oscar-winner Anthony Quinn). Minnelli used an outmoded color film process andinnovative camera techniques to vividly recreate Van Gogh's paintings, and hefilmed on the actual Dutch and French locations where Van Gogh's masteryflourished. The artist's lust for life also fed his madness, and this filmdeeply understands the fine line in between. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (16)

THE TERRIBLE LONELINESS OF VINCENT VAN GOGH
One of the greatest films ever made about the madness of creative genius. As films about artists go, I like this film better than POLLOCK and almost as much as BASQUIAT. This is very much an overlooked CLASSIC. I have friends who are fans of Van Gogh's who have never heard of this film. Based on the book of the same title by Irving Stone and for those who love DEAR THEO: the abridged letters of Vincent Van Gogh, a must see. This film absolutely conveys the heartbreaking feeling of this starving misunderstood genius pounding his lifeblood into canvas in a French atelier or countryside while the gallery owners scoff and the painter remains unrecognized and unloved.

Kirk Douglas' finest performance, is fraught with peril. Anthony Quinn, who won an Oscar for his portrayal of Paul Gauguin, is superb. The script, some of which was taken from Van Gogh himself, is sometimes dated but always poignant: "Sometimes the pictures come to me as if in a dream, with a terrible lucidity." BRILLIANT!!

Unfortunately the VHS format is fullscreen which begs the question; WHY IS THIS MASTERPIECE UNAVAILABLE IN WIDESCREEN ON DVD!?! What a cultural wasteland: I could probably find ERNEST GOES TO CAMP on DVD, but try to find this CLASSIC and the clerk at the local HOLLYWOOD VIDEO might say, "LUST FOR LIFE? That would probably be in the Adult Film Section." I hope someone is working hard to preserve this Masterpiece. Anything less would be a shame. My VHS tape has been viewed so many times the magnetic particles are starting to fall off. If the DVD doesn't come out soon I'll be forced to buy another copy on VHS.(SIGH)

A flawed classic
Many people consider this to be the standard when it comes to retelling the tragic story of Vincent van Gogh's life.

The film is very good and there's no question that director Vincente Minnelli put a tremendous amount of work into bringing Van Gogh to the screen. The sets and costumes are wonderful.

I suppose that my main criticism of the film is that its "heart" seems to be more firmly set in 1950's Hollywood than in 1880's Europe. In other words, the film has a very constructed, American flavour to it. This is most glaring when many of the scenes shift from Kirk Douglas on the screen (clearly American) to a narrative reading of his letters to his brother, Theo (read by a British narrator)--very jarring. Kirk's performance, though very good, never quite "clinches" the role--he remains a very good actor on a very pretty set.

But certainly I would recommend this film to anyone with an interest in Van Gogh--not a perfect movie by any means, but there are moments that are quite remarkable.

Starry Night
There haven't been many movies made about great painters, which seems a little odd, but theirs is a static art, hard to capture on film. Producer John Houseman and director Vincente Minnelli do a great job here of placing Van Gogh's life and art before our eyes in a way calculated to whet our interest about the man. His peculiar life was stalked by some kind of mental instability; whether physical or psychological in nature nobody still knows. Kirk Douglas' fine performance is right on in portraying a troubled man trying for both artistic excellence and some kind of normalcy in life; above all a painter who held nothing back from his work. Anthony Quinn, who must have played every nationality under the sun during his career, walked off with an Oscar for his part as the flamboyant and less-gifted Paul Gaugin, destined to play second fiddle to Van Gogh's genius. The film's construction owes something to John Huston's "Moulin Rouge," of four years earlier, a bio of Toulouse-Lautrec.

"I want to create things that touch people"
With an uncanny resemblance to the self-portraits of Vincent Van Gogh, Kirk Douglas is perfect for this detailed and wonderful production of the artist's life; it's a passionate performance of a troubled soul, whose creative urges battled with his mental illness.
The film has an intelligent script by Norman Corwin, based on Irving Stone's biographical novel. It picks up the story around 1879, when Van Gogh was 26 years old, and went to minister (unsuccessfully) to the coal miners of a destitute area, and from there takes us through his many different abodes, his relationship with "Christine", who is well played by Pamela Brown, and the flourishing of his art in his last 15 years of life.

The art direction is superb, and the recreations of the places Van Gogh painted a marvel, among them the famous yellow house he lived in and its bedroom, and my favorite, the pool hall, with its hanging lamps.
The cinematography by Freddy Young and Russell Harlan is terrific, and we get many full screen views of the original paintings, many of them lesser known pieces from private collections.

This was a multi-award winning film, and garnered an Best Supporting Actor Oscar for Anthony Quinn, who is fabulous as Paul Gauguin, whose personality was the complete opposite of his friend Van Gogh; the ego clashes when they attempted to live together are well illustrated in several scenes, and with a little addition to his nose, Quinn has been made to look exactly like Gauguin's famous self-portrait with the snake.
James Donald is excellent as Vincent's patient and generous brother, who was Van Gogh's central means of support for most of his lifetime, both financially and of his paintings.
A tremendous knowledge about art went into this film, and it's one of the best artist biographies ever put to film (another good one also came from a Stone best seller, "The Agony and the Ecstasy"), and is a must-see for artists and anyone with an interest in Van Gogh's genius. Total running time is 122 minutes.

A wonderful Classic!
I'm a painter myself, have done alot of reading about the lives of these artists, and can never get over the superb performances of these actors!----Truly a superb movie classic! Five stars, in my book! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Long before Rocky Balboa went the distance, there was the original Rock--as in Knute Rockne. His story, a classic 1940 biopic, combines vintage gridiron action with heart-tugging sentiment. Yup, this is the film with the famous halftime pep talk and Ronald Reagan's "win just one for the Gipper" deathbed plea. Yeah, it's corny. But so what. Lloyd Bacon, one of Hollywood's ablest craftsmen (42nd Street), directed with just the right scrappy disregard for genre conventions. Reagan, in his third best vehicle (behind King's Row and The Killers), plays George Gipp, the Fighting Irish's first All- American, who died of pneumonia in 1920; the always-reliable Pat O'Brien plays Notre Dame coach Rockne as a living, breathing icon--part father confessor, part Patton, part idealized father figure. Before he spurs the lads to victory, he changes the face of the sport--by inventing the forward pass, no less. --Glenn Lovell ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Patrick O'Brien asks the Irish to win one for Ronald Reagan
Ronald Reagan might have gotten the nickname of the "Gipper" from this 1940 bio-pic of legendary Notre Dame football coach Knute Rockne, but it was veteran character actor Pat O'Brien who had the role of a lifetime in the lead. James Cagney had lobbied hard for the role, but when the actor signed a petition supporting the Republican (and anti-Catholic) government in the Spanish Civil War, Notre Dame refused to okay him for the part. This was the first of only two movies ever filmed on the campus in South Bend, and if you do know that the other one was "Rudy" you should at least have been able to guess it had to be that one.

"Knute Rockne All American", which was added to the National Film Registry in 1997, is a fairly standard bio-pic, evincing the almost documentary style that was standard at the time. We see how the young Rockne (played by Johnny Sheffield, a.k.a. Boy in the Johnny Weissmuller Tarzan movies) learned to love football, revolutionized the game with the forward pass, and coached his alma mater to glory with the Four Horsemen and George Gipp. The result is a long series of episodes from Rockne's life that have varying degrees of appeal, such as when he picks up the idea for his backfield shift from watching chorus girls dance and experiments with the idea using his wife and their dinner guests.

Lots of footage of actual Notre Dame games are worked into the film, although I have no way of knowing if any of it is of the actual games being portrayed (I would be curious to know). O'Brien's performance seems a tad wooden, but if you have ever seen actual film clips of Rockne you know he is in the ballpark. A lot of the charm of this film comes from the ethos of the original Rockne, an American legend who was probably the first famous victim of an airplane crash. The result is not great, but certainly compelling (plus we all learn the correct pronunciation of his name as being Ka-Nute).

Reagan's supporting role is deservedly memorable. That same year he would get to play third banana George Armstrong Custer to Errol Flynn and Olivia DeHavilland in "The Santa Fe Trail" and would provide his best performance in "King's Row" before military service in World War II effectively derailed his acting momentum and ultimately set his life on a different path.

Final Note: While there is little doubt that Rockne invented the forward pass, there is debate over one aspect of this film. In his first scene as George Gipp, Reagan is sitting around doing nothing when Rockne orders him to go in at halfback to play against the varsity and run the ball. Gipp asks "How far?" and proceeds to run it back all the way. After crossing the goal line he bounces the ball off the endzone, instead of laying it down for the "touchdown." An argument has been made that this was the first spike in the history of football. At least it is the first "recorded" spike. Did the current tradition of choreographed celebrations all stem from what Ronald Reagan did in this 1940 film? You decide if that is yet another part of the Reagan legacy that is being reconsidered this week.

Pat O'Brien asks Notre Dame to win one for Ronald Reagan
Ronald Reagan might have gotten the nickname of the "Gipper" from this 1940 bio-pic of legendary Notre Dame football coach Knute Rockne, but it was veteran character actor Pat O'Brien who had the role of a lifetime in the lead. James Cagney had lobbied hard for the role, but when the actor signed a petition supporting the Repbulican (and anti-Catholic) government in the Spanish Civil War, Notre Dame refused to okay him for the part. This was the first of only two movies ever filmed on the campus in South Bend, and if you do know that the other one was "Rudy" you should at least have been able to guess.

This film, which was added to the National Film Registry in 1997, is a fairly standard bio-pic, evincing the almost documentary style that was standard at the time. We see how the young Rockne (played by Johnny Sheffield, a.k.a. Boy in the Johnny Weissmuller Tarzan movies) learned to love football, revolutionized the game with the forward pass, and coached his alma mater to glory with the Four Horsemen and George Gipp. The result is a long series of episodes from Rockne's life that have varying degrees of appeal, such as when he picks up the idea for his backfield shift from watching chorus girls dance and experiments with the idea using his wife and their dinner guests. Lots of footage of actual Notre Dame games are worked into the film, although I have no way of knowing if any of it is of the actual games being portrayed (I would be curious to know). O'Brien's performance seems a tad wooden, but if you have ever seen actual film clips of Rockne you know he is in the ballpark. A lot of the charm of this film comes from the ethos of the original Rockne, an American legend who was probably the first famous victim of an airplane crash. The result is not great, but certainly compelling (plus we all learn the correct pronunciation of his name as being Ka-Nute).

Reagan's supporting role is deservedly memorable. That same year he would get to play third banana George Armstrong Custer to Errol Flynn and Olivia DeHavilland in "The Santa Fe Trail" and would provide his best performance in "King's Row" before military service in World War II effectively derailed his acting momentum. Final Note: While there is little doubt that Rockne invented the forward pass, there is debate over one aspect of this film. In his first scene as George Gipp, Reagan is sitting around doing nothing when Rockne orders him to go in at halfback to play against the varsity and run the ball. Gipp asks "How far?" and proceeds to run it back all the way. After crossing the goal line he bounces the ball off the endzone, instead of laying it down for the "touchdown." An argument has been made that this was the first spike in the history of football. At least it is the first "recorded" spike. Did the current tradition of choreographed celebrations all stem from what Ronald Reagan did in this 1940 film? You decide.

The Best
This is one of my favorite movies. It is the story of the greatest football coach of all time from Norway to the tragic plane crash.

A worthy addition to any classic film library
I think the true testament to this movie's appeal is that it is still watchable after more than 60 years to both hard-core football fans and those(me)who can't tell a bunt from a punt.

"Knute Rockne, All American" is based on the life of one of Notre Dame University's most ingenious and beloved coaches. The movie follows Rockne's early beginnings from his family's emigration to America, to his days as a Notre Dame student,his career as coach, and his tragic demise.

It's an inspiring movie tribute about football's evolution and Notre Dame's struggle to establish itself out of mid-western obscurity; but it is primarily about a man. A man who was a mentor to the many he coached and a revolutionary of the sport of football. By the end of the movie I came to have a deep respect for Knute Rockne as a man of intellect, passion and integrity.

Pat O'Brien does a stirring portrayal of Rockne. My one complaint regarding his performance is that he is too mature-looking to portray Rockne during his early years and perhaps they should have had another actor for those scenes.

Another little gem is seeing a young Ronald Reagan as the ill-fated George Gipp. His deathbed scene is one of the most touching moments in the whole movie.

I found the action sequences a little boring and homogenous, (perhaps followers of football will feel differently) but it does not distract from the rest of the movie. My only other complaint is the soundtrack, which seems to consist of the Notre Dame fight song played over and over again in 115 different renditions.

It's worth noting that although the cover is colorized the movie is in black and white.

Winning One For Football
Here's a truly old-fashioned movie that is very corny, but watchable. Pat O'Brien plays the title role with a lot of heart and reverence. Reagan appears briefly as "The Gipper" and I don't think he registers as well as some people remember. The movie gives you a lot of information about the early game of football and it gives you a good sense of what Rockne was like. But it really is corny. It's worth seeing, if only for the "win one for the Gipper" scenes. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

LIFEGUARD
If you consider yourself a movie fan then Lifeguard is a must see. Sam Elliot's performance as Lifeguard Rick Carlson is vintage Elliot. This performance, and his perfect performance in Mask as Garr, make Elliot one of the best actors in the past 30 years. It takes place on the beaches of LA so Elliot is tan and in the best physical shape of his career. Elliot battles the pressures of the working world, while juggling several women. It has the beach, a great love story, and of course Elliot. So if you even somewhat like movies Lifeguard is for you!

THE RIGHT MAN FOR THE JOB
The story goes that Daniel Petrie was having problems casting the lead role in his new movie, "Lifeguard." His wife had recently seen "Frogs" and she suggested that he take a look at a young actor in that movie named Sam Elliott. Bless Mrs. Petrie! Sam Elliott is so right for his role in "Lifeguard" that it's difficult to imagine the movie without him. In fact, though he's done some good work since then, nothing in Sam Elliott's career quite matches his performance here though, unfortunately, the movie didn't attract much notice when it was released back in 1975. Perhaps the audience which might have appreciated it was discouraged by an ad campaign which made "Lifeguard" look a bit like those "Beach Blanket Bingo" movies.

Actually, "Lifeguard" is a thoughtful study of a man who's happy in a job which others consider beneath him. At one point he's tempted to change his life in order to conform to others' expectations, but by the end of the movie he's decided to be his own man and to follow a course which satisfies him. This philosophy has echoes of the "do-your-own-thing" mood of the 1960's but it's presented here in a quieter, more mature form.

Still A Satisfying View!
I just took this movie off the shelf and viewed it again after a few years. The message still rings true and the storyline is still poignant and real. Sam Elliott is great in this movie as are the supporting actors. The beach scenes are fantastic and the "to thine own self be true" theme resonates long after the movie is over. I only wish the writers would have resolved Rick's relationship with his old high school flame. But I guess we can all imagine our own view of the ending. Buy it!

much better in original format
this movie is one of my favorite movies. but why did they change the original song to just plain music. the original song at the beginning and end of this film went much better with the movie then the song they have now. i wan't to get this on dvd with the original song please thank you.

A CLASSIC!
This movie was a very good film indeed.Watch sam elliot star as a man in his early 30's going thru an early mid-life crisis,trying to decide whether he should finally "so called" grow up and get a real job or stay at a job he truly loves.This film really moved me and i am truly happy of how this movie ended!Buy this video while you still can. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Lisztomania, Ken Russell's follow-up to Tommy (both films were released in 1975) finds him even more in the mood for desultory spectacle than his garish pop artistry adapting the Who's rock opera. Seeking to tellthe story of superstar composer Franz Liszt through a freewheeling series of pop allegories, kitsch, quotes, and pastiches, Russell hopes to reflect in contemporary terms the runaway train of Liszt's celebrity, love life, andalleged rivalry with Richard Wagner.

Roger Daltrey, the Who vocalist and star of Tommy, returns to Russell's circus as Liszt, a great pianist nevertheless seduced by the ease with which he can make women squeal by playing flamboyant renditions of"Chopsticks." Floating on a sea of groupies, Liszt struggles with the possibilities of real love while also encountering the vampiric Wagner's exotic plans for world domination. Intuitive impressions, not history, are what this film experience is for, and toward that end Russell pulls out all the stops, planting Liszt into a heartbreakingly Chaplinesque short film, casting Yes keyboardist Rick Wakeman as a cryogenic viking, and placing the hero in phallic jeopardy when his genitals are subjected to a guillotine.Some of this striking stuff works, some of it doesn't, but all of it is determinedly undisciplined. With Paul Nicholas as Wagner, and Ringo Starr as the Pope (!). --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Offensove at times but funny
There are many long reviews here analyzing every detail of this film. I will only say that it does become too phantasmagoric and even in its deliberate excess and offensiveness the measure of good taste is a bit lost. I do think that it's great and entertaining that some scenes are shocking, but when the shots become too fixated on the same thing, it feels like a great joke that is being told too many times - it looses its zest. To me, Mahler was a better one in terms of being better balanced. This picture is still a good entertainment, though.

ART OR FILTH?
Watch out for Oliver Reed, Georgina Hale, etc - yes, Russell alumni and up and coming Russellites are in this one! You can't quite review this one accruately based on what has been cropped out of the picture, like reviewing Mona Lisa's nose, lefteyebrow and ear ....tough! This I believe was the first dolby processed video - hence the 2 stars, the sound ain't too bad!

Now, if you can deal with synthetic rectums expelling questionable vapors, stylistic phalli as part of the Russian court decor, and yes folks, we do have that rather gigantic male member sequence ......... I believe that Roger Daltrey bequeathed this prop to his grandma after the shoot. It's a fun house devised by Russell, premise? Franz Liszt was the first POP Star! Ex Playboy bunny Fiona Lewis is spectacular as Mrs Liszt the first. Sarah Kestelman fresh off "Zardoz" as the Russian dominatrix, also have Ringo Starr, etc. etc. It's not date movie, so keep the kids away from this one [err pre-teenies!] this one grabbed an initial "x" rating - later dropped [explains itself].

Just a pity about this unletterboxed version - it must be restored and issued on DVD. [Odd sidenote "Mahler" is available on DVD, but also cropped!] What's this? Is this Ken Russell bashing? Just think of what old Ken might have done for Madonna if he directed "Evita"!

Uneven
Even if one admires Ken Russell's visual flamboyance (which I generally do), and accepts the extreme and bizarre liberties he takes with historical events, it becomes difficult to ignore Lisztomania's flaws.

Russell works with an interesting concept here: he grounds the story of Liszt (and Wagner) in psychedelically-charged historical revisionism, tinged with postmodern asides (consider, for example, the scene where Franz Liszt and his bride reenact their 'meet cute,' Chaplinesque style). And some elements are startlingly effective (the Chaplin sequence; Rick Wakeman's lyrics for "Love's Dream," set to the music of Liebestraum, that actually enrich the piece; Liszt's opening seduction, set to a metronome). But in most cases, Wakeman's lyrics drown out Lizst's genius, and Russell never rises above this production's most significant weakness: the mise-en-scene (particularly the flashy backdrop behind Liszt's glitter-covered piano) looks cheaply made and sloppily thrown-together. With a quick glimpse of Roger Daltrey flying through the air on his pipe organ-space ship (which looks about as credible as a scene from the Bugaloos), one realizes that a heftier budget would improve this film substantially.

But most critics still miss the boat when they pan Lisztomania by attacking Russell for his excessiveness. The truly rich, excessive moments in this film are the moments that make it work: in particular, Liszt's visit to the Russian countess -- where he collapses from breathing poisonous gas that comes from plaster rectums on the wall, and eventually rides into court on a twelve-foot high penis (only to have it guillotined) is hilarious and visually kinetic.

This film isn't without its rewards, particularly if you're a die-hard Russell fan, but it remains flawed and uneven.

HEAVEN SENT OPPORTUNITY TO EXERCISE IN GOING TOO FAR
I loved this movie! Don't try to make sense of the "plot"; just sit back and let it assault you. Roger Daltrey has charisma to spare. Lisztomania makes Tommy look like Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood. It is bizarre, funny, flamboyant, and a sheer joy to experience. Too bad there isn't a letterboxed version available.

Fascinating Mistake!
Only Ken Russell could have created this strange film which mixes fact with comic book fiction. One can only wonder how a major studio ever gave the green light to this production, but I am so glad it did! This is not a good film, but it is fascinating to watch. While it is typical for a Ken Russell film to be over the top, none of his other films go this far over. Rick Wakeman's adaption of Liszt and Wagner music is very interesting and the set designs are beyond strange. I suspect this film contains the most phallic symbols of any musical. Ha! And to fellow Who fans --- This movie captures Roger Daltrey at his 70's best! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Set in a time when a buildup of toxic chemicals has made most people sterile, Volker Schlondorff's film offers a disturbing view of a society under martial law in which fertile women are captured and made into handmaids to bear children for rich and infertile matrons. The film unfolds from the eyes of newly converted handmaid Kate (Natasha Richardson). She is trapped in this mysogynistic society which both deifies these fertile women as prized possessions and condemns them as whores. Throughout the story Kate has to cope with the jealousy of the woman she serves (Faye Dunaway), the advances of her sleazy military husband (the Commander, played by Robert Duvall), and the loss of her daughter, who has been shuttled off to a similarly aristocratic setting. She also falls in love with one of the Commander's security guards (Aidan Quinn), who sympathizes with her plight and potentially offers her a way out. Throughout The Handmaid's Tale, issues of feminism, abortion rights, male dominance, and conservative religious politics all come under fire. Some may view the film itself as antifemale considering its concepts, but it is quite the opposite.Instead it shows how only through solidarity can women bring down an overriding patriarchical mindset.The film, which works from Harold Pinter's screenplay adaption of Margaret Atwood's novel, features strong performances from those mentioned as well as Elizabeth McGovern and Victoria Tennant. --Bryan Reesman ... Read more

Reviews (38)

thought provoking reading and viewing
I taught this particular novel and showed the movie in my AP senior lit and comp class several years ago. After I made the decision to teach the book, I read a review in The English Journal by another teacher who had taught it. She raved about it. My students said the same things hers did..."Why did you save the best until last?" I lent my video to a student who lent it to a friend. I never got it back. The book and the movie force us all to examine how we view women...how we view women in the church...how we view women in society. They force us to examine the separation of church and state. The book is not the product of a bored, sick mind, but rather the product of a contemporary feminist author whose work routinely asks us to reexamine ourselves. The video is a good representation of the book, bringing to life events portrayed. The book is better, but the video is certainly worth watching. And for the love of God, let's not let the USA become Gilead.

a decent film of a better book
the environment--these are the facets of a bleak existence and the movie holds true to that. There are flashes of joy, mostly in the well-played interaction of the main character and her best friend, but these are few and far-between. This isn't a complaint, but fair warning.
A worse flaw, for me, were the changes made to the main character, who moves from a more honest passive character in the novel to an active, at times brave/heroic character in the film. Perhaps they thought it would have been too dark, perhaps they thought the audience wouldn't react well to a passive main character. But it robs the story of much of its truth. As does the ending, which without giving any details, is much less ambiguous than in the story.
If you've read the book it's worth seeing but be prepared for some disappointment. If you haven't read it, it's even more worth seeing, especially today when aspects of our lives like the Taliban and the Patriot Act make the story reverberate more, but don't expect to have a bunch of friends over for a laugh-fest.

An absolute insult to such a thorough and compelling book
I have recently studied this book in my AS year at college and thoroughly enjoyed it. I have so much admiration for Margaret Atwood in writing such an imaginative, yet horrifying, book. The film version does the novel no justice at all, even my lecturer said it was 'absolute bobbins.' We gain no insight into the atrocities of the Republic of Gilead and the mental/physical effects it has on the women. I would admire anyone who successfully films a version of the novel!

An Insult to Margaret Atwood.
A cheesy, thoughtless rendition of one of my favorite books. The book contains some of the most beautiful narrative told in Atwood's unmistakable prose... the movie replaces ALL of her work with this with some talentless hollywood hack's shallow after-school-special dialog... and that's just the tip of the iceberg. I'd recommend "Volcano" before I'd recommend this trash.

Very poor adaptation of an excellent novel...
I first read Margaret Atwood's book The Handmaid's Tale for a women's studies course at my local community college and I enjoyed it very much. It is a very important work, much in the same vein as Orwell's "1984," but more hopeful, and told from the perspective of a woman. However, the movie was a huge disappointment and loses much of Atwood's message.

A quick overview of the story: Offred is a Handmaid in a futuristic, dystopian society known as Gilead. The birthrate in Gilead is very low due to severe toxic pollution, and so the remaining fertile women are selected to be Handmaids whose sole purpose is to become pregnant by the upper class men (called Commanders). As soon as they provide their Commander with a child, they are packed off to another household to do it all again. If they are ever unable to bear more children, they will more than likely be labeled "Unwomen" and shipped away to a work colony to die. Handmaids are not allowed to read, and can only leave the house with permission. The book consists mostly of Offred's thoughts about her former life and her current position. There are hints of a resistance movement, but no one in this world can ever be sure that anyone else is trustworthy. Offred does not know what is real, or what is safe, and lives in constant fear. The regime has made it illegal for a man to be termed infertile, so if a Handmaid has no children, it is blamed on her without question. Offred's Commander is obviously incapable of fathering children, and she faces relocation to the colonies if she does not conceive. As her time runs out, the suspense builds to a crescendo of urgency and terror.

The film does not capture the full horror of the world Offred, the story's main character, lives in. In the movie she appears to have almost unrestricted freedom of movement, able to wander about the house and even leave it without permission (for example, she just trots off to the Red Center one day and spends the night - this never happened in the original story), whereas in the book she was monitored constantly. There is also absolutely no reference to the Handmaids not being allowed to read, so a viewer that has not read the book would likely wonder at the significance of the scene where the Commander presents Offred with a magazine as a gift. Offred also smiles quite often in the movie, and there are no allusions to her frequent thoughts of suicide, which are readily apparent in the novel.

My biggest disappointment with the movie, however, was the altered ending. Atwood's book leaves us wondering, and actually gives the reader the task of creating the end of the story themself through the way they choose to live their life. The movie, however, provides us with a very neat, tidy, pretty little ending that allows the viewer to forget all about the characters without a twinge of conscience - they're obviously ok, right? So what's that got to do with my life? The movie ending does nothing to make the viewer think or realize that if we aren't careful right here and now in our own lives, everything might not turn out so prettily. There is no lesson, or moral to the story, when Atwood very plainly intended for her work to pack a real punch.

I really don't think the novel is even a good candidate for adaptation into a movie, because the book is very slow, centering mostly around Offred's thoughts. She cannot do much, so most of the time she just sits in her room, and it is her contemplations during this time that make up the bulk of the writing. It would be very hard to accurately represent the novel in film without making the movie boring. The director of this film obviously realized this and so he spiced it up and tried to make it into an action movie. It just doesn't work.

To make matters worse, the acting in the film is very wooden. Natasha Richardson, who plays the main character, is particularly unconvincing. It is hard to feel for the characters because they just don't seem real. The whole atmosphere of the film is stiff and unnatural.

Nevertheless, before I close, I would like to point out the few things I actually did like about the movie (and hence why I'm giving it two stars rather than just one):

The scene depicting the monthly "ceremony" is particularly moving. It is rather hard to watch, but I believe it really captures the event as described in the novel. I particularly liked the fact that the camera focuses for a moment on Serena Joy at the end of the scene, showing her emotions as the Wife - something we don't get so much of in the novel.

The movie also does a good job of showing the relationship between Offred and the Commander. The viewer can easily see that the Commander sees Offred as a pet - something fun to play with and indulge, but nothing he really cares about. She is like a toy for him, and one that can easily be replaced, just as Offred has replaced the Handmaid before her.

Overall, though, I would not recommend this movie to anyone. It just doesn't convey the message that Atwood intended, and it's not even very entertaining in and of itself. Read the book instead. You'll get so much more out of it. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

meh.
Yawn. A fairly dull "historical" romantic adventure tale starring Gregory Peck as a bon vivant schooner captain whose sailing run, between Russian-owned Alaska and the newly founded San Francisco boomtown, brings him into conflict with the Tsarist forces in charge of the far North. The film starts out with great promise, but grinds to a halt with a slow-moving romantic plot involving the rather unappealing, pinch-faced Ann Blythe. Unfortunately, when he finally gets back to sea, the action sequences are hardly more lively, or better directed. What was up with this film? Was it just a bad season for director Raoul Walsh? Well, whatever it was, I was mucho bored for much of this film. I did manage to amuse myself with the thought that the loquacious John McIntire's character would stay up in Alaska after the film's end and later found the town of Skagway, which he would rule with an evil, iron fist. (See: "The Far Country," from 1954, if you want to get the joke...) Anthony Quinn also co-stars, in yet another broadly played ethnic role. You're better off seeing him play opposite Peck in the vastly superior "Guns Of Navarrone."

Sailor's Delight
This would be a typical Hollywood costume epic of the 1950's, carried mostly by star power and production values. But!! If you like sailing ship sequences, this has one of the best ever filmed. It is worth getting just for the race to Alaska.

Disappointing
I really expected great things from this movie, but it left me sorely disappointed. With such great actors as Peck and Quinn I was sure this flick couldn't miss. Unfortunately the phony bombastic nature of the piece left me cold. Totally unrealistic( as opposed to say Moby Dick)it concentrated on lavish costumes and ornate sets with next to no attention to dialogue or story line. Quinn's character was so obnoxiusely phony and bombastic I thought I was going to be sick, as I love Quinn's work in Barrabas. The phony bravada of almost all the characters was totally unrealistic and made me sick. The ultimate in flowery Hollywood nonesense depending solely on visuals and nothing else. I see now why I never saw this before- it was being hidden for good reason...

I love this movie.
It is a wonderful blend of action, adventure, romance and just the right touch of comedy, even if occasionally absurd. Anthony Quinn's characterization of the Portuguee would have stolen this film from a lesser actor than Gregory Peck, but he manages to hold up his end quite well. Ann Blyth is regal enough to play any royal. She hardly sings in this film at all. I always enjoy The World in His Arms.

The World In His Arms
Wonderfully light romantic film full of gorgeous costumes, action and adventure similar to old Errol Flynn swashbuckling movies. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Director Henry Hathaway never hesitated to return to a picturesque location that had served him well. There's no more striking example than his sequel-in-spirit to the enchanting early-Technicolor Trail of the Lonesome Pine (1936). This time, the enchantment is darker, just as Charles Lang Jr.'s stunning cinematography represents a quantum leap in sophistication over Trail's pleasant pictorialism. The long-running Appalachian feud of the earlier film is replaced by a spooky familial curse that has almost literally poisoned one Ozark household and could perpetuate a tragic cycle of violence and vengeance in another.

John Wayne would win an Oscar under Hathaway's direction three decades later (for True Grit), so it's all the more noteworthy that his performance in this singular yet neglected film--as a son sworn to kill the father he has never met--was his most complex to date. Perhaps Wayne was challenged by the company he was keeping, including New York stage veterans Betty Field (as his tomboy love), James Barton, and Marc Lawrence (cast against type as the mute, lightning-struck cousin who dotes on Wayne's every move). Or maybe it was the prospect of sharing the screen with that old lion and premier Western role model, Harry Carey. There's also powerful work by Beulah Bondi, who as a matriarch from hell all but gives off sulfur fumes, and by the amazing Marjorie Main, playing a blind woman who sees for the first time on a mountaintop above the clouds. Get ahold of this movie, and it will get a hold on you. --Richard T. Jameson ... Read more

Reviews (1)

An Interesting and Unusual Film
Shepherd of the Hills is a fine film with wonderful colour photography of stunning mountain locations. There is a real sense of remoteness about the places filmed, which is vital for the story, for the people living in the hills have had little contact with the outside world and are thus unaware of things like personal cheques and telephones. Their lives are governed by such things as superstitions, curses and long-running feuds and they try to keep the outside world out. Thus they resent excise men, intruders and any strangers.

The story of the film revolves around the appearance of one such stranger, Harry Carey. John Wayne may be the nominal star of the film, but the larger and more important role is Carey's. Carey was once a major silent Western star, but his more familiar roles to modern viewers are smaller parts in such films as Mr Smith Goes to Washington, and later Wayne Classics The Angel and the Badman and Red River. It is a great pleasure to see him in a major part for his acting is subtle, quiet and undemonstrative. Wayne admired and learned a lot from Carey, their scenes together are some of the highlights of the film. The acting of the whole cast is in fact one of the main reasons to watch this film. There are many familiar faces giving fine performances, including Marjorie Main, as an old blind woman who regains her sight, Beulah Bondi as a vicious matriarch and Ward Bond, who sometimes seems to be in every other film made during this period. Also worthy of special mention is the beautiful Betty Field who is adorable as Wayne's girlfriend trying desperately to tame his wildness.

Shepherd of the Hills can be described as a sort of Western. It has many typical Western features, fistfights, shootouts, but it also has many elements which are unusual and surprising. This film is really worth getting for John Wayne fans and it is surprising that it is not better known, for it includes one of his best performances. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Let's be honest: this should be titled Wretched Excess' Frankenstein. Swooping, wild, bloody, and energetic, this is bad moviemaking from the best, which makes it all the more lovable. Kenneth Branagh plays Victor Frankenstein, a man so obsessed with conquering death that he decides to create life. What he gets, after a protoplasmic mud wrestle, is a Mean Streets monster (Robert De Niro) that isn't particularly happy to be back from the dead or thrilled about all the stitches. Helena Bonham Carter may, at several points in this film, actually be channeling Ramtha. The supporting cast couldn't be peopled with better performers (Tom Hulce, John Cleese, Ian Holm) but they all look like they're ringside at some Ultimate Fighting competition. A must for any midnight movie collector for the shock factor alone. A hoot. --Keith Simanton ... Read more

Reviews (90)

not too scary, more sad
This was a good movie with a good point about the way society doesn't always accept people who are different. But, I was really disappointed. When I read that Robert De Niro was in this movie playing Frankenstein's monster, and that it was a horror movie, I was expecting an entertaining, wild, bloody, eerie, and terrifying horror about a mad monster. But, instead, it was a very sad film. I almost wanted to cry. Just thinking about the scene in which Frankenstein's monster kills a good-hearted woman makes me sad. And, what's so sad is that the monster wasn't truly a monster at heart. He had love inside him, but nobody understood him, so he reacted with violence. The sadness of the film makes it less enjoyable to watch. Overall, it is a good movie though. But, don't watch this film if you are prone to weeping about sad scenes in movies. And, I wouldn't recommend watching this movie if you're looking for a scary movie, because it's not all that scary. If you like science, and you enjoy creating strange experiments, and science fiction, and watching tragedies befall upon good people, I recommend this movie.

A worth-while version
As film adaptions of Frankenstein go, this is more accurate than most. It's good to see the Arctic climax restored, as it is so often omitted. Kenneth Branagh has made a satisfying, staightforward version of the story, thankfully containing little of the wayward characterisation and tricksy camera work which combine to sink Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula. The horror element has been toned down a bit, although the section where Frankenstein ressurects Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) is quite disturbing.

Just a word about the creation scene, which is somewhat different to the 'thunder and lightning' scenario we have become used to. The monster floats in a tank full of amniotic fluid, which Frankenstein moves about the laboratory by means of chains and pulleys. The spark of life is provided by power generated from electric eels. Frankenstein, stripped to the waist, slips and slides on the fluid that has now poured onto the floor, and strikes the monster on the back, in the manner of a doctor slapping a new-born baby. It certainly gives a novel slant to a familiar situation.

Branagh directs and also plays the part of Frankenstein with energy and gusto. Robert DeNiro makes a formidable monster, but also manages to elicit our sympathy for his plight, which is just how it should be. The supporting performances from a host of well known British actors are generally good, perhaps the most interesting being John Cleese. He does well in a straight role as Dr. Waldemann, who takes Frankenstein under his wing at medical school. The comic relief is provided by Tom Hulce as Frankenstein's friend, Henry Clerval.

This is a good and entertaining version of Frankenstein, and well worth a look.

Not an authentic adaptation of the book, but still fun.
"Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" is an incredibly melodramatic adaptation of the book that takes huge liberties with the plot, but I still find it thoroughly entertaining. The movie is perfectly cast, and I think that the embellishments that Kenneth Branagh takes with the story only make the film more enjoyable. Even though I doubt that Dr. Frankenstein ran around without a shirt on as much as Branagh does in the film, most women will probably find it quite enjoyable. Robert DeNiro is amaing in his role of "the creature," and Helena Bonham Carter gives a great performance as Elizabeth. If you're the type of person who detests it when filmmakers stray too far from the text of the book they're adapting, then this film probably isn't for you. If you're a bit more open-minded and are just looking for an entertaining movie to watch, this is a perfect film to add to your collection.

Ingolstadt,?
The scene with the crowd was gathered during the lynching,
did'nt the caption say Ingolstadt and is'nt Ingolstadt in
Germany?

I am wondering why De Niro was talking like an englishman
and the crowd sounded like english too?

Maybe I missing something; should'nt the people so german?
I remember like thirty years ago about you should be true
to your heritage.

Excellnt film!
This is bye far, the best remake of Frankenstein ever. This is better than the Frankenstein sequel's to, well MOST of the Frankenstein sequel's at lest. Comes very close to the perfect book written by Mary Shelley. Some people said this was bad because there was to much drama. Will people stop being Nerd's! ... Read more

Reviews (49)

Very fun horror flick.
Okay, so it's not a masterpiece, but there's no doubt that Night of the Demons makes for great fun for horror fans. Most of the acting is subpar, the plot's unoriginal, but it has everything a horror fan could want. There's a great creepy setting inside a giant, old (and possessed) house. There's gratuitous nudity and a lot of good-looking girls (Forget Linnea Quigley, Cathy Podewell is hot!). Plus, a lot of well-directed suspense scenes all set into a rollercoaster ride in the last 40 minutes as the humans try to hide from the dem