Reviews (36)

Spectacular!
The novel Death On The Nile ranks as my favorite of all of the Christie novels I've read, and so I was hoping that this movie was faithful to the original material. I'm happy to say I wasn't disappointed.

The performances of the many actors are great. Simon MacCorkindale's portrayal of Simon Doyle is wonderful, and Angela Lansbury as Salome Otterbourne is very entertaining. Maggie Smith and Bette Davis as Miss Bowers and Miss Van Schuyler, respectively, have some wonderful scenes together and have great chemistry. David Niven as Colonel Johnny Race is great and makes for a good Watson to Poirot. Jack Warden as Dr. Bessner and Jon Finch as Jim Ferguson, while don't have a ton of screentime, still portray their characters perfectly, and of course Peter Ustinov as the great Belgian detective Hercule Poirot is great.

The scenery is beautiful. The scene where Simon and Linnet Doyle are climbing the pyramid is simply breathtaking.

The extras on the DVD are pretty good. The 24-minute featurette "The Making of Death On The Nile" is interesting, and the interviews (both in French with subtitles) with Peter Ustinov and Jane Birkin (who plays Louise Bourget), while not extremely interesting, are still a nice addition.

There are a few flaws in the movie. The largest one is the fact that they cut out Tim and Mrs. Allerton. For those of you who have read the book, you'll know that cutting out Tim Allerton changes a few important things. Cornelia Robson is also cut out, as well as James Fanthorp and Signor Richetti (which again changes a few things). While I did like these characters a lot in the book, during the movie, these characters were hardly missed.

The movie runs approximately 2 hours and 20 minutes, and despite the PG rating, has some slightly graphic violence in it.

I would highly reccomend buying this DVD, however, I would suggest reading the book first.

Christie goes to Egypt
This big screen treatment of mystery author Agatha Christie's best-seller is dinstinguished by the first appearance of Peter Ustinov as the world famous sleuth, Hercule Periot. Though the film version of "Death on the Nile" doesn't rise to the quality of its immediate predecessor, "Murder on the Orient Express," it is still a worthy trip with a boatful of nouveau rich upper classers who all have a motive to kill a filthy rich heiresss (Lois Childs). When she actually come up with a bullet to her head while sleeping, suspicion falls on her husband's spurned ex-fiancee (Mia Farrow, in a slightly nerve-trying overacting job) and an all-star passenger list headed by Bette Davis, Maggie Smith, Angela Lansbury and Olivia Hussey. Enter Inspector Periot and David Niven as another sleuth aiding in the investigation. Though the "who did it" isn't a surpise, the "how they did it" is, and that solution makes the film an enjoyable watch. Additionally, there's some stunning scenary of Egypt and along the Nile, and Ustinov's personification of the fabled detective is worthy. He shows up again in subsequent film versions of some of Christie's other novels, and this is one of Ustinov's better efforts.

The MAID did it!! Or did she??
=====>

I watched this 1978 movie of 140 minutes without first reading the 1937 Dame Agatha Christie novel (of the same name) that it was based on. I'm glad I did this! Why? Because it forced me to really watch the movie in order to try and deduce who the murderer was.

As a brief synopsis, the movie begins with "Jacquline ('Jackie') De Bellafort" (Mia Farrow) telling her very wealthy friend "Linnet Ridgeway" (Lois Chiles) about the man "Simon Doyle" (Simon MacCorkindale) she has fallen in love with. Linnet falls for Simon and they eventually marry. Their honeymoon is on a riverboat (technically called a 'paddle steamer') called the "S.S. Karnak" that takes then down the Nile River in Egypt. Aboard the boat, besides the three mentioned above, are "Hercule Poirot" (Sir Peter Ustinov) and his good friend "Colonel Johnny Race" (David Niven). There are other passengers on board who all dislike Linnet.

Linnet is murdered. Eventually two other passengers are also murdered. Poirot has to solve who the killer is. For both Poirot and the viewer, it's obvious that the killer is either male or female or, as Poirot might say, either a "beau" or a "belle." It's also obvious that the killer is no "Simple Simon."

Who are these passengers? Besides the five mentioned above, they are as follows:

(1) Louise Bourget, Linnet's Maid (Jane Birkin)
(2) Socialite Marie Van Schayler (Bette Davis)
(3) Miss Bowers (Maggie Smith), Aid to Marie
(4) Marxist James Ferguson (Jon Finch)
(5) Romance Novelist Salome Otterbourne (Angela Lansbury)
(6) Rosalie Otterbourne (Olivia Hussey), Salome's daughter
(7) Lawyer Andrew Pennington (George Kennedy), Linnet's uncle
(8) Dr. Ludwig Bessner (Jack Warden)
(9) Manager of the Karnak (I.S. Johar)

Of the fourteen actors mentioned above, Ustinov's performance stands out. This was his debut performance as Poirot and I feel he does a stellar job being both serious and comical at the same time. Other performances to look for are Mia Farrow as the ex-fiance and Angela Lansbury as the perpetually drunk novelist.

The cinematography of this movie is visually stunning. We especially get to see the Sphinx, the Pyramids, and the ancient ruins of Egypt. The costume design is elegant. The main background music adds to this movie as well.

Listen for gags that run throughout this movie. For example, Poirot is Belgian but is always confused as being French. One of my favorite pieces of dialogue is where a passenger gets angry at the great sleuth:

Van Schayler: You perfectly foul French upstart!
Poirot: Belgian upstart, please madam.

As Poirot attempts to solve the crime, we are shown what might have happened. Unfortunately, there is some unintended humor as Linnet continually gets shot (in the head) as Poirot goes through each possible scenario. I found this somewhat distracting.

Finally, the DVD (which has the movie in widescreen format) has five extras. I found that the only one that was interesting was about the making of this movie. It lasts about 25 minutes.

In conclusion, this is a fun movie, even if you have read the book. For those who haven't read the novel, I have left clues in the above review as to the possible identity of the killer. If you think you know who it is, then watch this movie to find out if you're right!

<=====>

A Mysterious Movie and a Superb Tale!
It begins with a rich woman who gets EVERYTHING SHE WANTS and when her best friend Jackie's new fiance meets her. The rich woman immediatly steals Jackie's hunk and in a matter of weeks they are married and set off for their honeymoon in Egypt. Poor Jackie. Her only love has been stolen for her BY HER BEST FRIEND! But Jackie is determined and follows the new couple to Egypt. After meeting a host of new characters, the couple plus Jackie boards a little Nile tour thing. But suddenly the rich woman is dead (shot). Who could it be?

All Star cast who-done-it in Egypt.
The second lavish all-star Agatha Christie adaptation. This is the first film with Peter Ustinov as the Belgian Detective, Hercule Poirot. If you love a who-done-it mystery, this one will keep you thinking and stimulate your brain to the very end. Please watch it to the very last second. What may be so one minute may be different the next second. This all-star cast is wonderful, especially Angela Lansbury. Olivia Hussey, Peter ustinov and Simon Corkindale had just finished the NBC tv-miniseries movie "Jesus Of Nazareth" (1977). Also in the cast is Bette Davis, David Niven, Mia Farrow, George Kennedy, Maggie Smith (California Suite [1978], Jack Warden, Lois Chiles (Moonraker [1979]), Jon Finch, Jane Birkin, Harry Andrews and I.S. Johar. Warning: This is not for children to watch. very Grusome and graphic violence. There are many Agatha Christie movies from film and television. Here are some worth watching. Those with an "*" include Peter Ustinov as "Detective Poirot". And Then There Were None (Ten Little Indians) (1974), Murder On The Orient Express (1974), The Mirror Crack'd (1980), *Evil Under The Sun (1982), *Thirteen At Dinner (1985-tv), *Dead Man's Folly (1986-tv), *Murder In Three Acts (1986-tv), *Appointment With Death (1988).
For a lighter comedy, may I suggest MURDER BY DEATH (1976). ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of Woody Allen's best films of the '90s, Bullets over Broadway stars John Cusack as a virtual Woody surrogate, a neurotic, Jazz Age writer whose new play sounds wooden and unrealistic to a low-level mobster (Chazz Palminteri) assigned to watch over his boss's actress-girlfriend (Jennifer Tilly). When the hood starts contributing better story ideas and dialogue than what the official playwright can conjure, questions (not unlike those of Amadeus) about the price we pay to make art at the expense of other responsibilities are intriguingly raised. Palminteri gives a very interesting performance as the enforcer waking up to the desperate (and almost feminine) demands of his own creative psyche, and Dianne Wiest (who won an Oscar), Tracey Ullman, Jim Broadbent, and Jennifer Tilly are very funny together playing the ensemble cast of Cusack's play. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (26)

Don't speak, just laugh!
Oh Woody, Woody, Woody. When he is funny, he is one of the best comic writers around, and in this movie his writing is hilarious. What other auteur in the cinema today can poke fun at those little idiosyncracies that we all see in ourselves, and get away with it?
Our hero, in a rare departure is not played by Woody Allen but rather, John Cusack, who gives a subtle performance, rather than the over-the-top pisstake by Kenneth Branagh in "Celebrity". He is trying to get his latest play staged, and can only do so by accepting money from the Mob and having a mobster's girlfriend, with no talent, take one of his lead roles. The humour that ensues centres around each of the plays characters, from the fading diva played by Dianne Wiest to the compulsive eater played by the magnificent Jim Broadbent, as they prepare for the play's debut on Broadway. All the performances are spot on and the only criticism comes in the ham-fisted fashion that the film concludes with a mobsters shootout and its all too happy ending.
Nevertheless this is well worth watching to hear great comic lines and the splendid cast who deliver them.

Pure hilarity
As a die hard Woody Allen fan, I can honestly state that this is one of his best efforts. The characters are so incredibly good (dare I say delicious?) and the actors who bring them to life are equally exquisite. From Dianne Wiest ("Don't speak...Don't speak") to Jennifer Tilly ("Hey, Venus, where's that hooch?") to Chaz Palmentieri("You don't write the way people talk")to John Cusack ("I think I'll go now and get the psychiatric help I need"). The rest of the cast is equally marvelous, especially Tracey Ullman. She really is nothing short of brilliant in everything she does. This movie is just a delight throughout. It is truly droll and clever, never once loosing it's intelligence. The attention to detail is admirable, so much so that the film seemingly leaps out at you from the screen. I've seen this film more times than I care to mention and each time I find myself enjoying it more. Only Woody Allen could have devised such an ironic plot twist. He is, without question, the O. Henry of the cinema. One final note: No one, and I mean no one, can make New York seem more fabulous and intoxicating than Mr. Allen. All his films are love letters to this the greatest of American cities. This is to the person who accused Woody Allen of preaching through the Rob Reiner character: Give me a major break. He was spoofing the tendency of some over-indulgent artists to dramatize and take himself too seriously. Sometimes a cigar, my friend, is just a cigar. Don't read so much into things. It can sometimes get you into trouble.

Funny, funny, funny!!
And funny. Great casting, great script, funny dialogue and good directing. The wonderful thing about this whole flick -- Woody Allen decided NOT to be in it. One of his better decisions he's made in years. (Thanks for giving us a break and breather from your repeatible and stale roles Woody!) Don't miss this little-known gem.

Were they trying to make a movie that makes no sense?
I'm not stupid, but this movie made no sense whatsoever. I didn't understand one bit of the boring, mindless conversations, characters, their purpose, etc. And a plot..? Don't even ask. This "sophisticated" comedy (where they got comedy I'll never know as this wasn't the least bit funny) was dull, shallow entertainment. The theme I got out of this movie was "You're not always who you think you are." A theme that could have easily been told in half the time it took this long, dragged out film. Don't believe what the critics say about this. Siskel and Ebert rated it two thumbs up but what do they know? They gave Gosford Park (warning: stay away) the same rating (Actually, that last one was Ebert and Roeper, but they're basically the same). Take my advice and rent something that wasn't directed by Woody Allen. Every one of his movies I've had the nerve to sit through entirely (without falling asleep or turning it off), have been a complete waste of my time. I kept waiting for the ending thinking (and hoping) it would make the movie. It didn't. Those who enjoyed this movie obviously classify it as a work of art much like Shakespeare: boring, but a masterpiece nonetheless. The only reason to watch this movie (by renting it, NOT buying it) is to see the always brilliant Diane Weist in her Oscar-winning performance.

decent
this movie was enjoyable, but not the best woody allen i've seen. ... Read more

Reviews (28)

IT'S ABOUT TIME!
I'm so glad that Disney finally came to their senses and decided to release this treasure on DVD. In my opinion, this is one of Disney's best. Starring Peter Ustinov, Dean Jones, and Suzanne Pleshette, this movie has comedy, action, and no worry of bad language or sex. Dean Jones plays a track coach who arrives in a new town, one with many tales and mysteries. Jones arrives at a hotel owned by families of pirates who roamed the area hundreds of years ago. The families are giving an auction to save their beloved, historical home from money-grubbing gamblers who tend to turn the hotel into a casino. When Jones suddenly finds himself bidding on an auction in competition with the football coach, he unwillingly wins a bed-warmer with a story, suposedly coming from Blackbeard the pirate. He soon discovers that he got much more than he bargained for! This wholesome comedy will keep a smile on your face all the way through, Disney fan or not!

Blackbeard's Ghost Should Have Stayed Away
While not a great moment in movie history, Blackbeard's Ghost is a fun film for families and stars the always-great Peter Ustinov. I had been looking forward to it's release on DVD as the print I had on VHS was so terrible, I felt surely that the DVD would offer a better print (and based on the quality of the prints on the recently-released Vault Disney titles I had purchased, I felt even more assured that it would). I was sooooo disappointed today when I received my copy of Blackbeard's Ghost. Of all of the DVDs I have purchased from a name studio, this has to be the worst I have ever seen. The print used seems to be the same as the one used for the old VHS I have. The picture contrast is terrible. The print itself is full of scratches and blemishes and the picture is very grainy. Worst of all it is presented in full screen (I seem to remember reading it would be widescreen when it was first announced), which leaves parts of the picture lopped off. An example of this is when Dean Jones' character is talking to a student while driving and the right half of Jones' face is missing while the left half of the student's is gone. The biggest example of the low quality of the print used is the opening titles. Since the film was not presented in widescreen (although it wouldn't have been too wide, I'm sure), the opening credits are "squished" up, with the picture being presented slightly off-center, leaving about a 1 1/2 inch black space up the left side of my screen. I know this film is not considered a classic by most, but I was hoping Disney would have thought it was and done better than this. Maybe some day they will.

Cute movie, Bad DVD
I enjoyed the movie. Ustinov was soo funny he made the movie for me. Of course the movie is pretty inane, but I knew that before I bought it. What I didn't know is that the DVD quality is the worst I have ever seen. The sound also had scratches and pops. The picture is faded and streaked. I like these kinds of movies, but I now look to the reviews before I buy Disney movies. For the cost I think they could restore them (and in general make them widescreen).

Pirates are cool!
I don't know why, but this movie never ceases to amuse me. The goofy pirate combined with 1960's Disney humor and Dean Jones just makes this movie so entertaining that you'll watch it over and over again. If you like classic Disney movies as much as I do, you definately need to add this one to your collection.

Video quality? Expected better...
This of course is an excellent movie - Ustinov is excellent as well as Dean.

However, I honestly expected better quality video from a re-released classic movie from Disney. The opening credits are truncated on the left side - it almost appeared that the opening credis were done with a hand-held video camera (someone with the wiggles of course). Tons of video artifacts exist throughout the movie (white dust, contrast problems, scratches, blooming, and washed out color etc.). It doesn't seem to have been given the "Snow White" treatment that other released products have gone through. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Please Re-Release This Video!
This was the first of the "Not Quite Human" series based on the novels by Seth McEvoy. There were 2 sequels following this film: One in 1989 and one in 1992. This has been my all-time favourite for about 3 years now. I first saw it in May of 1998 and I just fell in love with it!!! It is definetly a movie of the 80s!!!

Dr. Jonas Carson (Alan Thicke) invents an Andriod (who is later called "Chip") in his home. He looks like any other adolesent and nobody could tell if he was human or not. He goes to school with his sister Becky (Robyn Lively) and does anything else like any other modern teenager in modern day middle America. W

What they don't know is that his former employer is out to steal the android to re-program him! Good Grief!

What happens next.....watch it and find out (...). Recommended! ... Read more

Reviews (11)

Dr.Terror's House of Horrors
Amicus made several horror films,this being one of the better. Several men on a commuter train meet the mysterious Dr.Shrek (Peter Cushing).He tells them,one by one,how they will die using his Tarot cards.Some stories are better than others(The disbelieving Christopher Lee's called "Disembodied Hand" is the best tale in the film,IMO)Also a very young Donald Sutherland is one of the doomed in Dr.Terror's House of Horrors!!

Strong horror anthology
Amicus films pulled Hammer standards Cushing and Lee into doing this overall entertaining horror anthology. The story begins on a train where fortune teller Cushing uses his tarot cards to predict the unenviable futures of five men. The first two stories are probably the weakest, but hold tight because they get better. The third tale is a about voodoo and it is considerably better than the first two. The real gems are the last two entries of the five. The fourth story has Christopher Lee as a snooty art critic who gets pursued by a relentless severed hand and the fifth is an interesting vampire story starring a young Donald Sutherland. This film is definitely reccommended, just remember it gets better as it goes along.

Not bad, if I do have to say so myself.
Upon first reading the title, one might assume that this 1965 horror anthology was simply another cheap haunted house cookie cutter flick. However, when I actually viewed "Dr. Terror's House of Horrors," I realized that this movie (although not the BEST one conceived, in my opinion) was something that really DID hold my interest. Basically, the concept is this: the entire film takes place inside a train, where 5 gentleman (who have never seen each other before) sit together and wait to reach an unnamed destination. During the trip, these 5 passengers each have their futures foretold by a 6th individual; he turns out to be the mysterious, eccentric Doctor Sandor Shreck (Peter Cushing) who relies on a deck of Tarot cards to investigate the supernatural effects of fear and terror. The Doctor instructs each reluctant participant to tap the deck 3 times; afterwards the first 4 images confirm the listener's destiny, while an extra 5th card explains exactly how to avoid it. Then the fun really begins as each passenger's story is unveiled: Jim Dawson (Neil McCallum), a hard-working architect, is asked to renovate a widow's mansion, where later on he discovers an ancient Werewolf's coffin hidden in the basement. Bob Carroll (Donald Sutherland), a happily married man, is terrorized by a clinging vine creeping on the side of the house; an intelligent plant that becomes increasing maniacal against humankind. Biff Bailey (Roy Castle) is an ambitious jazz performer who steals the rhythms of an ancient voodoo ritual in an effort to compose a hit song; unwilling to take the West Indies culture seriously, Bailey learns the hard way why one must never pilfer music from an ancient, jealous god. Perhaps my favorite spooky tale is that of Franklyn Marsh (Christoper Lee), a snobbish art critic who coldly dismembers a painter's hand in a hit-and-run drive. When the desvastated victim commits suicide, his amputated hand returns to life for one purpose: vengeance! The film's final passenger, Doctor Blake (Max Adrian), is newly wedded to a gorgeous, seductive French woman who is later revealed to be a ravenous vampire.
I decided to rate this movie 4 stars because there are a few cinematic flaws. In some scenes (especially in the early half of the film), the acting did not seem convincing to me; such performances still leave something to be desired. In addition, a couple of the gentlemens' death scenes were fairly cheesy. But despite such mistakes, "Dr Terror" is worth watching all the way through, as it is glued together by a decent concept not always used in the horror genre. Also keep in mind that the twisting plotline flows from one scene to the next, without ANY excessive dialogue.

Found Again, movie from my youth
I remember being a child that did not like horror movies. My friend tried to make me watch Freddy and Jason when I was little and I had to hide in the bathroom and had nightmares for weeks. Well, I remember flipping channels and seeing a movie that was divided up into stories. It was a little too scary for me then, but I remembered it. Then a few more times over the years I came across this movie again and watched it. I now relate it to another Peter Cushing movie, The original Tales From the Crypt. They take a group of people and tell stories about all of them separately and shows how it affects the group pretty much. It is very campy, but if you enjoy older horror movies and want some fun on a Saturday this is a good movie for it. Definitely worth a chance. Keep the faith, dExtrosien

Pick a Card! Any Card!
I first saw this film when I was five years old. It scared the begeezes out of me then and stuck with me my entire life. Seeing it again 35 years later was quite a treat. While it no longer frightened me - lovers of schlock and modern special effects should steer clear of this one - I did find it morbidly entertaining. The film has a strong cast, headed by the dynamic horror duo - Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. A young Donald Sutherland also has a role. While I think all of the stories are good, some stand well above the others. The Werewolf story was exquisitely done, as was the Creeping Hand story. And the Vampire story has a great twist at the end, while the Voodoo story seemed to me the weakest. I would definitely recomend this film to anyone who enjoys slightly campy, 60s era horror films a la Hammer and Arkoff. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Wunderbar!
Tarantella is Mira Sorvino's breakthrough performance. She shines almost as brightly as she did in the classic hit "New York Cop." ... Read more

Reviews (33)

The must see Christmas movie after Miracle on 34th Street
There are several Christmas movies with heart: Going My Way, Miracle on 34th Street, It's a Wonderful Life. All of these movies are shown countless times during the season. We're No Angels is a rarely seen, light comedy, with Bogart, Peter Ustinov, and Basil Rathbone. I only wish the copy I loaned someone would come back.

THE funniest Christmas Movie ever made !
Anytime I visit my local Video store around the Christmas Season,I have to remind the Manager,that besides " Miracle on 34 th. Street " and the usual array of "feel good" movies for the holidays,this one is never on the shelf with the others..but it should be ! The combination of Bogart,Peter Ustinov and Aldo Ray is perfect.Every cliche,like " poisonous snakes always get the bad guy,the good guy can pick it up with his bare hands "...has been met head on,and they work well.All the characters are endearing and the end is wonderful,I see it every Christmas along with " The Bishophs Wife ".Who would not want to sit and have 90 minutes with Bogie & Co. ? Not me !!!!

RELEASE IN DVD
Really fantastic movie, we need it out in DVD and letterbox.
It is a wonderful funny movie.
Please vote for DVD.

top ten holiday season movies
This is a movie for all. It's a delight to watch again and again, each time hearing more of the softly spoken hilarious asides. Zero Mostel and Aldo Ray are great and Humphrey Bogart is wonderful at comedy.

GREAT MOVIE
All you really have to say about this movie is that it is a must see film. The movie is not meant to be historical about Devils Island, it just takes place there. It is just meant to be a fun movie and it does that extremely well. A MUST SEE FOR ALL AGE GROUPS. Good watching!! ... Read more

Reviews (170)

This movie was great, despite it's fictional entities
When I first saw this movie I was blown away buy it. Since then it has become one of my favorite movies of all time. Like many other people this movie gave me false ideas about Witchcraft, which I found otherwise as fictional. Even now as a practitioner of Wicca I still find it to be a great movie. This movie was made for entertainment purposes and not to persuade or disuade anyone one way or the other.

Fairuza Balk as Nancy was awesome. She played and looked the part so well and I don't think anyone could have done a better job. The movie is based around three teenage girls classified as the misfits of the school. They come together to form a small coven and cast spells one themselves and other people. Sarah is the newcomer who is quickly accepted into their circle. As the movie progresses things get out of hand and Nancy ends up way in over her head and it's up to Sarah to use her powerful inheritated gift of magick to stop her. I suggest this movie for anyone who wants to be thrilled.

Craft Services
The Craft is a solid, yet still somewhat predictable thriller, that tried to ride the surging horror wave started by Scream.

Sarah Baily (Robin Tunney) has always felt like an outsider all her life. So, when she and her Dad (Cliff De Young) move to a new town, she finds herself having to start fresh. As the new gal at St. Benedict's Academy, she immediately falls in with the high school's female misfits. But, this group of girls won't settle for being just powerless outcasts, that nobody wants to hang out with. Indeed, Nancy, (Fairuza Balk) Bonnie, (Neve Campbell), and Rochelle (Rachel True) have discovered just how much fun school can be if you have the skills to use "The Craft" and they plan to show Sarah the way.

Director and co scripter Andrew Fleming plays things pretty safe throughout the film. The tried and true horror formula isn't tested that much. Young and trendy stars populate the cast, with moments of humor and a few jolts, thrown in for good measure. The breakout performance for me here is Balk's sassy Nancy. She is one tough witch you don't want to mess with. She helps make the film better than it would be otherwise. As with any film about the wicken way, there's also a certain female "bonding" subtext that has to play itself out, as well.

The special edition DVD substitutes for the movie only edition from awhile back. The audio commentary from Fleming is a nice mix of the tecnical and on set trivia about the film. There are two making Of featurettes on the disc. The first,is a six minute EPK style prepublicity kind of thing, while the second is a 24 minute retrospective, produced for the DVD. Conjuring THE CRAFT features "new" interviews with Fleming, Robin Tunny, Rachel True among others, intermixed with on set comments from Balk and Campbell. This is well produced. Fleming provides commentary for the deleted footage that, doesn't really amount to much as far as the final version is concerned The entire film score from Greame Revell is preserved and given its due as an isolated music track. Talent files, as well as, theatrical trailers for The Craft, among other films top off the bonus material on the disc. Addtional production notes can be found inside the keep case.

The Craft is worth a dabble, with a *** and a half star rating, as long as your expectations are kept in check.

These Girls Know Their Rites!
Sarah Bailey (Robin Tunney) is the new kid in town, but even under the best of circumstances she has never been accepted by the popular crowd. At her new school, she falls in with a trio of other female misfits (Fairuza Balk, Neve Campbell, and Rachel True) who, it so happens, are trying to learn witchcraft and form their own little coven. When Sarah joins them to make it a quartet, they slowly develop multifold preternatural powers and learn how to focus and use them. With such abilities literally at their fingertips, it's not too long until the little coven, initially formed for self-protection and companionship, becomes an instrument for personal gain and revenge. Sarah soon realizes that one of her friends is evil to the core, and fearful of what THAT one may do with the group's newfound powers, she decides it's best to resign from the coven and thereby weaken the magic abilities of the others. But the coven has different plans, particularly regarding Sarah....

The sleeper hit THE CRAFT (1996) could've easily been played for camp, but it is instead a story of modern urban witchcraft that is both literate and emotionally powerful. The success of the film is due to Peter Filardi and Andrew Fleming's tight, well-written script, excellent direction from Fleming, and outstanding acting from principals Tunney, Balk, Campbell, and True. The supernatural elements of the story are handled carefully and earnestly, and witchcraft or the belief in it is never ridiculed or treated derisively. This keeps the tone of the film somewhat dark and edgy, which in turn creates an uneasy, spooky atmosphere that cues the audience to the fact that this is a serious horror film. Fleming wisely keeps the special FX to a minimum until the story's climax on the final reel, and he instead emphasizes the relationships in this group of dysfunctional, angst-ridden girls, well knowing that the primary target audience--to wit, teenagers--will easily relate to these characters and their normal desires and fears.

The Special Edition DVD from Columbia/Tri-Star offers THE CRAFT in anamorphic widescreen at its original aspect ratio of 1.85:1. The digital transfer is very good, with minimal filmic or digital artifacts. The disc also features an informative commentary with director Andrew Fleming, 2 featurettes, deleted scenes, and more. THE CRAFT is a cool horror film that most fans of the genre will enjoy, and the very reasonable price makes it easy for fans to add this DVD to their collections.

Darkly peculiar, yet entertaining all the same
I was looking for entertainment and I found it in THE CRAFT.

So maybe it was filled with holes. Maybe it's a tad unrealistic. Maybe it doesn't portray Wicca with fair accuracy (not that I care about that). So it's flawed. So what?

That said, THE CRAFT is awfully entertaining and worth more than one watch - hence my umpteenth watch a few weekends ago. I especially appreciated Fairuza Balk's performance - just as much as gorgeous Robin Tunney's. It's a shame she's no Hollywood starlet today. A year or more ago I saw her in this dreadful movie called CHERISH, a truly tedious indie flick.

Tunney plays Sarah, newcomer to the neighborhood. After being shunned by the popular girls, a circle of peculiar witches take her beneath their collective wings. Nancy, Bonnie, and Rochelle all have supernatural powers and the rumor mongers have always been spreading gossip about them. (They are played by Fairuza Balk, Neve Campbell, and Rachel True, respectively.) Now, it is time to get revenge on those who have wronged them - yes, revenge is the only remedy to their teenage angst and turmoil.

Each girl has a different situation. Rumors have been churning through the mill that Sarah Bailey slept with popular jock Chris Hooker (played by Skeet Ulrich, who later appeared with Campbell in SCREAM). Not only that, but he claims she sucked in bed, according to Nancy. Sarah had really been into Chris during their first date and after one kiss on a rooftop, he'd tried to take her back home with him. She'd declined and Chris had seemed a little disappointed. Still, Sarah never guessed he'd begin spreading lies about her. Now, she will get Chris, who snubs her in the halls, to fall truly, madly, and deeply head-over-heels in love with her. In fact, with Sarah's powers, he develops humorous stalker-esque tendencies.

Nancy Down's troubles mainly concern her homelife. Her father is a bum. She and her two parents live the stereotypical white trash lifestyle. Nancy uses her powers to give her father a heart attack (odd, yes...I know) and because of his death, she and Mrs. Down are left with a big 'ole sum of money. They move into a very nice apartment and are able to live quite comfortably.

Bonnie was involved in a terrible accident that left her permanently scarred - much of the high school knows about the disfiguring scars. She has a beautiful face but her scars inable her to wear certain clothes and she's oh-so self-concious about it. She undergoes a painful hospital operation that may or may not improve her condition - it does, thanks to her supernatural powers. :) Because of the operation, her mother and the doctors aren't all that suspicious. They just assume it to be the goodness of medical technology.

Rochelle's dilemma concerns racist Laura Lizzie (Christine Taylor), who is on the school's swim team with her. Laura makes it crystal clear that she can't stand Rochelle because she's black. Whenever Rochelle is at work perfecting her dives, Laura shouts out cruel remarks to distract her and she also calls her racial slurs in the locker room. Rochelle's spell causes Laura's hair to begin to fall out in huge clumps that leave bald patches all over her blonde head. Within days, she's totally bald.

But what you do to others in your spells comes back to haunt you. Times three. So now, the girls will have to deal with the consequences of their actions. Sarah must also deal with the fact that her three friends are turning on her and she must face the harrowing battle all on her own.

That is, if they don't kill her first.

With good performances and an exciting plot, this movie may appeal to fans of HEATHERS, MEAN GIRLS, and other movies in which the theme of all-girl friendships are stressed. Many critics took an intense disliking to this film, but it has been rather popular with many audiences, doing mildly well in the box office and on video.

Awesome movie
On her first day of school, Sarah is snubbed by the more popular girls and ends up becoming part of a circle of girls who are witches.

One by one, it goes through and shows each one of the girls problem. Bonnie was in a fire and left with horrible burn marks, Rochelle is the target of a racist clique, Nancy comes from a broken home, and Sarah is still haunted by memories of a suicide attempt. They all cast spells to improve their lives, and they work. Sarah makes a guy fall in love with her, Rochelle causes her harasser's hair to fall out, Bonnie overcomes her scars and Nancy ends up killing her jerk stepfather, resulting in her mother and her to inherit a bunch of money from him.

As the girls get deeper and deeper into the craft, Sarah realizes that they are taking everything too far. Bonnie has turned into a total snob, Rochelle's tormentor goes completely bald, Sarah's love spell has turned into dangerous obsession, and Nancy has completely turned power hungry. When Sarah makes her desire to leave the circle known, they will not hear of it. Nancy ends up trying to kill Sarah, resulting in one of the best fight scenes EVER.

Overall, some of the stuff referring to the craft in this movie is true. The quarter calls made by the group are actual Gardnarian Tradition quarter calls, and the threefold law is TRUE (I know from experience, lol) ... Read more

Reviews (25)

Ice Pirates leave a warm feeling!
What a wonderful piece of sci-fi fun! I always loved this picture since the first time I saw it WAAAYYY back in '84. I have to admit, it's not for everybody. You really have to be in a class of science fiction fans who also enjoy movies like Sleeper or tv shows like Red Dwarf. My only regret about Ice Pirates was that the director didn't have a larger budget--then again... Urich, Roberts and Huston (The Space Samurai Chick!) really steal the show--check out the gut-funny scene when Ulrich and Roberts were about to lose their "manhood". Hilarious!! The story is ludicrous in itself, water has become more valuable than gold or silver. I always found it funny that these people have the ability of interstellar travel but they can't produce water. I give the movie four stars--even though it loooks really bad on tv--in anyevent, Ice Pirates makes me wish filmmakers would produce more sci-fi satires. Long Live Jason and his Ice Pirates!

clasic cult sci fi
i stumbled across this in a video shop that imports vids from all over the world & it only cost me £2.99 (about $6.00) it aint a pg here thogh its a 15 so i had to get some 1 to buy it.
my mates used to pile round to watch it evry so offten the short guy loved the tiny robot kicking hell out of the big one

cant wait for it on dvd

I'm tired of waiting
I remember when cable was first introduced into this world except it was called "ON TV" where i'm from. I remember when this movie came on at that time. I was amazed by the humor and science fiction mixed into this great film. I'm still searching for a copy on DVD. I can't wait I've tried everything as to getting this film on DVD. I tried to buy a DVD format machine, but it was sold out. I'm getting impatient, but I still have some patience, and not for long.

SWKO-period piece
This a cult B-sci fi, and another SWKO (Star Wars Knock Off). Another Period Price. To it's credit, it is a lot funnier than Buckaroo Banzai.

A different type of sci-fi
This is one of my all time favorite b movies. The fx aren't well done but the story is great. There needs to be more cheesey sci fi movies like this, and space raiders. I would really be heart broken if this title never arrives on DVD because I would love to add it to my collection. ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Problematic yet entertaining
Any film sporting a cast including Charlton Heston, Laurence Olivier, Richard Johnson, and Ralph Richardson has to be a winner, right? Errr, maybe. Take a look at the 1966 epic "Khartoum." It's got all the elements of a Hollywood blockbuster made in an era when big screen sagas dominated ticket sales. Bombastic musical score? Check. Big name actors? Check. Lush, atmospheric vistas beautifully and tastefully photographed? Check. "Khartoum" has all these elements, including a kingly run time of 134 minutes. So what went wrong? Depending on your viewpoint, everything or nothing. Personally, I sort of liked this movie about British General Charles "Chinese" Gordon's excursion to the Sudan to fight off an Islamic fanatic named the Mahdi. Then again, I've never seen "Lawrence of Arabia," the epic of epics I'm told this movie tried to shamelessly rip-off. I've got a degree in history, so I always like to sit down and watch Hollywood attempt to do historical pictures. My background, unfortunately, doesn't encompass nineteenth century British politics, so I had to look at the movie from a purely entertainment level. From that angle, "Khartoum" is intriguing.

At the beginning of the film we see a contingent of British army regulars and local Arab auxiliaries wiped out by the fanatical army of the Mahdi (Olivier). This Islamic warrior seeks to throw the British out of the Sudan, capture the Suez Canal, and then launch a jihad against the western world. Enter Prime Minister William Gladstone (Richardson) and his cabinet. These politicians are quite concerned about the Mahdi's militant overtures. The threat of losing their hold on the Suez could cause Gladstone to lose political power, and the public is having a field day about the lost army in the desert. Prime Minister Gladstone doesn't want to take a further risk by sending another army into the field. What will happen to him if that force disappears as well? Then Colonel J.D.H. Stewart (Johnson) comes up with a novel idea: why not send good old General Charles Gordon (Heston) down to the Sudan to straighten out matters? "Chinese" Gordon knows the ropes in the region since he helped abolish slavery in that part of the world a few years before. The Arabs just love this Brit, so why not make use of his talents to undercut the local support for the Mahdi? Gladstone rejoices, recognizing he has a way out of this sticky political predicament. He quickly convinces Gordon to undertake a secret mission into the Sudan.

Gordon knows the score, but decides to go anyway. Stewart goes along as an assistant and as a spy for Gladstone. The General and Stewart sail up the Nile to Khartoum, where they plan on arranging resistance to the fanatics. Things go awry almost immediately, as a former slaver whose son Gordon killed refuses to help the British. Then the Mahdi's forces box the General into Khartoum. The city faces food and supply shortages that require Gordon to launch a few small attacks in the desert while Stewart remains behind to fortify the city with a moat. After he meets with the Mahdi and learns how dangerous the guy is, "Chinese" Gordon realizes he'll need the help of the British if he wants to hold the region. Across the desert go the messengers, but Gladstone stonewalls in London, claiming Gordon went to the Sudan on his own accord and thus must fix the mess himself. The prime minister even goes so far as to accuse Gordon of exaggerating the threat facing the city. Eventually, Gladstone sends forces to save Khartoum, but gives the leader of this army strict orders to drag his feet. Lots of politics here, folks, but it all makes sense when you see it. Gordon stands tall at the end when the Mahdi launches a massive offensive against Khartoum. The final battle scene is an intense one and helped elevate my overall impression of the film.

"Khartoum" does slightly drag in spots, namely when all the political wrangling between Gordon and Gladstone takes place, but it is still fun for viewers who like dialogue heavy films. Besides, it isn't as though there's no action going on-there just isn't enough to satisfy viewers who found other Hollywood epics so much fun. You want non-stop action, watch "Zulu." You want to think a little bit about the machinations behind the imperialism, give "Khartoum" a shot. A better argument of the inferiority of this film could easily be made concerning the other elements of the story. The performances tend towards the uneven, sadly, as Olivier hams it up as the bass voiced Mahdi. He's barely recognizable behind all that shoe polish make-up and thick beard. Heston imbues his depiction of Gordon with a certain wryness that occasionally appeals but too often feels out of place. Moreover, his British accent is the least convincing one I have heard in a long time. Richardson and Johnson don't have much to do in their roles, and don't get the amount of screen time allotted to Olivier and Heston. "Khartoum" works, ultimately, but with serious reservations.

The DVD version of the film contains only a trailer as an extra. The restored print looks great, and that brassy musical score booms wonderfully. I'm not sure I can recommend actually buying this movie. If you like films about the Middle East, the British Empire, or epics than I'm sure you would want to add this one to your collection. I suggest a discrete rental and then a decision. I can say that I would watch this film again, if for no other reason than to see that cool landmine device Gordon cooks up with a pistol and a length of primer cord. Enjoy!

"out of the vast, hot, African nowhere..."
Though the historical events in this film took place in 1884-85, there are aspects of it that remind one of today's headlines; this is a sadly underrated film, with a fantastic cast, massive battle scenes, and a beautifully written script about an extraordinary man.
There are scenes that take "artistic license", but the film is quite accurate in its facts on General Gordon; a military genius who hated war, a deeply religious man who worked to end slavery, and who fell in love with the desolate scorching sands and the people of the Sudan.

The pairing of Charlton Heston and Laurence Olivier is fabulous, and their scenes together are riveting. Heston is gaunt in this film, to closer portray the slightly built Gordon, and speaks with a subtle but excellent English accent; Olivier is the fanatic who calls himself The Mahdi ("The Expected One"), waging a holy war with his followers to destroy anyone who opposes his beliefs, with the aim of conquering the world for his fundamentalist faith.
Other wonderful performances come from Richard Johnson as Col. Stewart, Ralph Richardson as Prime Minister Gladstone, Nigel Green as Gen Wolseley, and Johnny Sekka is a delight as Gordon's servant Khaleel.

After British-led Egyptian forces are massacred by The Mahdi's insurgents, the British government asks Egypt to give up the Sudan, and General Gordon is called to evacuate the European and Egyptian civilians from the Sudan; he stays to ward off the terrorists and the siege of Khartoum takes place.
The sweeping panoramas of the desert and the Nile river are sumptuous (cinematography by Edward Scaife), and the Frank Cordell score is terrific, though it owes a bit to Maurice Jarre's music for "Lawrence of Arabia"; released 6 years earlier, "Lawrence" has some comparisons to this film, as they are both about adventurous men of courage who felt comfortable in Arab lands.
This film sparked my imagination and made me want to know more about Gordon's fascinating life and the history that surrounded him, and it is one I could watch repeatedly. Total running time is 134 minutes.
"...but there is this: A world with no room for the Gordons, is a world that will return to the sands".

One of Chuck's best
Before he was NRA junta chief and in between making movies where a planet of apes evolved from men and Soylent Green was people, Charlton Heston was a pretty damn fine actor. His performance is pre-"method" but commanding, and he definitely holds his own in all the scenes with Olivier.

This film is based on the actual seige and capture of Khartoum in the Sudan in 1884. The events are of couse slightly disorted (as usual) but the essence of the story is correct. I don't think the box office reciepts would have been too good if they actually showed Gordon (Heston's character) as being 5'2" in boots. The real story is rather chilling and sad but the film manages to make it inspiring to a point, the situation being one where victory may be impossible but heroism, a willingness to fight the "good fight", is not.

As to the quality of the disc itself, there are no extras except the trailer. The sound quality is merely ok, but the picture transfer is beautiful. A+ on that count. If you saw the recent film of "The Four Feathers" I would recommend this film over it. It is a little leisurely in pace ealy on but it is well crafted and very well written.

Unimpressive
This isn't Charleton Heston's best work by a long-shot. His acting is hardly convincing as General Charles Gordon. The cinematography is decent but there seems to also be an absence in character depth throughout the movie: there is also little action.

Epic movies about the colonial era in Africa are never easy: this movie just doesn't do it. The best role played in the movie was that of "The Mahdi" by Laurence Olivier, however, he is hardly a convincing moor. All of the scenes just seem to fall short in climax or tension for this sort of drama.

The failure of the movie also lies in its attempt to simplify the complexities of the time: the script writer failed to grasp te culture of the epoch and this is made evident in the movie. As a result, the dialogue is hollow and the action dull. Perhaps worth renting for those who are admirers of either Heston or Olivier but there isn't much to own here.

EXCELLENT!!
Excellent DVD transfer of one of the great epics of the 60's! I was shocked on how clean the print was with very few blemishes to be found. This is the best I've ever seen this movie look. If you love epics-BUY THIS TODAY! ... Read more

Description

A pioneer couple struggles to settle in Minnesota and start a new life. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Great!
If any of your ancestors came from any part of Europe by sea, you have to see this. Movie is not new, but is a classic. Was recommended to me by my Norwegian cousins even tho it's about Swedes. You DO NOT notice the dubbed English, believe me. And you want to watch if again and again because movie really captures what the emmigrants went through, both in the old country and here. Definitely a "to own" movie for anyone that likes history and genealogy.

Historical and entertaining
This is one great movie. I would recommend it to anyone interested in American or Swedish/scandinavian history.

who wants to be a pioneer?
Well worth a million bucks (or star rating) and is the richest realization of pioneer experience ever put to film. The pacing, the cinematography, the patient character development or rather continuation of character unfolding that began with the prequel 'the emmigrants', is an enriching study of human personality in its most basic social and natural settings, ie. real human beings tied to the land and to each other out of fundamental necessity. Every detail of the journey west is bathed in vivid realism. The difficulties of travel and communication continue in this new land until homes are built and lives and cultural ties re-established to replace ones left behind. The enduring marital bond between Max Von Sydow and Liv Ulman's characters,(Oscars aren't good enough) the desire for that better life which drew them to the paradise of Minnesota where the miseries of Indians who must share land that was once their own are soon realized. The youthful will to explore and prosper that cannot be suppressed in Max's younger brother whose artistic temperment misfits him for farm life and drives him to the gold of California and his destiny is one of the most stark and poetic depictions of a sensitive life in the wild west ever portrayed. If you want to know what it was like to have been there- watch this film. Anyone with a shred of curiousity or empathetic appetite for the struggles and accomplishments of our ancestors will be well satisfied with this rare feast of pioneer life. I can only hope the eventual transfer to DVD will do justice to the cinematographic beauty this profound film possesses and deserves.

Portrait of what was
This and The Emigrants tells the story of Scandinavian settlers in the upper midwest. It was made in the later part of the Nixon administration, and the Swedish director threw in a few apt shots at America and her heritage. But it and The Emigrants still tell the story of people who came here for a better life, and how they more or less found it.

Not exactly a competitor for the Die Hard or Lethal Weapon series. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Shadowbox is powerful
Living with a terminal diagnosis, working with, loving someone with a terminal diagnosis? This video is for you. It is powerful, incredibly realistic in its portrayal of anger, denial, fears, as well as hope and humor. As a hospice employee I've seen hundreds die, just as these characters in Shadowbox have. This would be great film to share with Hospice employees, and with medical staff who often don't understand all that the patients and their families experience. ... Read more

Reviews (328)

Talented cast in an alright movie
Deep Impact, which is basically about an almost unstoppable metor about to collide with the earth, which will result in many deaths if something isn't done about it. Morgan Freeman stars as the president of the United States, who is straight forward and honest, which is a type of president this country has never had. Also, stars Tea Leoni, the most talented youngster, Elijah Wood, Robert Duvall, and Vanessa Redgrave as Tea Leoni's alcoholic mother.

After the discovery of the meteor by Leo Biederman (Wood), a scientist checks what path it is headed and comes to the realization that it is headed straight for earth, not to mention the shores of the east cost. To try and stop it, they send a group of astronauts to try and destroy the meteor, lead by Tanner (Duvall). The major strength of this movie is the human reaction. Each character reacts differently to the disaster to become them. Some worry about themselves and flee without a second thought and some worry about other people, which is what is believeable. Deep Impact takes the middle ground, in other words instead of letting the meteor hit, they are able to spilt into two pieces, with the larger piece being destroyed in a scene that may just bring tears to your eyes.

Compared to Armegeddon, this movie is a masterpiece. This one has more realism and it is not made like a 120 minute trailer as Roger Ebert once pointed out about Armegeddon. It has characters you just might remember and dialogue that is not so repetitive you may just walk out. Despite the fact, this movie is not great although it stars some great talents such as Elijah Wood and the brilliant Morgan Freeman, it is just decent. GRADE: B-

i prefer armageddon because...
...if you are gonna have a film about an ELE, with the slightly
more serious approach that covers the sort of lottery in this
one (which all seems perfectly believable), you ought to have
some emotional impact to the story

maybe it's been been too long since i saw it, but it just seemed
like no one in the film really cared about what was going to
happen. seemed a little odd to me...

it's ok
Deep Impact is a good disaster movie, it has a scene where
they pick those who would be save, Similar to the old
1951 movie (when Worlds Collide)they called the ark but there are remakes of some these old george pal movies like the
time machine,ok now I like to see them do a remake of the 1951
(when Worlds Collide).

Made an Impact on me
Many people tend to compare this movie to armageddon, as they are both about the idea of a celestial body (in this case a comet, in the case of armageddon an asteroid) on a collision course with the earth, and seeing as how they were released in very close proximatey to one another. I think this has a lot to do with some people's lack of love for Deep impact, but the reality is these were two very different movies.

While "Armageddon" was a great movie in it's own rate, it was more of an action-romance movie that was meant to apeal to a braoder audience and satisfy movie-goers' typical demands of a major release. But with Deep Impact a much different aproach was taken, following in the way of the traditional Disaster Movie Genre.

From the beginning we are introduced to one of the main Characters, an upstart reporter investigating your run of the mill political love affair scandal, but stumbles instead upon the biggest story of history, that there is a monstrous comet on a collision course with earth. And so unfold's the American government's plan to send an team of asteronauts to intercept the comet and plant enough nukes on it to deflect it off course. The movie handles the plot from a much more epic, and at the same time much more personal level than armageddon.

The romance angle of the story is provided by the young boy who unwittingly discovered the comet and his girl neighbor. As counter measures fail, and plan B, C and D are called into action the terrible reality that only so many can be saved, and that it has to be decided who lives and dies sets in. A national lottery determines who will get passage to a special fallout shelter-like cave complex that was built in secret to house 1 million people. The rest are left to fend for themselves.

I really found deep impact to be more emotional, though not as romantic as armageddon. Characters will die, babies will be deperated from parents, young people will be asked to carry burdens that they shouldnt have to deal with and cities are destroyed as part of the asteroid hits the atlantic and causes a massive tsunami. Watching all this really had a more realistic and more message-orientated feel to it than Armageddon. I liked that the movie seemed to follow closer to the science and horrow of what a comet impact could cause, and how that affected the characters and our society. This made the movie much more interesting to me in many ways, and much realer as well.

The special effects are well done enough for the time period, and actually the tidal-wave scene where you watch a city massive wall of water inundate the city, hills and forests was quite ae inspiring. This is well done and will make your jaw drop when you see it.

The only problems are some inconsistant acting, and the fact that this movie is a bit slow and might not appeal to some viewers as much as armageddon because it's not an action movie.

All in all this was a great disaster movie and I thought it did a better job than armageddon in many ways of dealing with the actual plot scenario, though I like that movie as well just for different reasons. But if you're looking for a good sci-fi based disaster movie that will touches on many deeper levels than similar movies than this is your best bet. You're better off renting Deep Impact than you are going to the theater to see "The Day After Tomorrow".

Deep Enough.
As far as disaster films go, this is one of the best. The characters have a little more depth than your usual catastrophe cardboard cutouts and are played with conviction by a fine cast. What good's a disaster if you don't really feel for the folks the disaster is happening to. Unlike most other big budget disaster blockbusters, DEEP IMPACT has a decent script that takes itself seriously. Add the cast, assured direction by MIMI LEDER, and some great fx visuals, and the end result is an extreemly enjoyable thrill ride that keeps head and heart intact. It's amazing how this movie gets so much slack when most others in the genere are far inferior (i.e. ARMAGEDDON, DAY AFTER TOMORROW, etc.). ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Something of a prelude to NBK & Kalifornia.
When insecure 18 year old Lincoln Muller (Devon Gummersall) and his jock friends encounter wild & seductive Alex Langley (Rosanna Arquette), they think they are in for a night of explosive passion. Instead, she steals their car and entices Lincoln to join her on a cross country crime spree, starting with the robbery of a convenience store clerk (Cuba Gooding Jr.).

Defies formulas, trusts the subtlety & insight of viewers
This movie appears at first to be an adolescent fantasy movie, and then seems to drift into a buddy/road movie formula, but emerges on its own and defies formula and cliche. Arquette is wonderfully full, both subtle and powerful in her portrayal of this lost, wounded, strong, evasive and ultimately caring woman. I also appreciate a movie that doesn't feel the need to explain every detail, location and motivation, but instead trusts the audience to follow the story as it emerges and to go with the characters as they unfold. Ultimately, I guess I'd call it an effective, touching, thought-provoking and uncommon love and coming-of-age story told in both gentle and violent images.

I saw on Cinemax in January.

Awesome
This Movie is my Favorite movie of all time ... Read more

Reviews (35)

Intermittently funny, but generally inane and faux chic
"Full Frontal" is built on a remarkably juvenile screenplay by performance artist Coleman Hough; it's pretty amazing director Steven Soderbergh saw anything in it. It's literate enough, but about all the neurotic, postmodern things we've grown to loathe: weird sexual fetishes, the debate of "reality" vs. "unreality", that two-degrees-of-separation-in-LA material, and, finally, unnervingly, Hollywood mechanics. We did not need another ludicrous, didactic structural analysis of Hollywood.

Boy do we get it. "Full Frontal" begins with an introduction of the characters through series of random, purposeless monologues drawn from different points in the film, then the opening scene of what looks like a big budget romance movie between an actor (Blair Underwood) and a journalist (Julia Roberts), just staged and false enough to let you know it's winking, before commencing with seemingly unrelated subplots that wink like an old creep with a pocket of butterscotch candies.

Another journalist (David Hyde Pierce) is clinging to his magazine job and his marriage to a human relations executive of some kind (Catherine Keener) who is quite clearly deranged or a descendant of the inquisition: She conducts interviews, all day it seems, by throwing a plastic blowup globe at her applicants and demanding the names of all the countries in Africa. This story is intercut with the opening of a second-rate stage comedy about Hitler, with a lead actor (Nicky Katt) channeling Cary Grant and quoting Peter Ustinov; and a massage therapist (Mary McCormack) who eventually crosses the paths of all the characters. David Duchovny appears in a cameo as a kinky movie producer that proves he's pretty hard up in life after "The X-Files."

Soderbergh is usually pretty savvy with a variety of film styles and camera lenses, but using cheap digital cameras mutes the small victories of comedy Hough's script does deliver. The hand-held jitter is agonizing as well. There's only so much of the follow-the-globe cam we can take.

Mostly, though, "Full Frontal" is a painful (and refreshing) reminder that not every chic, self-absorbed New Yorker like Hough can waltz into LA and force audiences to acknowledge her obvious highbrow wit and trendy verbal gymnastics by inserting bizarre non-sequitors like vampires, marijuana brownies and guys crawling along hotel floors. Keener especially rants and moans her way into the pantheon of grating personas. It could be said that Roberts acquits herself in a small role - Roberts seems to be doing a lot of that lately - while Pierce most closely approaches a performance of resonance.

Based on its less-is-nothing marketing campaign, Soderbergh and others basically knew "Full Frontal" was inside baseball, pertinent to the few, aimless for the rest. That knowledge doesn't excuse the film, particularly the ridiculous final scene that pulls back and back and back to reveal a couple of artists an hour past being "on it" and hip.

Excruciating, but not absolutely worthless ;-)
There is a style, or class, or school of comedy characterized by something bad, or lame being repeated over and over until it becomes funny. There is something like this going on here with "Full Frontal". I saw this picture in a theater with six other people, and three of them walked out after twenty minutes. Too bad, really, since the chuckles only started to occur after the proceedings had worn you absolutely down, and twenty minutes into the picture you were only JUST starting to get exasperated. Could be that this film works better on the small screen, which I found to be the case with Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut", another excruciating experience. Warning! By no means see this movie with another recent Soderbergh picture "Solaris", or you may subsequently need therapy.

Experiment? Ensemble Drama? The Film Doesn't Know it.
Though "Full Frontal" boasts of its great casts including Julia Roberts, the film is rather an experimental indie film, mostly shot in 18 days with a digital camera (which cost only $ 4,600). That is not a problem if the film is interesting -- I mean, interesting characters, interesting techiniques, interesting stories, or anything. No such luck, sorry. Though some actors are giving their best efforts, the film looks more like a self-indulgent film-school student's work.

The film follows the events that happen to the characters (whose profiles are revealed in the introductory part). Journalist Julia Roberts is interviewing TV star Blair Underwood; Cathrine Keener is doing the most uncomfortable job of the human resorce office (that is, firing the employees); her sister Mary McCormack is talking about the guy she met on the net; David Hyde Pierce (who shows uncanny resemblance with director Soderbergh himself) is rehearsing the stage drama for the always quizzical Nikky Katt. When the day comes close to the end, these assorted people find themselves strangely entangled in the web of human relations, which is represented by the dinner party for "Gus," powerful Hollywood producer played by one star from "X-Files."

The film also includes 'film within film" device (and even "film within film within film" devide, too), which might confuse some of the viewers. Fortunately, the device is not overused, and soon you will understand what is doing on.

The trouble is, except for some moments including talented Keener, none of the characters can really grab your attention. They are facing the critical moments of life, the film implies, but strangely we do not care. And as the experimental film, "Full Frontal" is not as innovative as "Schizopolis" (in which Soderbergh himself starred).

Possibly, here is the reason for its half-baked result: first, incredible you might say, but Soderbergh's use of digital camera is so poor like someone's home movies. At one scene, you see Sandra Oh very briefly. Well, but I couldn't see whether it was her or not because of a blurred image (I knew her voice, and saw her name in the credits), and I was thinking -- what is the point of doing that? The poorly shot images just detract our attention to the characters which should not be sacrificed for the dirctor's unnecessary "experiments."

Some parts of the film might interest you (if you're a film buff). You see many cameos -- Brad Pitt, Terence Stamp, and David Fincher (as the perfectionist director who needs 49 takes for one breif shot). But they are not enough for us to keep being interesting in the story which should really count. The conculsion is this; you just cannot use this great cast just because you want to be experimantal. Life is too short to do that, especially with this cast.

Don't buy this DVD--don't even spend $3 to rent it
The only reason this movie gets one star is because there's not an option to choose zero. This is, unbelievably to me, given Mr. Soderbergh's other credits, one of the WORST movies I've ever seen. The "documentary" style filming is grainy and extremely distracting, and even more so because it's such an over-used technique. I'm an avid independent film viewer and like the unusual and the avant-garde, but this film is a poseur which fails in every way.

If you come to the story without knowing it's supposed to be imbued with skewering cleverness and satire, it's confusing, unengaging and boring, and, come to think of it, now that I know it's supposed to have those elements, it's STILL confusing, boring and unengaging. The character development is so poor that you don't care about anybody nor understand what's motivating them. David Hyde Pierce is a horrible choice for the main character--he has no depth or emotional range which, unfortunately, keeps us half wondering if Kelsey Grammer's going to come through the door at any minute. Catherine Keener has the kind of charisma that transcends shoddy screenwriting, but how her character behaves makes the least sense of all.

I think the only reason to rent this movie would be if you want to get a few second "full frontal" view of David Duchovny, albeit a grainy one shot from a distance so you really can't see anything, or if you're the VP of HR and you need to show your managers how NOT to conduct an HR interview.

Watching Paint Dry
This is quite a short film, around ninety minutes, long but it seems longer as it is extraordinarily tedious. It's a Hollywood movie about Hollywood and the movie business and I guess it's intended to have a certain ironic, satirical edge to it. But it's not much of an edge and what Soderbergh has made is a smug and tedious exercise in navel gazing. I think Soderbergh probably thinks he has made a wry black comedy but it's a very safe, pale shade of black and, though it sometimes tries hard, it is never remotely witty. It has a decidedly overwritten and theatrical feel to it like a rather pretentious and forgettable off-broadway play. There are six main characters, three of each sex, none of whom there is the remotest reason to care about in the slightest. The gimmicky postmodern film-within-a-film trick is getting pretty tired by now and, where this film is concerned, has little or no apparent point beyond courting a certain spurious arthouse credibility. One or two fairly decent performances, notably from Catherine Keener and Mary McCormack, constitute a slender redeeming feature. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

B-MOVIE HEAVEN, HOLD THE BUTTER ON THE CORN
This movie was a great find for a few bucks. I guess scarecrows
are getting a bad rap these days. Pop some corn, shut the lights down and enjoy this for the time of the year (love scarecrows, especially since jeepers creepers2) they give the
harvest, Halloween season a whole new meaning. It has a few jolts but it
is different and filmed well. Yeah cheesy here and there but
all good b movies need to be, its dark and brainless, like the
scarecrow.

A Very Good, Underrated Horror Film
...

The movie starts off that some drunk yokells riding farm equipment try to destroy a farmer's corn field,

The acting in this movie is... well bad. It's the main downfall of the film...

There were no wasted scenes and the movie always had you wondering what would happen next. There's a great chase scene in the house where... is chased by the scarecrow from the attic all the way to the farm that had me literally squeezing the life out of my pillow.

This movie has grisly murders, a mediocre cast, and an overall okay plot. I honestly would give this move 3 1/2 stars but I rounded up for the sake that I had fun with this crazy scary film.

Good Movie, Buy it or Rent it.

a horrible movie
This movie is ok but most of the movie is stupid.the movie is about a bad spirt that escapes from under a cornfeild because some kids bust open his tomb.The spirt goes inside a scarecrow and comes alive.He kills to find his book of magic spells that will change him to his human form so no one can stop him.This movie is Z rated and the fact the way the scarecrow does most of his killing by turning them into scarecrows(Making sticks,hay,or weeds come out of them.)makes this movie a peice of garbage.

Great example of a horrible film...
...and here at Ferncliff Hall we loved every minute of it. Some of the best death of straw incidents we've ever witnessed in a film. Many a cringe was had at the "my seed" parts, and the sewing shut of the mouth caused a good deal of mirth in our tiny dorm room. All and all, not a complete waste of time if not taken seriously.

A Must See For Lower Budget Horror Movie Fans
I saw a few people giving this one star, that's not a good thing to give to a movie, that truely is in a class of its own. There's been movies about leprechauns, munchkins, gremlins, etc. But, for them to make this movie with the Scarecrow and do it in a relatively convincing way, then I give it a thumbs up. And although I don't want to reveal what parts, because I truely want you to order this video, there were 2 convincingly scary parts in this film. Now, buy the damn tape! :) ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Is an ancient legal code relevant today?
If you care nothing for matters of criminal justice, disregard the title and the rather specific concern of this review, and just rent this movie and enjoy. It is a rare kind of film that deserves attention for its narrative technique of quiet captivation and its stunning characterization of human hope amidst disappointment and failure. But I will leave that analysis to other reviewers more capable.

In a moment of desperation, a peasant (Helge) steals from his employer (slaughtering an ox with a sledgehammer) to feed his starving child and wife, who for her part is terrified by the brutal act. Director Sven Nykvist brilliantly captures an immediate alienation of husband and wife, which is followed by both of their alienation from a fragile village, suffering from famine and emigration. Helge finally finds himself driven to the cow paths in the woods, avoiding human society.

How is such alienation, necessarily caused by a sinful (or criminal, depending on which way you look at it) act, resolved? Nykvist explores two distinct possibilities: the state system on one hand and an ancient code of reconciliation on the other. You will profit greatly from meditating on this film. If only US judges and legislators would!

The Ox
Set in rural Sweden in the late 1800's, "The Ox" (original Swedish title "Oxen") is an insightful period film starring Stellan Skärsgard, Liv Ullman, and Max Von Sydow, and is directed by Sven Nykvist.

The main character (Skärsgard) is driven by hunger to kill and butcher the land-owner's ox for his family, and must then deal with the consequences of his wrong-doing. For insight into the Swedish immigration into the U.S., this movie makes a wonderful chronological predecessor to the film "The Emmigrants", starring Max von Sydow, which became the basis for the story "Unto a New Land", which was adapted to the U.S. TV series "Little House on the Prairie". In Swedish with English subtitles.

Superb, A masterpiece
This movie takes you to the core of humanity and shows how intolerant men can become. Superb performances by all especially by Stellan Skarsgard. ... Read more

Reviews (108)

A visually stunning sci-fi spectacle
I have fond memories of seeing "Logan's Run" in the theaters many years ago, and am delighted to see this film getting a fine presentation on DVD. Directed by Michael Anderson, the film takes place in a post-apocalyptic future where humans live a hedonistic life in the shelter of a domed city. There's just one catch to this pleasure-oriented utopia: nobody is permitted to live past the age of 30. The title character, played by Michael York, is a Sandman: an elite policeman assigned to kill those who flee the birthday death sentence. But a surprising assignment takes Logan on a voyage that will change him profoundly.

"Logan's Run" is an adventure tale, a love story, a crime drama, a social satire, and a sumptuous visual spectacle all in one. The whole package is superbly enhanced by Jerry Goldsmith's inventive and varied score. This is one of the most visually stylish science fiction films ever made; it's full of scenes that are truly unforgettable.

The film is really grounded by the performances by the superb cast. Michael York and Jenny Agutter make an absolutely enchanting screen couple; the evolution of their characters' relationship is one of the key pleasures of the film. Richard Jordan brings complexity and intensity to his role as a fellow Sandman. And Peter Ustinov is delightfully warm, funny, and loveable in a critical supporting role.

The DVD includes a vintage "making of" featurette, as well as a full-length audio commentary by actor York, director Anderson, and costume designer Bill Thomas. The three discuss casting, stunts, special effects, Peter Ustinov's ad-libbing, and other aspects of making the film. They reveal some fascinating and delightful bits of trivia along the way. This is one of those great commentary tracks that makes you appreciate the film even more.

Solid sf adventure less than the sum of its parts
Logan's Run started off with a pretty amazing concept--(courtesy of science fiction writers William F. Nolan and George Clayton Johnson)what if our youth obsessed society put everyone over the age of 30 (21 in the novel)to death as a means of population control? This film version of a classic cautionary tale is intermittantly successful. David Zelag Goodman's screenplay condenses and changes around several key characters. Goodman's script essentially refocuses the novel into The Fugitive in the future. In the original novel Francis (played brilliantly by the late Richard Jordan)and the Old Man character (played as befuddled by Peter Ustinov) were one and the same. You'll need to read the novel to see why this was an important altered plot point.

Additionally, Sanctuary did exist in the novel while here it's clear that it's something of an urban myth. While these plot points might not seem essential, altering them radically reshaped the film. Still, it's clear that the film's director, producer and screenwriter (respectively, Michael Anderson the late Saul David and Goodman)wanted to streamline what could have been a confusing plot if not layed out correctly.

The basic plot--In the future our society is enclosed in domes. As a means to control the population, everyone has a life clock crystal on their hand. When you reach 30 you have the option to become "renewed" in a ceremony attended by the citizens. Logan (Michael York) and Francis (Richard Jordan) are Sandmen who hunt, capture/or kill runners (people who choose to not go through renewal and try to escape).

After one incident, Logan is debriefed by the computer that runs the city. The runner wore a symbol representing life. During this debriefing he is send undercover to become a "runner" and find out 1)Who is behind the network that tries to get people out of the city and 2) If sanctuary exists. Logan's life clock is prematurely aged to 30. He contacts a girl who he had met before on the circuit (a system where people can "dial up" others for casual sex)who he had seen wearing the same symbol. Despite her better judgement, she elects to help him escape.

Francis, alarmed that his friend is running, elects to chase him and either bring him back for renewal or kill him.

The film is quite good despite some gaping plot holes. Michael York gives a impassioned performance as Logan 5. Jenny Agutter is enchanting as Jessica. Richard Jordan shines as Logan's former partner Francis who feels betrayed and hunts Logan down. Roscoe Lee Brown is exceptional in his cameo as the demented cyborg Box. Michael Anderson, Jnr. gives a nice cameo performance as the surgeon hired to alter Logan's appearence. Made for $6 million, Logan's Run looked quite good when it was released in 1976. The symbolism of having Francis and Logan fight in the House of Representatives with an American flag was quite evident given the year of release (1976).
In many respects the themes in the film are more timely than ever. The obsession with youth, looking good and plastic surgery have come to define our culture in the 21st Century. The only thing missing from the film are botox injections.

Jerry Goldsmith's brilliant score is a highlight of the film. Like his score for Planet of the Apes, Goldsmith chose to go with a mix of sythesizers and orchestra to portray the city of the future. He eschews cliches in his music and the various themes and cues are at turns suspenseful and witty. The optical effects are pretty good given the time. The matte paintings by Albert Whitlock are outstanding and fairly convincing. The miniatures are a mixed bag. They didn't look completely convincing in 1976 nor do they today. Part of the problem has to do with the fact that waters don't fare well when placed in miniatures. You can't miniaturize the bubbles and water drops. Also, the use of the miniatures in combination with live action is quite grainy due to the film stock and amount of composites. Still, if you can suspend your disbelief, you'll enjoy the film despite its limitations.

Logan's Run attempted to tell an adult cautionary tale in a world of light weight escapist movies. It's a commendable film and the film makers frequently bite off more than they can chew. I'd rather have a film that's too ambitious than not at all.

Still, I appreciate the ambitions if not the execution. It's nice to finally have this fine if flawed movie on DVD. The transfer is quite good although the print has a number of flaws. There's also quite a bit of dirt evident on the print. These probably could have been cleared up with a direct digital transfer. Additionally, the 5.1 soundtrack occasionally sounds "tinny" and when played in the stereo format can be quite difficult to hear.

The extras are limited but nice. The commentary by director Michael Anderson and Michael York is quite good and informative. A pity the terrific actor Richard Jordan isn't around any longer to give us his perspective. I would have liked to see a fresh retrospective documentary on the making of the film. It's not likely to happen, though as no one is going to champion this film at the expensive of other newer projects (particulary since producer Saul David is gone). The featurette included is the original one made to promote the film. It's actually pretty decent given the age and purpose of it. The trailer is included as well. The disc is a dual sided single layer DVD with the widescreen and pan & scan versions on the same disc.

classic!
logan's run is a real gem. love the cast and the look of the film and it's a good dvd to have when you want to see something that's out of this world!

fantastic futuristic fun
Logan's Run was one of my faves as a kid. It was different from othe Sci Fi at the time. It created a weird world that was great to watch. I also watched the TV show version and loved it too (sure it was just a TV show and not quite as grand as the the more expensive flick but it was still weird enough to keep me watching). You've just got to love a show that creates it's own strange world and takes you away from reality. Logan has it's own style that provides just the right escape from the played out worlds of other Sci Fi flicks and shows. Give this a chance if you want something that's different and you've never seen it.

A bit excentric, but absolutely worth watching.
This is an awsome movie, even by today's standards. Granted the special effects can sometimes look corny or cheesy, but for the time when this movie was produced, the effects were top notch.

The story line goes like this. It is the year 2275. Disasters have forced what remains of civilization into a self contained, domed city. No one goes outside the city becuase they all beleive it to be a barren wasteland, incapable of supporting life. This is because it WAS that way when the city was founded, but that was over a hundred years ago. Since the city was founded, there was realised a great need to maintain the population to acceptable levels. So, it is determined that at age 30 you will "terminate". If you do not want to end your life at 30, you can participate on the "Carosel" on your "Last Day" (30 years to the day of your birth). The recorded message basically says that if you have a strong enough desire to renew, you will. Renewing gives you an unstated amount of extra time. If you are ready to end, you don't have to participate on Carosel. However, there exist a few people who don't want to follow the rules. They "run" from their fate. To prevent people from running (as well as for general law enforcement) there are a group of cop like folks. Each is refered to as a SandMan. It is their responsibility to enforce law in the domed city, and to track down anyone who decides to run, and terminate them.

Now meet Logan 5. He's a sand man, and he loves his job. But one day when he is doing his job and terminates a runner, he finds an Ankh on the runner. He doesn't think much of it. So he picks it up with the rest of the runner's belongings, and heads back to HQ to be "debriefed". But the central computer DOES recognise the Ankh. It is determined to be a symbol associated with a legenday place called Sanctuary, where runners can go and hide and live out their life normally (as you and I would consider normal). The computer determines that Sanctuary must be either right on the inside of the dome, or outside the city. Logan 5 is assigned to find sanctuary, and destroy it.

And so begins his Grand adventure, during the process of which he leaves the city, Falls in love with his "partner in crime, Jessica" (which is strictly forbidden in the city), Finds a man who has more cats than I could count, and returns to the city to try and stop the madness.

A very good movie on all counts. It should have been more popular. ... Read more

Reviews (55)

Broken Mirrors
"Persona" is by far one of the most complex films ever fabricated in cinema. Like all Ingmar Bergman films, "Persona" challenges the viewer's thoughts of reason and reality. Made in 1967, this still remains to this day, the most haunting and confusing film on self-identity and the duality we have as human beings. Some might find the overlay of the movie too cynical maybe, but only because Bergman so purposely shows us our contradictory natures. Both character leads played by Bergman regulars Liv Ullman and Bibi Anderson give stunning performances, as usual. It's really amazing how well both women played such difficult roles, Ullman's character doesn't speak one line throughout the film and Anderson so captures all the different moods with an almost too realistic touch. Recommended to only serious movie-goers, Bergman fans, art house, foreign film fans, and those who can handle disturbing commentaries on self reflection.

One of the All-Time Greats
"Persona" is not only Bergman's masterpiece; it is consistently ranked as one of the greatest films ever made. It is admittedly difficult, but never pointlessly so. The underlying spirit feels much the same as the High Modernist literature of the 1920s: a brilliant fusion of emotion and intellect resulting in a startling new form of expression. Indeed, the opening sequence of the film -- "a heap of broken images" -- brings "The Waste Land" to mind, and Bergman himself remarked, "I had it in my head to make a poem, not in words but in images."

Despite the unconventional style, one never has the feeling of novelty for the sake of mere effect. The formal innovations follow from the content. Much of the film, in fact, is shot in a fairly traditional way, though with Bergman's usual painstaking subtlety. The detailing is even finer than one might expect, with every sound, almost every word, orchestrated with great care.

"Persona" is a deeply compelling film, but it is probably not an ideal starting point for a newcomer to Bergman's work. "Wild Strawberries" is more straightforward and warmer; a great character study that retains elements of fantasy.

A final note: Avoid the grungy transfer on Hen's Tooth Video. The MGM version is far cleaner and is worth the extra money.

Liv Ullmann and Bibi Andersson are AWESOME!!!
I've never quite been into foreign films, but I decided to check out 'Persona' because it has been associated with one of my favorite films, Robert Altman's '3 Women.' I was frequently told by other film buffs, "If you like '3 Women,' you'll really like 'Persona.'"

They were right, for I was completely blown away by this Bergman masterpiece. 'Persona' is a powerhouse of emotions, and the acting is superb. Liv Ullmann's silence is extremely compelling, for her nonverbal communication conveys a whole lot more than any dialogue could relate! Bibi Andersson's performance is heart-wrenching at times, for her persistance and confusion draws the viewer into her corner like a spider caught in a web.

As far as Ingmar Bergman, I am now a dedicated fan of his films after viewing 'Persona.' There were a few bits during the opening montage that made me wince (beware!), but after seeing the entire film, I can understand why they were there. In addition, the visual look of some of the key scenes are among the most breathtaking I have ever seen in a film, such as the one where Liv almost floats into Bibi's room like a Nordic goddess.

Highly recommended for anyone with an interest in Ingmar Bergman, arthouse cinema or films about the psychology of relationships.

The Greatest Film of the 20th Century
This is Ingmar Bergman's greatest achievement as a film director (most of us have not seen his stupendous stage productions and only a few of his "made-for-TV" films).

It is, quite simply, the greatest film of the 20th century by its greatest film director. All films should be judged against it---and found worthy or wanting.

one of the best ever made
This is one of the best rated films of all time...and it's definetely justified. It might very well be Bergmans materpiece, and THAT says a lot. The story behind one of the greatest achievments in cinema history was (is); Liv Ullmann, Bibi Anderson, Sven Nykvisk and Ingmar Bergam....That's the whole movie !!! Only 4 people,but it doesn't get much better than this. It's perfect - ... Read more

Reviews (3)

great
The best thing about this movie is Tracy Ryan and the girl they pick up on the way. Kira Reed is in this but not enough.

Decent, chockful of nudity and laughs
I must have laughed so hard during certain parts of this movie that if I was in a movie theater, I would've embarrassed myself. And that is actually the best thing about "Fast Lane to Malibu" is its overabundant sense of humor, and how it takes itself with the joking, tongue-in-cheek knowledge that it is, in fact, just a straight-to-video skin flick,.... the scenes are often cut short as if they were just eager to get it over with. I didn't understand that, and I'm not complaining, because there are some truly inspiring scenes in this movie that involve a freeze-frame of everyone on the screen except one character, and that character proceeds to engage in a Shakespearean-style way of expressing their thoughts to the audience. I hadn't seen anything like that in a movie in a long time, and it was kind of refreshing to see some low budget skin flick writer utilize a time honored storytelling tool. Oh well... but that wasn't the point of this movie. The point was the sex and the women, who are (almost) all very good looking and sensual in their own way. If this was the standard for other films of the genre, they would all be a lot better.

Softcore porn movie at it's best
A film that says it all by the video cover. Two college students take a cross country road trip to Malibu where sorority girls are ready for action. If you're looking for a movie in terms of acting, you aren't going to get much. If you're looking for a lot of female nudity, this film will definitely make you smile. ... Read more