Reviews (3)

More worthy for its intentions than its execution
William Friedkin's little seen "Rampage" is a disturbing film that doesn't quite work but still deserves some credit for being one of the few films to actually try to seriously examine the actual real life issues of evil, murder, and justice in this country. Alex McArthur plays a blank-faced serial killer that Friedkin apparently based on Richard Ramirez, the infamous night stalker. The always underappreciated Michael Beihn plays the district attorney who prosecutes McArthur and seeks the death penalty despite his own personal opposition. During the trial, Beihn is himself haunted by memories of the death of his own daughter who we learn was being kept alive by machines until Beihn ordered her to be taken off life support. If all of this sounds a bit heavy handed, well, it is. After years of making films that, at times, seemed to define "style over substance," Friedkin attempted to make a film that was all substance but stacks the deck so in favor of the death penalty that the film's attempts to provide a serious debate of the issue ends up falling somewhat flat. (I should note that I support the death penalty so I didn't have any trouble with the politics of the film. My objections, instead, rest with the heavy handed way those politics were presented.) However, that said, it should also be said that this is still a powerful, if flawed, film. Friedkin's direction is grimly realistic and, admirably, he tones down the hyper kinetic, "look-at-me-ma-I'm-an-auteur" flashiness that had marred most of his films since 1980's unfortunate Cruising. Uniquely and admirably amongst films of the serial killer genre, Alex McArthur's killer isn't turned into some sort of wanna-be Hannibal Lecter, dispatching nameless victims with a quirky one liner. This is the rare film that has more sympathy for the victims than the killer and as a result, the viewer never forgets the true horror that madmen like McArthur's killer bring ino the world. The film's initial murders are devastating and rather hard to stomach (as real-life murder is). This realistic quality, the feel of real life being played out before our eyes, was what made Friedkin's earlier films like the French Connection and the Exorcist so memorable. However, at the same time, he also fails to give us anything as captivating as Gene Hackman chasing the subway or Linda Blair's head doing a 180 degree turn and, as a result, Rampage at times gets a little too talky for its own good. (Even the one action/suspense sequence towards the end of the film feels rather tacked on as if Friedkin's heart wasn't really in it and he was simply making a sop to commercial conventions.) The two leads, who have never become stars though both have strong and loyal followings, also do wonderful work. With his pleasant but off-looks, McArthur is terrifying as the emotionless killer -- all the more so because both he and Friedkin never resort to any easy answers to explain his madness. Michael Biehn plays an essentially introspective role and manages to pull it off with a skill that bigger stars should envy. Wisely, Biehn plays up the very ordinary, almost bland qualities of his character, creating a human being as opposed to just another character in a film. Whatever depth that film's ethical debate carries belongs not to the heavy handed script but to Biehn's totally convincing performance. As well, though she doesn't get to do much, Deborah Van Valkenburgh (cursed to be remembered primarily as McLean Stevenson's brunette daughter in that most banal of all sitcoms, Hello Larry) is sympathetic and likeable as Biehn's wife. Most importantly, when this was first made in 1986, Rampage was one of the few films to actually attempt to intelligently examine the issues involving the death penalty. Certainly, its no where close to the standard for such films, Tim Robbins' Dead Man Walking, which, despite the fact that Robbins has always been far more outspoken politically than Friedkin ever was, managed to avoid this film's heavy handedness -- i.e., while it was obvious that Robbins didn't support the death penalty, his film still can be seen as a persuasive argument for both sides of the issue. One wishes that Rampage had managed to pull off the same trick because, when combined with the performances and Freidkin's direction, one can't help but feel the film could have then been truly great instead of just being a noble misfire. Rampage, itself, wasn't released until several years after it was first filmed. By that time, most of the country was firmly pro-death penalty and the film's attempts to spur debate seemed rather dated. Now, with Bill Clinton's 1992 execution of Ricky Ray Rector and the more recent spate of executions in Texas under then-Gov. Bush, the issue has come back and even supporters like myself have somewhat ambigous feelings towards the death penalty. As well, recent years have seen an increase of films like Natural Born Killers, Hannibal, and the whole slahser film genre; films that have created a cult of celebrity around the characters of brutal murderers and that often present brutality as the modern equivalent of slapstick comedy (all trends that Rampage very much did not embrace). Now is a perhaps a good time to rediscover Rampage, admired it's succesful moments, and regret it's noble failures.

Better Late Than Never
This film was panned by the reviewers when it was came out because it was released many years after the key subject matter had changed in the publics mind. The era in which this film was intended was a time when the options for sentencing a convicted murderer were limited to a life sentence, which would allow some killers to be back on the streets in as few as twelve years or the death penalty.

In that time period William Friedkin started researching material for a film that was supposed to show how the death penalty was too extreme for some cases. As he studied the case in which the filmscript was based he became convinced that the death penalty was needed and that some killers really deserved to die for their crimes. The tone of both the script and the film that would follow then started to change dramatically.

I suspect one of the reasons the film remained in the can (completed but not released) as long as it did in no small way had to do with Hollywood's political leaning away from the death penalty. It was also a time when Chief Justice Rose Bird of the California Supreme Court granted every death penalty appeal that went before her court.

Freidken's depiction of the killer in this film leaves the viewer with no doubt the world would be a better and safer place if the death penalty was applied. His story also gives the viewer some insight into how the outcome of the trial could be changed by some small details.

Now that the courts recognise the concept of a life sentence without posibility of parole some of the passions in opposition to the death penalty have cooled off because the juries now have the ability to keep a killer out of circulation forever. Just remember the characters in this film did not have that option. And it was not going to happen for at least another ten years.

It's Unique!
Reviewer is the author of NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY (which is also on Amazon.com).

Okay! Okay! THE EXORIST,it's not! It does, however, give a unique twist to an otherwise well-worn subject---The demented killer, and should he be executed, sent to prison or, perhaps, found to be Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity? Certainly, the theme at hand isn't pro-NGRI. But, isn't it good to get contrasting perspectives on this complex topic? Is he psychotic? Is he merely psychopathic? Or, perhaps, he's a mixture of these two "psycho-babble" DSM IV categories! Michael Biehn shines brightly as the relentless D.A. Perhaps, however, he could have played the BAD GUY all the better! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

This tense, 1964 action drama from John Frankenheimer (The Manchurian Candidate) stars Burt Lancaster as a member of the French Resistance trying to prevent Nazi looters from taking valuable art treasures out of the country. A great ride all the way, with Frankenheimer at his inimitable best. This is a true, human-scale action movie of the sort we used to think of before "action" meant blowing up asteroids in space. Kinetic but almost rueful in tone, the film's chases and fights aren't just eye candy but rather encourage audience involvement in moral stakes. Crisp and serious performances all around from Lancaster and 1960s icons Paul Scofield and Jeanne Moreau. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (41)

One of the Best
An engrossing WELL-WRITTEN story (Hollywood, PLEASE take note), excellent cast, superb acting on the part of all the actors (not just the leads), painstaking staging and Frankenheimer's direction blending all these essential elements into a thoroughly enjoyable movie. What can you say about a rousing action movie that also makes you think? You can say it's rarely found in today's films. The primary quandry here is just what is the value of art in terms of the human lives that must be expended to preserve it? Is it truly a country's heritage or just oils on canvas for which the people who will have to die for it have little or no real appreciation? Is it worth saving because of its beauty or its value? And when does the cost of saving it become too high? The movie works on all levels, but the characters (and the actors portraying them) are exceptional. The stand-outs: Burt Lancaster, the yardmaster/resistance leader who really doesn't want to do this one last (and seemingly unimportant) job so close to the end of the war; Paul Scofield, the intense German colonel who loves (obsesses over) the art and is taking Lancaster's attempts to thwart his plans for it very personally; Wolfgang Preiss, the "good German officer" who does not agree with his superior but does his duty until he can do it no more; Jean Moreau, the pragmatic French hotel proprietress who has had to comfort one too many fellow widows and Michel Simon, the old engineer who fondly remembers dating a girl who posed for Renoir and decides to make this fight his own. No one who loves a good movie should miss this film. It's not just for action/war movie fans.

Underrated war actioner--art for whose sake?
_The Train_ has held up well since its release in 1965. Dismissed as an improbable shoot-em-up then, it tells a much richer story than the special-effects vehicles in the genre nowadays. Burt Lancaster isn't especially gallic as the Frenchman Labiche, but his acting talent and intensity soon steamroller any resistance the viewer may have. Paul Scofield is perfectly cast as a cultured monster, the Nazi colonel who is bent on spiriting the paintings away into Germany. One can easily picture him murdering hostages between sips of cognac.

Shot in black and white, the film is dark and greasy-looking. The screen is filled with churning railroad machinery much of the time, which dwarfs the people around it. The wheezing, snorting engines are also stars in this movie. Even the sky looks dirty in the daylight scenes. Oh yes, there's a sensational train wreck, too. Definitely less mindless than your average Rambo flick, but no less exciting.

The Train
Is a work of art worth a human life?
We are near the end of World War II. It's August 2, 1944, the "1511th day of German occupation" of Paris. German Colonel von Waldheim (Paul Scofield) enters a dark museum and turns a spotlight on a painting. He stares at it with the eyes of a lover beholding his best beloved. He turns another spotlight on another painting. The Hun is humanized, and we sympathize with his quiet passion.
It comes as a bit of a shock when he announces that he is taking the paintings, hundreds of Miros and Picassos and Matisses and others, with him when the Germans evacuate Paris. A resistance group, led by railroad worker Paul Labiche (Burt Lancaster), is enlisted to stop them. Labiche initially refuses. It's one thing to blow up a train, dangerous enough - it's another to stop a train without damaging what's inside it. National heritage or not, men will die. There are more important targets than a train filled with art. Things change, though, and eventually Labiche and the remnants of his resistance group find themselves trying the impossible.
I've always been a little leery of Burt Lancaster. Maybe I was traumatized by viewing THE RAINMAKER or ELMER GANTRY at a young and impressionable age. He sometimes seems all horse teeth and braying charm and dis-tinct e-nunc-ee-a-shun. Not so here. In THE TRAIN he's restrained and natural and completely convincing. Scofield is equally strong as his brutal nemesis.
Sometimes the extras on a dvd aren't worth the bother, but I loved the director's commentary by the late John Frankenheimer. It was like taking a course in the art of film making.
Frankenheimer tells us he was trying to give the movie a realistic feel, which I understood before listening to the commentary track but didn't really understand how he went about it. One trick he used was to open the f-stop on the camera and keep everything in focus, something that would have been impossible if THE TRAIN wasn't shot in black and white. Everything is kept in focus and he keeps the background action busy and interesting.
Frankenheimer is an unabashed fan of Burt Lancaster, with whom he made five movies. Not only does Lancaster do all his own stunts in this one, including a dangerous backwards fall off of a moving train, he even fills in as a stunt double for another actor. The original stuntman made a fall off a roof look like an "olympic jump," and 'realism' was the keyword in this one. Lancaster did take a nice tumble off the tiles, but you've got to wonder about the wisdom of it all. Lancaster was injured during the filming of THE TRAIN; on his first day off in weeks he played a round of golf and twisted his knee when he stepped into a hole. His right knee swelled up 'like a basketball.' Frankenheimer shot Labiche in the leg halfway through the movie to explain the limp.
The only phony movie aspect to this movie is the dubbed voices of some of the French actors. You can't hide dubbing very well, and Frankenheimer doesn't have much to say about it. I wouldn't knock a star or even a half-star off because of it. This is a tremendously entertaining film.

Great movie.
There are an amazing amount of action films these days. Each one of them attempts to beat the last one's visual effects. And in this competition, hollywood has lost track of what makes a truly great action film... Skill. Most of the action films these days are entirely uncreative, and many of them are very, very boring. Who really want's to see a dozen tiles fall to the ground and break in slow motion, as films such as "the Matrix" use this technique constantly. But this film is different. It carries raw emotional power, and it's star, at age 50, did all of his own stunts, and even drove the locamotives that his character drives. This movie is awesome, and I highly recommend you buy this DvD. And by the way, this music track is a lot of fun to listen to when you're sick.

Perfect film on less- than- great DVD
The audio on the MGM DVD was lacking the full spectrum of audio, in my opinion. If you don't care so much about audio, it would be a 5 star DVD, but for those feeling that audio is an important factor, a star must be deducted. Bass and treble just weren't tweaked in DVD production which made the audio seem really flat, and I know that MGM could have produced a better job. It seems that a good number of the MGM DVDs lack the care and attention of producing consistently superior products.

The DVD gives the viewer options to listen to music only and has an option for director's comments during the film. I was at first dismayed because at the beginning of the movie, director John Frankenheimer just wouldn't open up. But he started sharing some interesting things as the movie progressed. There is also an 8- page booklet that gives some interesting production notes and history.

The video quality from, I think, an original film print is pristine. Frankenheimer's locations and times of filming were very effective in evoking a very dismal feeling as the European conflict was drawing to a conclusion. I love Frankenheimer's use of deep focus -- which is using wide angle lenses to have both near and far- away characters and scenes in focus -- to give a vision that many other filmmakers fail to incorporate effectively.

I'm glad that there was explanation in the film about why people were more concerned with paintings than people in a story that was loosely based on an actual event. Many westerners like Paul Labiche (Burt Lancaster) would not care about the value of crates of artwork in a time of war, but schooling by caretaker Miss Villard (Suzanne Flon) expressed the passion and pride that the French feel for such paintings. This helped explain why some would scarifice their lives to save the crates. (Ms. Flon, born in 1918 is apparently still alive and acting, too.)

It's quite a story of saving "priceless" paintings at the expense of one's life. It seems like a WWII action film (which has its share of blowing stuff up), but its story actually weighs the value of art against the value of life. Labiche from the very beginning of his introduction battles Col. von Waldheim (Paul Scolfield), who wants him to deliver the art to Germany AND The Resistance, who want the art protected from the Nazis. Labiche is actually alone in his own beliefs as an American, being tugged by both sides while ultimately struggling with making sense of the conflict over the art.

The movie is well- developed from Lancaster asking Frankenheimer to direct "The Train" after original director Arthur Penn abandoned the project a week after production. I only say that because everything that was directed by Frankenheimer was terrific. The choice of the players, scenery, editing, camera placement and post production yielded a perfect war film that wasn't simply about war. It was about the value of life and what people value in their lives.

Watch for the one scene of a runaway train's derailment -- one of a dozen cameras mounted to film the scene -- came within inches of being wiped out by the locomotive's wheels and the scene has become a classic in filmmaking history. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Television director-producer Scott Winant (thirtysomething) made his feature debut with this predictable romantic-comedy about two people destined to meet and fall in love--though it takes 20 years for their lives to intersect. A good idea done before, the film doesn't have anything new to offer, and the excessive sweetness of Winant's approach can't mask the lack of originality. Still, it boasts a very attractive cast, and it's fun watching these actors work together. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Light Fun+
I thought this movie to be charming and witty. Though it would appear to be very light, you look deeper and pay attention to how the characters roll around each other, it becomes somewhat of a fun, tangled web-much like our own lives would be seen if we could view them from a third person. Happy and sad, it's a great flick for a rainy Sunday afternoon. As an added bonus who knew Jeanne Tripplehorn could do slightly, slapstick humor the way she does, hats off to her. Add tacky, tasteless and yes, tired Sarah Jessica Parker and its great!!

Awesome movie
This is a really great movie which is hard to find these days.
Yes, it's a "chick flick", but it doesn't have the sex, nudity and unneeded scenes in alot of movies out there.
It's a classic romance but it also makes us think about life in the big picture and how everything relates to everything else in the world.

So bad- you have to watch it- again and again.
I actually did look forward to the release of this film due to the premise of the plot and being a sucker for a good romantic comedy. An added bonus was that Scott Winant of "thirtysomething" fame (my all-time favorite television show) was the director/producer. Simple plot- two people meet briefly throughout their lives on parallel courses until their lives become involved with the future of an old apartment building slated for demolition. The Fates enlighten them with the realization that they are soulmates destined to meet and fall in love. Well, I was a sucker- for going to see this movie! I can't think of another movie that got yanked out of my local cinema faster than this one was (less than a week). I can't think of another movie in recent memory that I checked my watch as many times as I did during this flick. It was more exciting to look at my watch dial than the movie screen.

While the story did have brief flashes of brillance in some of the dialog pertaining to life philosophies, they were few and far between. Dylan McDermott, always a good actor, absolutely flubs here. Sarah Jessica Parker, never one of my favorite actresses, looks so bad in this film to me that I was afraid my eyes were going to bleed... I guess I couldn't look away every time she was on the screen for that reason. Jean Tripplehorn's attempts at physical comedy left me gasping. Everytime she was hit with something or knocked down or fell, I wanted to jump into the movie and yell at the director (or call PETA) for torturing this poor woman that way. At least Jennifer Aniston and Ken Olin had the good sense to save their careers by appearing only briefly in minor supporting roles.

The self-angsting dialogue on "thirtysomething" worked incredibly well and bonded you to the characters. In this movie, listening to the characters bemoan their life circumstances you finally say, "Enough is enough!" and hope they all get hit by a bus so they stop talking. The plot flows along very disjointedly and at a very slow pace. I felt no chemistry between the two main characters, who are destined to meet and fall in love. The finale takes a sudden awkward jump a few years later when the couple are married and putting their child to bed. How the plot/premise went from "A" to "B" (how this couple fell in love and decided to make a life commitment) was left unanswered by the film and made the ending very unsatisifying, disappointing, and unbelievable.

Whoever the hair stylist was for this film should never work again. Mr. McDermott has a great head of hair. His greased look in this film- not a "successful architect style", that's for sure- terrible and very distracting! Ms. Parker's hair style?? My nightmares as a 5 year old were not as scary as this disaster on her head!

In all fairness, I will say some one good thing about this film. The cinematography is wonderful, especially around the apartment complex. You always see this dust, fuzz, or pussy willow type stuff floating in the air in the building's courtyard. I'm still trying to figure out the symbolism intended by the director of this effect. There are quite a few recognizable name actors in this film, but remember "Mars Attacks"? The film is such a flub, it is one of those movies you will want to watch more than once because the acting and dialogue are so bad.... like a horrible car wreck with blood, gore, and screams of agony- you can't take your eyes away! (heh heh) I always put this movie on when I'm in a masochistic mood and feel the need to be punished by Hollywood.

Worst movie I have ever seen
This movie is stunningly bad. It is hard to say which is worse: the plot, the screenplay, or the acting. If I had to pick, it would be the acting. Dylan McDermott as an architect? If you believe that, you would believe Keenau Reeves as a brain surgeon. And if you wonder why the fake-Sandra Bullock lead female hasn't become a household name, well, wonder no more. She is awful. The fact that there are some good reviews of this movie only proves that there are some people who like every movie, no matter how bad it is. It is bad beyond belief. The other reviewer is right, that even Sarah Parker is rendered into something awful by the director. You know how some movies "transport" you into another world? Well, this one transports you into an awful world of dismal movies that should not have been made. There is nothing redeeming about this film. Save yourself two hours by avoiding it.

YUCK
There are so many things wrong with this movie it is hard to know where to start. The sub-plot where the characters are attempting to preserve the historic apartment complex is resolved in the most unsatisfying way possible. The heroine's parents' story is also cringe worthy. The movie seems to be both promoting and simultaneously mocking the notion of a "one true love" that makes everything else meaningless. It does not pull it off and instead seems merely ridiculous. Run if you see this movie coming! ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Happy 100th Birthday, Mr Bob Hope!
Another fine Bob Hope movie, Bob Hope must have been at the age of 38 or 39 at the time. He's funny and quick with the lines. Fine delivery. Bob Hope says in this film as he flattens out his hand, "I got a long life". He sure does and we are glad he has given us 65 years of laughter. Happy 100th Birthday, Mr. Bob Hope!

Classic Hope and Carroll a definite plus
This is definite vintage Hope with the added benefit of the beautiful and talented Madeleine Carroll along for the ride. Legend had it that Hope constantly mentioned on his successful radio show how beautiful he found Madeleine Carroll and that any leading man in Hollywood would be lucky to work with her. Madeleine apparently was so touched by this unexpected adulation from the great comic that she called up Hope and said "Hey Bob I think it's time we made a movie together!" Needless to say Bob was happy to oblige and the result is the classic "My Favorite Blonde"
It is without doubt one of Bob Hope's best mixing his usual lovable coward character in with murders, intrigue and a priceless cross country race keeping one step ahead of hit men, police and you name it.
The one liners come fast and furious and will have you laughing from start to finish. The on screen chemistry between Hope and Carroll really works and Madeleine really surprises in holding her own against Hope's scene stealing techniques. Favorite moments are when Bob is accidently dragged in to speak to a room full of women who believe he is a child specialist. It is priceless as is the terrific scene of the "staged" domestic dispute which the pair stage to be "rescued" by the police from an apartment they are cornered in. it will have you laughing till you cry. Bob's comedy act side kick "Percy" the penguin also gets in on the act and has an hilarious scene in a sleeping car of a train when he is dressed in monogrammed pyjamas and night cap!!
Being a Hope film of the early 40's needless to say it has a very [costly] look and benefits from a terrific supporting cast including Gale Sondergaard and the always excellent George Zucco in his usual villanious character. Of course a Hope film wouldn't be complete without its share of Crosby jokes and a very funny little cameo by Bing Crosby himself just prior to the classic "bus scene" which will really have you laughing.
Even in the madcap proceedings there is still time for a bit of glamour and being an absolute fan of the glamour of old Hollywood I can say that never has Madeleine Carroll looked more beautiful than in this film, even despite the fact she spends most of the film on the run! Her Edith head fashions and beautiful Fur Coat make her look like a real glamour Goddess.

"My Favourite Blonde" is a classic of its genre and if you like fast paced comedies with no let up this is the film for you. I know I love it and never tire of its humour. Now if only someone would "rescue" another Hope "Favorite" in this case "My Favorite Brunette" which for too long has been lost in the horrid public domain arena where we can only see it in terrible foggy versions. That is another classic that deserves better.
Enjoy "My Favorite Blonde" she is still a beauty after all these years!

Memories for the grandchildren
Well, I watched this with a couple of the grandchildren--sub-teens. The plot was out-of date, but they howled at the movie's slapstick. They left the screen for a trip to the bathroom when Madeleine and Bob engaged in some "mushy stuff." That's just the way it was when I saw it in 1942. This Hope film provides a bonus which is the performance of Madeleine Carroll. Her acting skills are revealed in several scenes with Hope when she needs to save them by belting out several lines of American slang. Take it from my grandchildren; five years ago they would have claimed that MY FAVORITE BLONDE was a "bad" [super good] movie. Besides there wasn't too much huggin' and kissin' in between the good parts.

Great Hope Spy Farce
My Favorite Blonde is a hilarious edition to the My Favoirte Series. Madeline Caroll makes an excellent Hope cohort as does a certain penguin. I used the think that Bob Hope movies were all horribly dated but this movie proves that Hope's brand of comedy still works. I only wish they would finally re-release My Favorite Spy so that I could own the full series.

Funny Spy Spoof
In this film Bob plays an entertainer with the so familiar weaknes ofr a pretty face. Gullable guy falls for every trick in the book as girl uses him as cover for secert activities underground. They dodge knives and bullets through out and fall in love of course. ... Read more

Amazon.com

A potboiler featuring a demented caretaker and a seemingly hapless suburban family, this isThe Nanny of the 1990s. However, it is much more predictable than that 1965 Bette Davis psychodrama, and more graphic. It works only because Rebecca De Mornay makes us intensely uncomfortable as the disturbed au pair who wants to take care of much more than her employer's well-being.

Annabella Sciorra plays the perfect mother of a flawless family. Her obstetrician, however, is less than wonderful, having enjoyed her examination much more than he should have. When she files sexual harassment charges against the repugnant doctor, he loses face--literally--after shooting himself in the head. Several months later, an ideal nanny shows up at her home. You guessed it--she's the doc's widow.

The movie follows a tried and true formula, with the audience in on everything. However, the story does surprise us in intense and intimate ways. The visit to the obstetrician is one of the creepiest moments in the film. You definitely hear the voice of writer Amanda Silver in a plot concerned with the vulnerabilities of a family, a newborn, a marriage.

Since we know so much up front, there is an overall lack of inventiveness in the plot machinations. It may not jolt us, but De Mornay does. It's unsettling to watch someone who appears so attractive and who behaves so kindly suddenly reveal hideous psychopathic tendencies. Restraining herself from going over the top, she instead oozes such malevolence you'll want to shudder. --Rochelle O'Gorman ... Read more

Reviews (40)

Sick and disturbing realistic thriller
I first watched The Hand That Rocks the Cradle when I was very young. There are some great actors in this movie, such as Rebecca DeMornay, and Ernie Hudson, and Julianne Moore. I rented it a few nights ago, and I felt guilty and disgusted at the very thought of anyone, including myself, being entertined by such a sick film. The acting is fine, but the story is not a made up kind of thing. A story like this happens all the time, not quite as dramatic as the movie, but there are so many sick people out there who manipulate and deceive, and even kill. Rebecca DeMornay plays a sociopathic diabolical deeply disturbed woman seeking revenge on CLaire Bartel, after losing her husband, baby, and home. A sick person seeking revege is not a good mix. You can learn a thing or two from this film. I have learned by own experiences with sociopathic people. Number one is, if a person seems too good to be true, they aren't! No one is perfect and if they seem to be perfect they are definately without a doubt, acting!! If things start to go wrong, bad things, in a pattern, one happening after another, don't ignore it like Claire did. Being naive and blind is opening yourself to the enemy. An easy target is someone who trusts way too fast and opens up way too fast. To hire someone to watch after your kids, never on the third day tell them your life story. Every bit of private information you give them, they can use it against you, if they wanted to. Just like Payton did. There were so many sick things in the movie that made me want to just shut it off. The underwear scene, the greenhouse scene, the perfume on the dress scene, how on earth did she manage to get that far??? Anyone would stop and wonder why such things are happening. Bad luck? No, try a sick twisted person living in your home trying to destroy your life. It's a sick world we live in. That's why nowadays you can do background checks and criminal checks on the people you allow into your house to care for your kids. Always be alert and never ignore your instincts!!!

The Hand that Rocks the Cradle Rules the World!!!
"The hand that rocks the cradle" from 1992 and by Hollywood pictures was a great movie. i remembered it did create a buzz when it came out. the performances were good, but what really got it attention was this vile and almost mesmerizing character of peyton flanders (rebecca mornay). an over the edge psycho who wants to get revenge on one family because of a miscarriage she suffered over the fact that her husband , dr. mott (john de lancie) has been found guilty of sexually foundling his own patients.

Of course dr. mott has dr. mott has had a long history of doing this and his wife knows about it. however his dark secret is exposed by claire bartel (annabella sciorra) who while pregnant gets some unwanted sexually advances by the good old dr.

Bartel then is pointed as the first woman to come out as one of the dr. victim's and this causes a domino effect where other victims come of the closet to talk about the dr. the dr's games are over , however he can't deal with the fact that he has been exposed and going to prison, so he commits suicide (via a gunshot).

Peyton (mornay) loses their baby in the process and when she finds out miss bartel was the first victim to speak out she does what any typical psycho would do, she targets her for her revenge. the expression "hell on wheels" definitely applies here. Peyton's character is quite a sight for sore eyes, i haven't seen a psychotic character like this since glenn close's alex character in fatal attraction.

However, peyton doesn't launch an obvious assault on claire. no she's schemes to get into the family and then killing clare by posing as a nanny for hire in the family.

She then sets up the situation to get hired by making it look like the baby of the Bartel's is choking and thus saving her life. Pathetic. However the Bartels, Clare and Michael (Matt Mccoy) laughingly fall for the lies of Peyton despite the fact that she isn't whom she claims to be but then again the Bartel family is such a naive family that they are easily pluckings for Peyton's revenge.

For instance, Peyton is hired to be the "nanny" even though, she admits she wasn't sent by a nanny agency , she doesn't have clear cut references, and Marlena Craven (Clare's friend) doesn't like her one bit.

That about sums the movie itself in a way. It seems several characters are either too dumb or too naive to see what's going and this in turn leads to the disastrous things that happen at the hands of Peyton.

For example it seems that Clare has a sort of asthma problem and she must take her pills. Well one day, Michael (Matt Mccoy) must turn in an important proposal to his company. Clare volunteers to do it, but when her back is turned, Peyton hides the proposal thus ensuring some problems in the marriage of the Bartels. The stress caused on Clare causes her to have several asthma attacks yet she doesn't see that Peyton is responsible despite the warnings from Marlena or the obvious advances Peyton is making toward Michael. Yes that's right Peyton ever the home-wrecker tries to make sexual advances toward this gullible guy to break up the family.

Add further insult the other person who doesn't believe Peyton's nanny character is who she claims is Solomon (Ernie Hudson from Ghostbusters and Oz). Solomon is a black man who is mentally challenged, yet despite this Solomon has the intelligence to realize Peyton is a psycho. However, Peyton before Solomon has a chance to discuss his suspicions of her, gets rid of Solomon, thus leaving the Bartel family once again an easy target for her.

LOL I made it sound like a soap opera. But all kidding aside "The Hand That Rocks the Cradle" is a very intense psychological thriller. Probably the best that came after Fatal Attraction and was then followed by another thriller about a psycho woman in "Single White Female" with Bridget Fonda.

Revenge Of The Babysitter: The Classic Thriller
The Hand That Rocks The Cradle, released in 1992, seems to have opened up people's eyes to the real evil in some people who masquerade as babysitters or people of friendly nature you can confide in but who only wish to do harm. Although this is downright drama and sensational, the stuff thrillers are made of, some of its content can in fact occur in real life and there have been many a case that has proven true. It was a thriller in the early 90's, although it may appear rather tame by comparison to our present thriller movies. On DVD, the experience is fresh and the sound quality is incredibly good. The DVD features the original trailer and commentary. It stars Rebecca De Mornay as the scheming and murderous baby-sitter Peyton, Annabella Sciorra as Claire, the hapless wife. The story moves slowly, building up tension to a climatic finale.

Peyton's husband, an obstratrician, sexually molests Claire who files a complaint and seeks to get him in jail. The obstratrician commits suicide and triggers a miscarriage in Peyton, who was about to have his child. So, there it is. The set-up. Peyton really does have valid reasons to be angry. She has lost everything -her husband, her baby and her home. But she is so consumed with bitterness and by her desire for revenge that she is stripped of her humanity and becomes an authentic villain so perfect for this type of film. Rebecca De Mornay's non-threatening, beautiful and innocent Caucasian features are a perfect disguise. She takes a job as babysitter to Claire's daughter Emma. Now safe in the family's trust, she conducts scheme after scheme to destroy Claire and to exact revenge. She is breastfeeding Claire's infant to mark the child as hers(Peyton proves that women can be just as territorial as men and just as ruthless, perhaps more so) she wins Emma's trust and affection by forging a false friendship, she frames the black help, who is a bit weak and slow but proves heroic in the finale, by making Claire believe he is sexually molesting Emma -she hides Emma's panties in a drawer in the storage room. She even tries to break up Claire and her husband by making Claire believe that he is having an affair with his old friend and sweetheart (played by Julian Moore who ends up killed in the greenhouse by Peyton) and Peyton even attempts to seduce Claire's husband for herself! There is no stopping her until her come-uppance comes just in time for the ending.

The dangerous "outsider" coming into the safety of a perfectly happy family really works as a thriller in cinema. We cannot sympathize with Peyton, because she is a very corrupt and vicious woman. Although we would like to see Claire, Sciorra's character, be more defensive and try to protect her family and even eliminate the villain herself, we cannot help but worry how it will turn out for her since she is not a very strong woman and is in fact a victim of asthma. The real star of the show is Rebecca De Mornay anyways and so it was fitting that Claire is a weak contrast by comparison to Rebecca's powerfully evil performance. The location was shot in Southern California somewhere near the Hollywood Hills or perhaps a suburban community, is tailor-made for the ambiance of a dark film such as this one. Who'd ever guess that such intense crime could happen in a small town that looks blameless ? The music is effectively chilling, although the composer or music editor seems to have delighted in playing with the theme of innocence mingled with evil- the soprano aria "Poor Wondering One" from the Gilbert and Sullivan opera "The Pirates Of Penzance" is played repeatedly as it seems to be an album that Claire has in her house. At one point, the orchestral score twists the cheerful melody by using darker and menacing instrumental themes
so that "Poor Wondering One" sounds more serious and visceral.
The rest of the music is appropriately detached, shocking and like most other thiller movie scores.

An entertaining time waster
If you have a brain, you'll know how this movie will end up. The demented nanny. The saintly, stuttering black handyman whom she has fired. The mousy, asthmatic wife. The clueless husband. There are few surprises in this movie.

So why three stars instead of zero or one? Well, Rebecca DeMornay is effectively chilling in the role. She's pretty believable as the nanny who has her very real reasons for going off the deep end. (In fact one of the few surprises in the film is that she is given a solid reason for flipping out. In fact, I was kind of rooting for her over the very mousy Annabella Sciorra.)

The scene with DeMornay in the woman's bathroom at the arboretum was great. Her character, Payton, was quite soulless, and she made you feel her chill. She never plays a false note. The stares she gave could stop people in their tracks. You really do think this woman could kill.

Worth watching if your expectations aren't for a Casablanca or Gone with the Wind.

The 90's Classic Thriller About An Evil Babysitter
1992: I was too young to fully appreciate this film when it was first released. At this time in the early 90's, shocking thrillers of suspense dealing with the base instincts of humans for murder and revenge were very popular (Silence Of The Lambs won Best Picture) and the ever popular femme fatale- such as Sharon Stone's portrayal in Basic Instinct. Rebecca De Mornay rose to movie stardom at this time with her performance as Peyton, a vengeful and scheming baby-sitter. Rebecca De Mornay grew up in Europe although she was born in America - her father was the radical conservative talk show host Wally George whose show was popular in independent stations in the 80's and early 90's and who died recently. Opposite De Mornay is Annabella Sciorra, who plays the asthma-ridden but brave and good mother Claire, who has the seemingly perfect suburban dream life- a devoted husband, a daughter and a baby.

After it's been revealed that Claire's obstritician has sexually molested her, he commits suicide rathe than being put in jail. This triggers the consuming obscession for revenge in his widow, Peyton. Peyton takes a job as babysitter for Claire's baby and daughter Emma (played, it seems, by the child actress in Matilda).

Although Peyton comes off as innocent, helpful and utterly harmless, she slowly works her revenge over Claire and her family. She is breastfeeding Claire's baby without her knowledge, winning Emma's affection, gets rid of the African American help who knows too much, and even tries to seduce Claire's husband. The subtle way in which she does her evil is very frightening but the intensity grows most abundantly in the final portions of the film. This is a well-done movie, in almost Hitchcock psychological horror, and is a great adult film. I must stress that this is adult horror and that kids should not watch it. It would make them twice about their "real" babysitter. Of course, although there are a few bad apple babysitters, not all of them are like Rebecca De Mornay's wicked Peyton. ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of the biggest teases in film history, this film's sensational plot finds a young wife (Demi Moore) solicited for sex by a wealthy bachelor (Robert Redford), for which the latter offers to pay a cool million bucks to her and her underachieving husband (Woody Harrelson). The two accept Redford's deal, and their marriage is ruined. The twist in the film, though, is that the sin doesn't lie with the rich guy, but rather with this unfocused, immature, equivocating couple who would do such a thing, naively believing it would get their lives on track. Director Adrian Lyne, who caused an even greater stir by filming Lolita (the one starring Jeremy Irons), thus pulls a kind of thinking person's bait and switch, promising something tawdry and then turning the story around so its focus is on a rite of passage for the estranged spouses. Still, Lyne has some peculiarly garish ideas at times: the final disposition of that million dollars is like a joke out of Monty Python. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (32)

Interesting but seriously flawed
INDECENT PROPOSAL is one of those formularized, supposedly heartfelt movies told in one mess of a tale. It starts off with a couple (Demi Moore and Woody Harrelson) struggling to make ends meet and just as they are about to drown in debt, they hit the jackpot in Vegas and then lose all their winnings again. As they are about to hit rock bottom, Robert Redford, a multi-billionaire, comes into their lives to give them a chance to get one million dollars. The catch: Redford "borrow" Woody's wife for one night. They agree, but this of course changes the course of their relationship forever. Woody Harrelson is truly miscast in a role too serious for him, making some scenes unintentionally funny. Yet the other two leads help keep this vechicle interesting. Despite the limited success of the script, it remains as a flawed but ambitious work.

A treasure
This movie is definitely a treasure, beautifully acted, beautifully filmed, its the kind of movie that stays with you. I can't say much about the movie that hasn't already been said except that I recommend the soundtrack also, the movie score is excellent.

How can any female viewer....
of this movie not be angry about this film? Come on, Robert Redford asks Woody Harrelson to sell him his wife for a million bucks. HELLO? Can't Demi have an opinion on that? In the billiard room scene the two men talk about Demi as if she is some sexual pleasuring device. Plus, there is a microphone in the picture for about 3 minutes.
Other then that, the film is entertaining, but that is only because Robert Redford is in it. Brilliant casting, who needs a million bucks reward to sleep with RR, especially when compared to Woody.
Demi knows that, Robert knows that and the (female) viewer knows that. Poor Woody marvels what went wrong for a bit too long to come over as at least decent intelligent.
Good thing is that we never see Demi and Robert "doing it".
All in all the movie works in favour of RR, and that is not a bad thing.
Yeah, I know my english is bad :)

I'd like to make a proposal,remake the movie with Demi & I !
Demi Moore is a housewife who goes to Vegas with her husband and loses all their money at the casino. A rich tycoon (Redford) offers a proposal. One night in bed with the man's wife (Demi) for a big wad of money. She accepts...however, after the smoke clears, the husband suspects that his wife is still seeing the tycoon & ends up divorcing her. She runs to the tycoon to start a new relationship. Will money buy her the happiness she seeks? Find out for yourself!

Was it really so indecent?
Adrian Lyne is truely a master at exploiting human emotions. In this powerful movie he adds the bonus of 'easy money' in the form of one million dollars to a stuggling couple if the lady is willing to spend just one night with him.. We are all to assume that one night is all the billionaire really wants. "The night will come and go but the money could last a lifetime" he explains, but in a true Coen brothers twist, money proves to be the root of all evil. The irony being, that once the night passes, and the relationship deteriorates, neither of them want the money. The only real flaw in the movie is the fact that neither member of this relatively intelligent couple are able to see what the billionaires alterior motive is.
All through this movie I kept wondering what I would do in the same situation. Now I'm not married but maybe if I were I would look at it differently but right now, I would probably take the money. The reason being that I think I'm mature and responsible enough to deal with it.... But then again, dont we all. ... Read more

Reviews (41)

One of the Best
An engrossing WELL-WRITTEN story (Hollywood, PLEASE take note), excellent cast, superb acting on the part of all the actors (not just the leads), painstaking staging and Frankenheimer's direction blending all these essential elements into a thoroughly enjoyable movie. What can you say about a rousing action movie that also makes you think? You can say it's rarely found in today's films. The primary quandry here is just what is the value of art in terms of the human lives that must be expended to preserve it? Is it truly a country's heritage or just oils on canvas for which the people who will have to die for it have little or no real appreciation? Is it worth saving because of its beauty or its value? And when does the cost of saving it become too high? The movie works on all levels, but the characters (and the actors portraying them) are exceptional. The stand-outs: Burt Lancaster, the yardmaster/resistance leader who really doesn't want to do this one last (and seemingly unimportant) job so close to the end of the war; Paul Scofield, the intense German colonel who loves (obsesses over) the art and is taking Lancaster's attempts to thwart his plans for it very personally; Wolfgang Preiss, the "good German officer" who does not agree with his superior but does his duty until he can do it no more; Jean Moreau, the pragmatic French hotel proprietress who has had to comfort one too many fellow widows and Michel Simon, the old engineer who fondly remembers dating a girl who posed for Renoir and decides to make this fight his own. No one who loves a good movie should miss this film. It's not just for action/war movie fans.

Underrated war actioner--art for whose sake?
_The Train_ has held up well since its release in 1965. Dismissed as an improbable shoot-em-up then, it tells a much richer story than the special-effects vehicles in the genre nowadays. Burt Lancaster isn't especially gallic as the Frenchman Labiche, but his acting talent and intensity soon steamroller any resistance the viewer may have. Paul Scofield is perfectly cast as a cultured monster, the Nazi colonel who is bent on spiriting the paintings away into Germany. One can easily picture him murdering hostages between sips of cognac.

Shot in black and white, the film is dark and greasy-looking. The screen is filled with churning railroad machinery much of the time, which dwarfs the people around it. The wheezing, snorting engines are also stars in this movie. Even the sky looks dirty in the daylight scenes. Oh yes, there's a sensational train wreck, too. Definitely less mindless than your average Rambo flick, but no less exciting.

The Train
Is a work of art worth a human life?
We are near the end of World War II. It's August 2, 1944, the "1511th day of German occupation" of Paris. German Colonel von Waldheim (Paul Scofield) enters a dark museum and turns a spotlight on a painting. He stares at it with the eyes of a lover beholding his best beloved. He turns another spotlight on another painting. The Hun is humanized, and we sympathize with his quiet passion.
It comes as a bit of a shock when he announces that he is taking the paintings, hundreds of Miros and Picassos and Matisses and others, with him when the Germans evacuate Paris. A resistance group, led by railroad worker Paul Labiche (Burt Lancaster), is enlisted to stop them. Labiche initially refuses. It's one thing to blow up a train, dangerous enough - it's another to stop a train without damaging what's inside it. National heritage or not, men will die. There are more important targets than a train filled with art. Things change, though, and eventually Labiche and the remnants of his resistance group find themselves trying the impossible.
I've always been a little leery of Burt Lancaster. Maybe I was traumatized by viewing THE RAINMAKER or ELMER GANTRY at a young and impressionable age. He sometimes seems all horse teeth and braying charm and dis-tinct e-nunc-ee-a-shun. Not so here. In THE TRAIN he's restrained and natural and completely convincing. Scofield is equally strong as his brutal nemesis.
Sometimes the extras on a dvd aren't worth the bother, but I loved the director's commentary by the late John Frankenheimer. It was like taking a course in the art of film making.
Frankenheimer tells us he was trying to give the movie a realistic feel, which I understood before listening to the commentary track but didn't really understand how he went about it. One trick he used was to open the f-stop on the camera and keep everything in focus, something that would have been impossible if THE TRAIN wasn't shot in black and white. Everything is kept in focus and he keeps the background action busy and interesting.
Frankenheimer is an unabashed fan of Burt Lancaster, with whom he made five movies. Not only does Lancaster do all his own stunts in this one, including a dangerous backwards fall off of a moving train, he even fills in as a stunt double for another actor. The original stuntman made a fall off a roof look like an "olympic jump," and 'realism' was the keyword in this one. Lancaster did take a nice tumble off the tiles, but you've got to wonder about the wisdom of it all. Lancaster was injured during the filming of THE TRAIN; on his first day off in weeks he played a round of golf and twisted his knee when he stepped into a hole. His right knee swelled up 'like a basketball.' Frankenheimer shot Labiche in the leg halfway through the movie to explain the limp.
The only phony movie aspect to this movie is the dubbed voices of some of the French actors. You can't hide dubbing very well, and Frankenheimer doesn't have much to say about it. I wouldn't knock a star or even a half-star off because of it. This is a tremendously entertaining film.

Great movie.
There are an amazing amount of action films these days. Each one of them attempts to beat the last one's visual effects. And in this competition, hollywood has lost track of what makes a truly great action film... Skill. Most of the action films these days are entirely uncreative, and many of them are very, very boring. Who really want's to see a dozen tiles fall to the ground and break in slow motion, as films such as "the Matrix" use this technique constantly. But this film is different. It carries raw emotional power, and it's star, at age 50, did all of his own stunts, and even drove the locamotives that his character drives. This movie is awesome, and I highly recommend you buy this DvD. And by the way, this music track is a lot of fun to listen to when you're sick.

Perfect film on less- than- great DVD
The audio on the MGM DVD was lacking the full spectrum of audio, in my opinion. If you don't care so much about audio, it would be a 5 star DVD, but for those feeling that audio is an important factor, a star must be deducted. Bass and treble just weren't tweaked in DVD production which made the audio seem really flat, and I know that MGM could have produced a better job. It seems that a good number of the MGM DVDs lack the care and attention of producing consistently superior products.

The DVD gives the viewer options to listen to music only and has an option for director's comments during the film. I was at first dismayed because at the beginning of the movie, director John Frankenheimer just wouldn't open up. But he started sharing some interesting things as the movie progressed. There is also an 8- page booklet that gives some interesting production notes and history.

The video quality from, I think, an original film print is pristine. Frankenheimer's locations and times of filming were very effective in evoking a very dismal feeling as the European conflict was drawing to a conclusion. I love Frankenheimer's use of deep focus -- which is using wide angle lenses to have both near and far- away characters and scenes in focus -- to give a vision that many other filmmakers fail to incorporate effectively.

I'm glad that there was explanation in the film about why people were more concerned with paintings than people in a story that was loosely based on an actual event. Many westerners like Paul Labiche (Burt Lancaster) would not care about the value of crates of artwork in a time of war, but schooling by caretaker Miss Villard (Suzanne Flon) expressed the passion and pride that the French feel for such paintings. This helped explain why some would scarifice their lives to save the crates. (Ms. Flon, born in 1918 is apparently still alive and acting, too.)

It's quite a story of saving "priceless" paintings at the expense of one's life. It seems like a WWII action film (which has its share of blowing stuff up), but its story actually weighs the value of art against the value of life. Labiche from the very beginning of his introduction battles Col. von Waldheim (Paul Scolfield), who wants him to deliver the art to Germany AND The Resistance, who want the art protected from the Nazis. Labiche is actually alone in his own beliefs as an American, being tugged by both sides while ultimately struggling with making sense of the conflict over the art.

The movie is well- developed from Lancaster asking Frankenheimer to direct "The Train" after original director Arthur Penn abandoned the project a week after production. I only say that because everything that was directed by Frankenheimer was terrific. The choice of the players, scenery, editing, camera placement and post production yielded a perfect war film that wasn't simply about war. It was about the value of life and what people value in their lives.

Watch for the one scene of a runaway train's derailment -- one of a dozen cameras mounted to film the scene -- came within inches of being wiped out by the locomotive's wheels and the scene has become a classic in filmmaking history. ... Read more

Reviews (38)

Cameron Couldn't Dream Up A Movie This Good If He Wanted To
The latest Titanic with Winslet and DiCaprio is so over-rated it's sickening. I've just recently seen this version of the Titanic...and let me tell you...it put James Cameron to shame.
The acting in this was amazing, especially Tim Curry, Catherine Zeta Jones, and George C. Scott, and the woman who played Molly Brown.
Despite the fact that many people are disgusted by the rape scene, I don't see what's so graphic about it. It's true that it was unnecessary, but look at whats on TV nowadays! Hello people...they play a lot worse than that on the damn Disney channel.
Tim Curry's character is the kind one loves to hate, and he does an amazing job for the part. It's true it seems he's always typecast as a villian, but this is the most purely evil role he's played yet! As much as I tried to hate his character...I couldn't...knowing that it was really Tim.
You're guarenteed to love this movie, I believe it has set that standard for all Titanic movies, despite what many will say. DiCaprio couldn't act half as good as anyone on this version.

TITANIC MOVIE YOU WANT TO SEE!
This is the movie that you want to see because they have great actors. my favoraite is tim curry(clue,rocky horror picture show). I love the way the front cover looks it is just that I can't find it anywhere (the picture). You should see this movie I would give it 100,000,000 stars if I had to. take my advise and get it. Or you will miss the action that could be write in front of your very eyes

Better plot than Cameron, but not convincing enough
I picked this DVD up in a videostore the other day and got really curious. Having seen James Cameron's blockbuster movie from 1997 and noticing that stars like Catherine Zeta-Jones were on the role list here, I had pretty high expectations about this one. But alas, I watched it without being too overly impressed. The special effects are laughable, you can easily tell that the ocean and iceberg is computer made and some of the sailing scenes even look painted at one point. Plot-wise, it goes real in depth with many of the characters and we get to really know what they're all about. We just don't stick to one couple that bore our asses off (Kate and Leo, yawn). No depressing James Horner background music a la "The Rose" either. The raping scene was a bit off the edge but it isn't as bad as people claim. I've seen worse things in other movies. The sinking of the ship was a huge disappointment, we only see images of the people in the lifeboats with a terrified look on their faces and just small seconds of the ship sinking and breaking in two. At this point of the movie, James Cameron does a much better job actually focusing on the ship sinking and breaking in two and paid less attention to the people in the lifeboats.

If you're fascinated by Titanic like me, then this movie is worth checking out but if you also want a great movie experience that makes you feel as if you were on the boat the night of the sinking, then James Cameron's version is the one to go for. Seeing that this was a movie produced for TV, it makes sense they didn't spend that much money on it but don't let that put you off from watching it, you will enjoy it.

Wonderful movie and a shame it is out of print!
I saw this on TV just like most people and I liked it better than the Oscar winning movie Titanic. Everything is great about this movie! The costumes, the acting, the actors, the stories, etc. What's not great is that it is out of print and the cheapest I've seen this to buy is $99.00! WTF! The people who release DVD's need a good kick in the a$$ for not making more DVD copies! You'd think they would since Catherine Zeta-Jones is now an Oscar winner and is very famous! RE-RELEASE IT ON DVD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not the Theatrical Version but Better!
I saw most of this movie on TV one day, I missed the beginning but I saw most of the movie and I really liked what I saw and I'm disappointed that the DVD is no longer selling and I hope to find a used copy but I also hope they rerelease this DVD. I have noticed that several reviews have gotten this George C. Scott, Catherine Zeta-Jones Version mixed up with the Winslet, DiCaprio version and mixing up movie facts, I'm not exactly 100% sure but I think the ship was only shown breaking in half in the theatrical movie but not this made for TV movie. If you are interested in movies based on the story of the Titanic and don't mind if some parts of the story are fictionalized then I recommend this movie, and you know that parts of the Dicaprio, Winslet version were fictionalized too. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

a great feel good movie with excellent acting
This movie really shows how Michael Keaton can really do comedy.
He plays a wealthy hockey player whose life is turned upside
down when he meets a Latino kid who muggs him and his mother.
We see a romance revolve and Michael Keaton's character sees
just what a lonely life he has. His scence with the little boy
are touching and funny. Michael Keaton can do comedy and serious
roles and he was perfect in this movie. Everyone was great.

I was quite pleased!
I am happy to say that "Touch and Go" was a great movie. My old buddy Michael Keaton finally did it again. He made a film that I enjoyed as much or even more than "The Dream Team". I actually cared about each individual character and their outcome.

It is a story about a self absorbed hockey player who finds out what that there is a world outside of himself. After being mugged by a wisecracking 12 year old kid, he ends up taking the brat under his wing unintentionally. He begins a romance with the boys mother (Maria Conchita Alonso-lookin SMOKIN' as ever-of course this was 1986) and ends up putting his hockey career on the backburner.

After renting a slew of BAD movies including "My Own Private Idaho", "A Kiss Before Dying" and "One Good Cop"(it just didn't do it for me) It was a treat to have something with substance finally. I highly recomend this film to anyone looking for a good time on a Saturday night.

5 out of 5 with complete confidence.

great interaction
the movie was intertaining and thought provoking.great inter-
action with it's 3 main characters.

touch and go
i saw the movie once and i love it. i enjoyed how the heart of micheal was change due to his meeting the little boy and his mom who i felt really needed him. oh i really enjoyed when he got with her and the boy was going to have a father figure in his life now and how she would no longer have to struggle any more cause she got micheal. she is a lovely girl and they play well together in this movie. i love it--------yes!!!!!!!!.

Touch and Go
This is one of my all time favorite movies. Michael Keaton and Maria Conchita Alonso are wonderful. It is an entertaining and heartwarming story about a young boy headed in the wrong direction in life and a playboy hockey player who become friends and "straighten" each other out. I highly recommend this movie. ... Read more

Amazon.com

If you've never seen an aviation movie before in your entire life, you'll be blissfully ignorant of the fact that Memphis Belle shamelessly (and yet gloriously) incorporates just about every cliché in the flight-movie handbook. If you're a big fan of aviation movies--especially movies about World War II bomber crews--you'll be glad that the genre's clichés have been handled with such professional flair. As it follows the crew of a B-17 bomber on its final and most dangerous mission over Germany, Memphis Belle may be little more than a slick and highly authentic presentation of familiar thrills and characters, but it's a rousing piece of entertainment. Featuring an ensemble cast of fresh faces who've since enjoyed thriving careers (including Billy Zane, Sean Astin, Eric Stoltz, D.B. Sweeney, and Harry Connick Jr.), the movie exists as a fitting tribute to the men who fought and often died in the air over hostile territory. It's the Hollywood version of a 1944 wartime documentary made by legendary director William Wyler (whose daughter served as one of this film's producers), and as such it's a bit contrived and melodramatic. And yet, this exciting movie is almost certain to grab and hold your attention, offering an honorable reminder of the bravery and integrity that were crucial ingredients of any bomber's crew. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Twelve O'Clock Medium...
If you can penetrate (like a B-17 cutting through cloud cover) all the character cliches and a certain old-fashioned hokey aura, you'll find a harrowing depiction of daylight bombing, circa 1943. What you won't find is an accurate account of the real Memphis Belle's 25th mission, or anyone resembling the actual men who flew her that day.

Matthew Modine captains this fictionalized crew, with support from resentful co-pilot Tate Donovan, dishonest bombadier Billy Zane, panicked navigator D.B. Sweeney and wiseacre belly gunner Sean Astin. Tailgunner Harry Connick, Jr. gets to display his vocals and piano skills in a musical number, dedicated to waistgunner Eric Stoltz, that stalls the film in the early going.

While the real Memphis Belle experienced a somewhat less dramatic run to a different target, this film's mission is to depict the aerial terrors of that year in Europe, when American airmen suffered more losses than any other branch of our armed forces. Direct hit! Massive B-17 formations thunder across the sky, flak rips planes apart, and in one chilling moment, an enemy fighter slices one bomber in half, and our heroes hear the panicked screams of its doomed crew over the radio.

The battle scenes are horrific, and the character scenes are just horrible. It's not that the acting is of poor quality; it isn't. It's that each crewmember faces some sort of hackneyed personal crisis and comes through in true cliched fashion, which somewhat cheapens what the real crew experienced. It's literally one thing after another, a bombing run as group therapy. The film relies exclusively on stock Hollywood types, rather than human beings. Plus, Sweeney's fearful character does a disservice to the real Belle's navigator. Modine comes off best, with his youthful appearance and dedication, as he admonishes his crew not to shout their targets over the intercom. John Lithgow has the thankless task of portraying the coldblooded PR officer who's more concerned with publicity tours than the men's welfare, or their mission's stategic/tactical importance.

Despite its failings as a "true" story, this is a film worth watching. Not until "Saving Private Ryan" would a film surpass "Belle's" depiction of nerve-wracking combat.

Great Hollywood Introduction to Vital American History
A little background. First of all, there really was a plane called the Memphis Belle. It is traditionally considered the first B-17 to complete the obligatory 25 missions and survive. If you are going to learn about the real 'Memphis Belle', I highly recommend you watch the William Wyler documentary, made during World War II, that chronicles the story of the actual plane and its crew. You may also want to read the book that came out in the past year called "The Man Who Flew the Memphis Belle" about the Belle's pilot, Robert Morgan, because it is a fascinating book about a man who went on to fly B29's in the Pacific after surviving in Europe. And to watch a movie that accurately chronicles the trials and tribulations of bomber crewmen in Europe in WWII, I recommend "Twelve O'Clock High" and "Pistol Packing Mama".
That having been said, I must add that most air veterans think that the 1990 "Memphis Belle" movie is unrealistic, and in many ways they are right. However, I have done enough research to appreciate that the film is a great way to get introduced to the exploits of the brave aircrews who flew over Germany in World War II. It is an entertaining film. I think the director would have been much better off NOT calling the film "The Memphis Belle", because the story is mostly fiction. So why did he/she do so? It was put out by the daughter of William Wyler, who made the original movie, in part as a tribute to her father. Thus the name.

The actual pilot of the real Memphis Belle was asked about the movie, and said that it appeared to him that the writers had taken everything that had happened to the crew over all 25 missions and compressed them into one hellish mission. Indeed, the crew deals with about every in-flight emergency imaginable on mission twenty-five. This is one exciting piece of film.
Roger Freeman, one of the great air historians, also served as an advisor on the film. The film got a lot of things right, too, in addition to the gaffes that many air vets notice.
The joy of seeing three of the surviving B-17's flying together again in this movie is worth the price, in my book.
I recommend the movie with the caveat that it is not FACT, but historical fiction, and recommend that if you like it, that you not stop until you see the real "Memphis Belle" video from the forties and also read Robert Morgan's book. You will come away with renewed and increased admiration for the brave men who flew missions in the war to save the world. These men flew knowing full well that each mission could well be their last. They flew no fewer than 25 such missions at war's beginning when the odds were terrible, and as many as 35 by war's end. This movie is a fitting tribute to their sacrifices.

Almost Realist
This is the first of a line of movies depicting shear guts in the face of a real enemy. Afterwards came the likes of Platoon, Saving Private Ryan, Thin Red Line, The Windtalkers, Blackhawk Down and We Were Soldiers.

Memphis Belle gets a bit schmaltzy in the beginning, focusing on the crew and not the reality, but the scenes of flying into the fire makes you respect the guts that generation displayed.

I really thought that using the actors (all around 21 to 25) was a great touch, and made me sit back and think about what I was doing at that age (Nam) and what my dad was doing (WWII). Whew, take a bunch of amped up young men and throw them into harms way. I wonder if older, more comfortable men would have done that?

And I thought flyboys had it easy. Everyone directly engaged was slugging it out. My Uncle used to say that the papers in WWII wouldn't focus on both fronts simultaneously, if the European campaigns were having a fight, the Pacific theator was talked about briefly or that the Marines were doing okay... he said that wasn't the case, everyone was fighting hard to stay alive, not just to win the war. From the individuals perspective it was a matter of survival, not glory. The glory came later.

Great movie!
This is a movie that I was introduced to when I was young. It really made me appreciate what men like the ones in the movie did for our country. It also turned me on to WWII aviation as well as movies that go for the heart. I would recommend this movie to anyone.

See how many familiar faces you can spot.

World War II in the air.
If all you know about World War II is Hitler and the Marines raising the flag at Iwo Jima then this movie will help show another side of the war. Not everyone who died in World War II did so in a foxhole or on the beaches of Normandy. Many young men met their fate in the statosphere, some by themselves and others with their crews. Memphis Belle is a great movie on showing how men fought and died at thousands of feet above the ground in the war against Hitler and the German war machine. Although not entirely acurate on how the Memphis Belle flew its last mission, this movie shows just how special this bomber crew was. Also it shows just how lucky the crew of the Memphis Belle were in being the first B-17 in the Eighth Air Force to finish 25 missions and complete their tour of duty. This movie is a great tribute to the men who flew this bomber as well as all the men who gave their lives for both sides in the sky over Germany. ... Read more

Reviews (213)

Funny , Romantic and Sexy
This is one movie that had a lot of star power. George Clooney returns to normal movie bliss as Bank Robber Jack Foley, who, after just getting out of jail decides to rob another bank. Though it may seem successful it isn't and he gets into a 1981 Honda Accord Hatchback(AKA Eggcar) which doesn't work. Back to Jail He Goes. Jennifer Lopez also does a great Job as Karen Sisco, a Beautiful Federal Marshal. Dennis Farina is funny and over Protective as her Father Marshall Sisco. Also, Don Chedle makes another good movie choice(He Also Stars in the risque Boogie Nights) as Boxer and theif Maurice "Snoopy" Miller. His nickname is Snoopy because he throws his Fights to make money, even in jail. Also there is Albert Brooks as Ripley a rich Embesler who gives them all the lowdown on uncut diamonds. This funny movie also stars Michael Keaton reprising his role as Ray Nicolette ( From Jackie Brown) a strange FBI Agent who is always reveiling who he is. Memorable Scene- Karen protects herself from Snoopy's Cousin , Ex Boxer, Kenneth with a metal weapon and saying "We've Tusseled" Watch and Enjoy. Also watch out for the scene stealing White-Boy Bob

Why I have a soft spot in my heart for Jennifer Lopez.
Though this made no money when it was first released, director Steven Soderbergh's caper film "Out of Sight" has developed a strong cult following. This well-written, well-acted, beautifully shot ensemble comedy-drama is superior entertainment, and it "launched" Soderbergh's comeback to the world of serious film by proving that Hollywood films can still be smart and artistic.

Taken from an Elmore Leonard novel, the script gives George Clooney his best part to date. As Jack Foley, a moderately successful thief who uses words more than guns, he's given moments where he's supposed to be tough and tender. He's smart but impulsive, and he frequently finds himself in the middle of a jam. During a prison escape, for instance, he ends up sharing a car trunk with a federal marshal named Karen Sisco, played in a sophisticated, ballsy turn by Jennifer Lopez.

From that scene of flirtatious, intense dialogue because they like each other and hate each other, stuck at an impasse where neither one of them can make a move, Sisco and Foley banter and battle throughout the entire movie. When their confrontations come (in the seduction scene and, later, in the final heist), the payoffs to the audience are rewarding.

The supporting cast is uniformly colorful, and all the characters are well-defined. I particularly liked Don Cheadle's work as a scary, insecure prison boxer and Steve Zahn's turn as a hapless criminal obsessed with wearing sunglasses.

But the scenes between Clooney and Lopez set the screen on fire, moreso because of the way they deliver their dialogue than because of the way they look. The editing of the seduction scene, where their dinner dialogue seems to narrate what happens to them after dinner, is what makes it so sexy.

Great movie. Lopez has never done anything yet that's as good.

JLo & Who?
Clever dialogue and witty banter make "Out of Sight" an enjoyable film loaded with many twists and meaningful turns. Characters played smart kept my attention, though I was confused about who was Jennifer Lopez's boyfriend. How apropos? George Clooney is too good looking to survive in prison and come out looking so fresh. Many familiar faces, not all in the credits offer more fun. No surprise Clooney and Lopez find a lot to talk about and the time for conversation in the end.

Michael Duranko
www.bootism.com

"Out Of Sight" Review
Steven Soderbergh's smoothly-adapted cinematic take on Elmore Leonard's novel of the same name has George Clooney (in one of his finest performances) as Jack Foley, a bank robber who keeps ending up upstate due to a good deal of bad luck. Jennifer Lopez is Karen Sisco, a beautiful but very dangerous Federal marshall who ends up in Foley's trunk during a prison getaway and eventually ends up falling for the escaped prisoner she has been assigned to bring back in. Foley and his partner-in-crime, Buddy (Ving Rhames) are planning one last score though. They're planning to swipe some uncut diamonds from a former cellmate who has them hidden in his winter home in Detriot. They aren't the only ones in on the caper though as Don Cheadle's thuggish Maurice "Snoopy" Miller has also managed to bully his way into the picture. "Out Of Sight" works real well, mostly in part to thanks to Scott Frank's very well-done adaption of Leonard's novel. The very entertaining performances from the ensemble cast don't hurt things either. Even J-Lo who is generally more of a "movie star" than an "actress" brings a lot to the table. Also look for Michael Keaton in a brief cameo, reprising his role as Ray Nicolette from "Jackie Brown".