Amazon.com

When he emerged from film school in the mid-1980s, director Phil Joanou was touted as the next Steven Spielberg, perhaps because Spielberg took him on as a protégé briefly. Since then, it's been "Phil who?" thanks to a series of mediocre thrillers like this one. Based on one of a series of novels by James Lee Burke about a troubled ex-cop named Dave Robicheaux, this film sat on the shelf for a couple of years before finally being released in 1995. Alec Baldwin plays Robicheaux, a recovering alcoholic who has put life on the New Orleans police department behind him--until a plane crashes in the lake next to his house. He rescues a young Central American girl from the wreck and adopts her--and winds up involved in a gumbo of drug running and dirty dealing involving an old pal named Bubba. Tip-off that this movie should have gone straight to video: Bubba is played by Eric Roberts. Redeeming feature (at least for men, who are all dogs, as everyone knows): a Teri Hatcher nude scene. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (15)

A poor adaption of a very good book
My main problem with the movie is the casting of Alec Baldwin as the lead character. He is miscast, and should stick to the pretty boy characters he usually plays. His attempt at a bayou accent is ludicrous, for example. Surprisingly, Terri Hatcher does a convincing job in her role. My advice? Read the book, and skip the video.

A very underrated movie.
This is quite simply a 4-star production of a 5-star book. Many people only rented a copy to fast forward straight to the Teri Hatcher nude scene, while some actually wanted to see the screen adaptation of a wonderful book by James Lee Burke.

Many seem to attack Alec Baldwin's portayal of the lead character, Dave Robicheaux, but I actually think he did a very respectable job. Sure his Cajun accent wasn't 100% dead on, but that isn't all that makes a character. The Robicheaux character, throughout the series of books, is a flawed character that is full of heart and that is exactly how it comes across on-screen. It seems as if every other role was perfectly cast, especially the role of Claudette (played by Teri Hatcher). Every last detail is done perfectly, from the accent down to the sultry demeanor.

The plot brings plenty of action scenes, with many scenes that bring out emotion. If the production studio hadn't been nearly broke when this movie was made (and subsequently put on the shelf for a couple of years), therefore going vastly unpublicized, it would have been more successful at the box office. Don't let the numbers fool you, this is quite a film.

The Teri Hatcher balcony scene sure helps too!

Overlong but great acting and atmosphere
Not sure why this one was trashed by critics when it came out in 1996. I think maybe they were just looking for a reason to cut loose on Alec Baldwin. Who knows? While no one's idea of a classic, it's still a damn fine little neo-noir thriller.

Alec Baldwin does an excellent job in the lead and Eric Roberts just about steals the movie with a characterization that is at once frightening and goofily ingratiating.

It's a shame this one was thrown away and abandoned during it's theatrical release because it seems like director Phil Joanou hasn't done much of anything since. That's too bad because he's a great director (see his STATE OF GRACE and FINAL ANALYSIS also).

Give it a chance!

Give it a chance....
I for one love the flick. I thought that Alec Baldwin played Dave Robicheaux very well. Also I thought that Eric Roberts as Bubba Rock was an inspired choice. And it wasn't the actor's fault that the film sat on a shelf for years. They just got caught in the crumbling of Orion Studios. Thus no promotion was assigned to the film when it finally emerged. The saddest thing that may have occurred was that it cooled the creation of further films based upon the other Dave Robicheaux novels. I always felt that John Goodman would have made a grand Cletus Purcell!

Guys, Listen...
Sure, everyone buys the video for the Teri Hatcher nude scene. You might as well...it did such bad box office that it went straight to TBS (minus nudity)so you won't be recording the unedited original off cable. You could just download the pix from a hundred sites, but dang rabbit, Teri is so sexy in this film that you want to get the whole thing. And while everyone criticizes Alex Baldwin's Cajun accent, Hatcher gets it smooth as silk. Girls, Listen...I didn't read the book. My wife did. And we agreed to see the film after seeing the trailer. She votes thumbs up. As a licensed private detective, I'm not sure I buy the uncoastered Gin Rickey water-mark taste test but, as Johnny Carson liked to say "You buy the premise--you buy the bit." I bought it on VHS. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This controversial, 1984 made-for-television movie gave Farrah Fawcett her first true showcase as an actress. Playing an abused wife who kills her monstrous husband (Paul Le Mat), Fawcett demonstrates a facility with the moral ambiguities of the story, which concerns the painful but fascinating questions of where justice lies. Fine support from Richard Masur and Grace Zabriskie, and the assured direction is by Robert Greenwald (Xanadu. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (18)

Farrah can act? Who knew...
This movie is historically significant since it was one of the first movies to portray domestic violence in a realistic fasion; where situations often turn into a "kill or be killed" scenarios.
It is also one the few films (few? I think the only film) where you can actually see Farrah, "I'm now as loony as a bedbug", Fawcett display her acting abilities. In fact, the whole cast does a pretty good job.
The Burning Bed is actually one of the few "men bad, women good" movies that tries to be honest in its portrayals of people in abusive relationships.

This movie will open your eyes.
In health class, I watched the Burning Bed to learn about spouse abuse. I learned so much with this touching story and I've never been a big fan of Farrah Fawcett until now. Her acting was incredibly moving and I give her a lot of respect to take on this tough role. Go see this movie and it really makes you think about this abuse and the many other women who still experience it.

Farrah's Best!
If Farrah didn't receive an award for this movie, she was seriously robbed! She must have researched the subject of wife abuse thoroughly right down to the humiliation seen on her face and the sheer terror that whatever she said could possible cause yet another smack. Superb acting!

Good,but it was the usual "men bad,women good "movie
This movie was good,but it was the usual,run-of-the-mill "men bad,women good" movie.Like "Enough",the acting was good,but the storyline was just another "abusive husband" thing...

GREAT~~~~
This movie was GREAT. The book was alot Better then the movie was.~~~ ... Read more

Reviews (130)

Takes classic film noir detective story to new heights
This 1974 film takes the classic film noir detective movie to new heights. Yes, there is murder, scandal and lots of lies. But yet Jack Nicholson, cast as a private eye, is a sympathetic character. There's one scene in which the director, Roman Polanski, playing a bit part as a thug, rips open Nicholson's nose with a knife. This is the kind of wound that makes the audience grimace every time someone refers to it in the film. Faye Dunaway is cast as the femme fatale. She's beautiful, of course, and it's hard to take our eyes off of her. She's a woman of mystery, but little by little we glimpse her humanity. And by the time her secret is revealed, she's won everyone's heart.

Based on a real life scandal in Los Angeles in 1908, another underlying theme is about water and power in this desert city. The action takes place in the 1930s, and the details of that period of time are well portrayed, right down to Faye Dunaway's shaved and penciled eyebrows. The screenplay won an Academy Award and I can understand why. It was tightly written and revealed details that moved the plot forward at just the right pace. I sat there fascinated, not wanting to take my eyes off the screen, trying to figure out what would happen next and constantly surprised by the next twist and turn. John Huston is cast in the role of a wealthy landowner with a huge secret of his own. He's a fine actor and his presence on the screen added depth to the whole production.

The DVD has a special interview with the writer, Robert Towne, as well as Roman Polanski. This added to my enjoyment of the film and provided further insight about its production. Definitely recommended.

Transcendent Film Noir
I've seen very few "greatest film" lists that don't have Chinatown among the top 10, or even top 5. It's deserving. It's done in the style of a '50's film noir, but transcends the genre.

There are great performances here by Jack Nicholson and John Huston. Nicholson plays a jaded but heroically decent private investigator in the mold of Humphrey Bogart. He's much less the tough guy than Bogart, though, and you get the impression that he'd rather being doing something less seedy for a living. It's a very subtle portrayal. Huston, on the other hand, plays a tycoon whose mere presence on the screen can make your skin crawl.

The film stands out in just about every respect. The sets are wonderful and the cinematography beautiful to look at. Even the score is exceptional.

The DVD is a little short of extras, but they really aren't missed. The transfer is very high quality in all respects.

To the brainiac above who doesn't understand why the water is being dumped in the ocean: they're trying to create a drought to drive the farmers out of business. That's pretty much the key point of the plot. And, yes, a .38 snubnose is perfectly capable of hitting someone at 50 yards. Guns & Ammo tests them to that distance all the time. Get a clue!

A Master Screenplay, A Perfect Film
Many writers consider Robert Towne's screenplay for 'Chinatown' as the perfect screenplay. It is, and is also in fact the example of how important good writing is in the art of cinema. It is perfection and in the hands of Roman Polanski it became a film masterpiece. But it all goes back to the writing. Robert Towne has taken the true story of how Los Angeles stole water to grow and wound around it the fictional story of Jake Gittes, Evelyn Mulwray, and Noah Cross and made them major participants in an ugly little tale of lust and greed. Towne's screenplay is layered like a decaying Dahlia with twisting mysteries and taught suspense. There is not a loose end in sight and a few well placed red herrings are added to the mix to delight any fan of this type of story.
The attention to detail from vintage cars, sets, real L.A. streets and alleys to the excellent score by Jerry Goldsmith and the golden cinematography of John A. Alonzo contribute to all the aspects of this classic of the post 60's film noir.
Faye Dunaway as Evelyn Mulwray is at the top of her game creating a neurotic exotic hothouse flower that carries death within the heart of her dark and dirty secret. Lacquered and veiled in the most perfect black widow getup of the genre she is superbly brittle and vulnerable at the same time. She is fascinating to watch as she slowly unravels along with the mystery until she is naked in the horror of what her past and present prison is. This is a great performance by a great artist.
As Evelyn's father Noah Cross, John Huston is the debauched cancerous center of evil and greed captured within the crumbling casing of a seemingly charming old man. He too gives the performance of a lifetime and his soliloquy on what a man is capable of is chilling.
The center of this masterwork is Jack Nicholson who became a star with this, the best of his early work. His J. J. Gittes is hardboiled and ruthless in getting to the bottom of why he is being used to take the fall for a murder. He embodies the soul of Bogart and the heart of a romantic fighting to stay tuff in a rotten world. He is drawn with such skill that he seems not to be acting but simply existing the real world of L.A. in the late 1930's.
"Chinatown" is seminal in its place in film history. It bridged and old and forgotten genre with a new Hollywood in its post studio infancy and laid the groundwork for later films of equal ambition such as "Mullholland Falls" and "L.A. Confidential".
This is one of the best film ever made and a must have for any serious film collector.

I cut my nose shaving
Not since Otto Preminger's LAURA had filmgoers the pleasure of watching a classic film noir, until Polanski's CHINATOWN. The plot and characters are complex but chillingly believeable. I can't find anything wrong with this film. It is well-paced for a fairly long movie. The lighting, cinematography, setting, costumes... everything is as should be. The performances by John Huston and Faye Dunaway are eerie and tragic, respectively. Then of course there's Nicholson. Mad Jack was already firmly established on the Hollywood map having already won acclaim for EASY RIDER, THE LAST DETAIL, and FIVE EASY PIECES. This film however fixed him permanently in the constellation of Hollywood stars. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST would soon follow. In any event, his portrayal of an aloof, world-weary gumshoe who stumbles in over his head into an intrigue involving crooked politicians and the money-slobbering wealthy still holds up 30 years later. This is an incredible film.

THIS IS WHAT FILM IS SUPPOSED TO BE
The mid-1970s saw a spate of "government conspiracy" films, all with liberal themes that emanated from Watergate. None of them were about Kennedy stealing the 1960 election. Hmm.
"Chinatown" (1974) may be the best screenplay ever written. A historical look at 1930s Los Angeles, it actually condensed events from the 1900s with events that, uh, never happened but made for good drama. Written by L.A. native Robert Towne, directed by Roman Polanski, produced by Evans and starring Jack Nicholson, Faye Dunnaway and famed director John Huston, it told the story of how Los Angeles became a metropolis. In Towne's version, Huston "owns" the L.A. Department of Water & Power with a character based on actual L.A. City engineer William Mulholland. Mulholland had orchestrated the political deal which built the aqueduct that brought water from the Owens Valley into the L.A. Basin, allowing millions of Southern Californians to keep their lawns green to this day.
The Mulholland character is "sacrificed" at the altar of greed, embodied by Huston, who secretly buys the San Fernando Valley, knowing that once the water deal is set, it will be incorporated into the city, making him a gazillionaire. It is rather cynical, although nobody suggests the L.A. "city fathers" were boy scouts. The same old theme is that capitalism and American political power are corrupt. To make sure the audience is convinced the corruption is beyond redemption, Huston is in the end found out be an insatiable, incestual monster. He plays the role so well it brings up minds-eye imagery of his real daughter, Angelica. The film is utterly beyond any criticism, regardless of political colorization. For decades, film students and screenwriters have studied it. It spawned an artistic quest to lace the screen with symbols, metaphors, backstory, and twists.
"Chinatown" seems to be the apex of the American film period, the mid-1970s. The period from 1960 to 1979 is unparalleled, but the backstory of the people who created these classics is a telling tale of why the genre leans to the Left. In the 1960s, film schools became popular. Four schools emerged, and have held their place as the place to learn the craft. In Los Angeles there was the USC School of Cinema-Television. Their first big alumnus was "Star Wars" director George Lucas. UCLA combined their film school with their drama program, so as to bring actors, writers, directors and producers together. Coppola went to UCLA along with a future rock star named Jim Morrison, who would form The Doors with another UCLA film alumnus, keyboardist Ray Manzarek.

STEVEN TRAVERS
AUTHOR OF "BARRY BONDS: BASEBALL'S SUPERMAN"
STWRITES@AOL.COM ... Read more

Description

Academy Award(R)-winners Nicolas Cage (THE ROCK) and sexy Angelina Jolie (THE BONE COLLECTOR) ride an unstoppable wave of speed and adrenaline in this hot, egdy action hit from high-octane producer Jerry Bruckheimer (ARMAGEDDON). Legendary car booster Randall "Memphis" Raines (Cage) thought he'd left the fast lane behind -- until he's forced out of retirement in a do-or-die effort to save his kid brother (Giovanni Ribisi, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN) from the wrath of an evil mobster! But with speed to burn and attitude to spare, Memphis hastily reassembles his old crew -- a rogues' gallery including Academy Award-winner Robert Duvall (A CIVIL ACTION) -- and floors it in a full-throttle race to pull off the ulimate car heist: 50 exotic beauties in 24 hours -- and the cops are already on to them! Directed by Dominic Sena and written by Scott Rosenberg, GONE IN 60 SECONDS is an action-packed thrill ride that comes out fast and never slows down. ... Read more

Reviews (328)

Good Movie...Cage Needs More Sleep
When I first went to see "Gone In 60 Seconds", I had never heard a word of it in previews or word-of-mouth. I never liked or could sit through any Nicholas Cage movies until this one though. Cage plays a rather lathargic Randall Raines, a reformed car theif who is unwillinglly drawn back into his old profession to save his younger brother Kip (The Wonder Years' Giovanni Ribisi) from death. Kip takes a car boosting job for the meanest car-theft ringleader in town (A part which even I could've played better than this guy), and faces the ultimate price for mistakes. To keep the big boss from killing his brother, Cage must round up old collegues to pull off the biggest boost of their lives. Some of his partners in crime include Angelina Jolie, Robert Duvall and my favorite...Vinnie Jones as The Sphinx. Each with his/her own special tallent, they work at moving 50 cars in 2 days to save little Raines. The one thing that kept the movie from running out of gas at the box-office I think, was the fact that they went in-depth as far as methods of boosting the cars...instead of knocking on someone's door and stealing the keys from the kitchen table. And there's a lot of laughs along the way that keep it from seeming like a re-run of CHIPS. Up-beat comedy makes the movie a lot better than it could've been, my favorite part was Nicholas Cage taunting a seriously ghettoed-out rival theif from inside a diner who was out kill him. The movie does have a few corney scenes that were obviously forced by a nerdy director...but the action, the laughs, and all the new stuff you learn about stealing cars these days is what makes it a good pick for me. I think this movies' like alcohol though, if you get in a car after it youre gonna feel like driving like a maniac. Nicholas Cage deffinately hits a mark with this one.

An escapist guilty-pleasure movie
If you're the kind of moviegoer who likes to watch some films without having to do a lot of thinking, loves action and hot cars, and likes to watch a goofy movie without having to think about character depth or surprises in the story, you'll like this movie. I recommend it only to people who like such movies. I don't mind watching such a movie now and then, and there are some things that I thought were pretty cool.

The 1967 Shelby GT-500 Mustang is the best thing about the movie. I've always liked cars and this is a rare classic. The climactic chase is cool and well done. Nicholas Cage actually did 98% of his own stunt driving. Another thing I liked was Robert Duvall. I guess he's the kind of actor who can survive anything. And the opening boost of a brand new Porsche 911 right out of a factory showroom was kind of neat, and funny as well.

But the story is predictable, awfully predictable. You know the hero will save his brother's life. The only surprise is in the final delivery of that Shelby. If you actually saw the original 1974 film you'll recognize a scene in a garage that pays homage to a similar one in the old film. It involves a car, a cop, and heroin. I was also disappointed that the final chase doesn't last longer.

GREAT CAR FILM!
"Gone in 60 Seconds" exists for one purpose: to show off some of the hottest cars in existence. The storyline is kind of hokey, but the cars more than make up for it, especially the GT 500. The car chase at the end is one of the best ever filmed! All the actors (Especially Robert Duvall, who can never give a bad performance) do fine in their roles. All in all, "Gone in 60 Seconds" is a one @#*& of a ride!

Also, don't miss Christopher Eccleston (plays the villain, Raymond Vincent Calitri, in this film) this January, when he resurrects one of the greatest characters of all time, the Doctor, in BBC's new "Doctor Who" series. BBC plans to send it to American TV stations as well.

Movie Grade: B+

Maybe a three star movie, but still...
A waste of great talent is probably the most honest thing I can say about this flick.
Jolie is Academy Award material and she hardly does anything in this movie. Gage is a master, this movie was a waste of what he's capable of doing, but I guess he's a good draw. I actually saw this at the theater when it came out and a second time recently. There are cool cars and some cool chase scenes, so it's not that it isn't entertaining, it's just that I was expecting a lot more.

Great chase scenes- cheesy otherwise
Nick Cage is pretty good in this film- the car chase scenes are wild and fun- the rest of the storyline gets kind of schmaltzy and is really predictable.Good action flick when you need to zone out- if you want something with more substance- go back some years and watch Dirty Harry! ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Slow,thoughtful,deeply engaging and memorable
This movie is sort of slow-moving,yet intriguing and exciting and full of honest emotion. It tells its story of the proud father and the prodigal son who both turn out to be something quite different very well,and its many mysteries are not solved until the very end. James Coburn`s performance is edgy,tense and wonderful,and the movie is beautifully shot.I don`t know whether this movie actually got an Emmy,but I hope it did.It`s well deserved.

About loss, stubborness, forgivenes, and love...
James Coburn heads the cast of this Hallmark Hall of Fame movie. The story is centered around the accidental death of the wife and mother of a well-to-do ranch family. Coburn, the father, never forgave his son, the one who happened to be driving when the accident happened. That's all in the past. The bulk of the story happens in Mexico, where the son now lives and has a highly successful career as a painter -- that career provides another point of stress between father and son.

The father travels to Mexico to try to help his son when the son is involved in another car accident, this one a hit-and-run resulting in another death.

I enjoyed this Hallmark offering greatly, but for me it's a half-step down from other Hallmark movies like "Sarah, Plain and Tall," "The Love Letter," or "Decoration Day."

Definitely a solid 4-star offering. You'll be glad you watched this one.

Have a great day!

Alan Holyoak ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Matt LeBlanc before Friends in this one!
Three more screen-steaming vignettes from erotica auteur Zalman King: "Runway," "Kidnap" and "Burning Up."

Stars
Amber Smith, Alexandra Tydings, Anthony Guidera, Daniel Blasco, David Duchovny, Jennifer Ciesar, Mark Zuelke, Matt LeBlanc, Ron Marquette, Udo Kier

You know what you're getting with Zalman King.
Number 7 in the "Red Shoe Diaries" series features the following three segments:

"Runway" - This is the only segment which is even mildly interesting (which isn't saying much). A model is feeling sorry for herself because she is unhappy with her profession. She only does it for the money and considers herself a "whore". A taxi driver drives the model home and carries her bags up for her. She offers him a wad of cash to partially dress up like a woman. She takes pictures of him and then they make love. Odd.

"Kidnap" - Two brothers, (one of them Matt LeBlanc), rob a bank in the city. They then try to make their getaway on horseback(!). However, one of the brothers stops to talk to a beautiful woman and the police eventually arrive. The robbers take her hostage and whisk her away to the countryside. The woman and one of the brothers end up getting married. Another odd one...but this segment is silly and boring.

"Burning Up" - A woman becomes obsessed with firemen. Her actions become more and more questionable until she does something quite strange toward the end. That's about it.

I have never seen a "Red Shoe Diaries" series that I truly enjoyed. This one continues in that tradition.

Yawn
Hardly erotic, no character development, and pretty timid sex. Not what I would call an erotic masterpiece, or even good entertainment.

Most of it was very Hot
All three stories were very erotic,the best one being the third one with aphrodities from the hercules series.

A Luscious Erotic Escapade in the Grand Red Shoes Tradition
This is my favorite of the Red Shoe Diaries series. The stunning cinematography and intense exploration of erotic desire that has made this series popular is very evident in this video. "Runway" is the story of a disillusioned model that finds fulfillment and excitement from an exotically handsome taxi driver that acts as her model in an impromptu photo shoot. The realistic portrayal of the viscous and hollow world of fashion is an added treat here. "Kidnap" is the tale of a sexy urbanite that gets plucked out of her daily existence by a rugged thief who awakens her desires. "Burning Up" is my favorite of the three episodes--it's about a lonely woman who is infatuated with a mysterious and gorgeous fireman. The fire theme is carried throughout the episode with exquisite skillfulness. Her desire for him is very much like fire, and many of us can identify with her burning, relentless desire. The beautiful cast, sumptuous cinematography and soundtrack, and intense, unbridled sensuality make this video a must-see for those who are not afraid to explore their most intimate desires. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Final Proof that Kids Are Dumb and Tasteless.
Everyone should be forced to sit through this travesty as an adult at least once, especially if you loved it as a kid. That way you can realize what a dumb kid you were. At least I was. I loved Yor like every other kid that was between 5 and 10 years old in 1983. There isn't really any plot, per se, but our story goes a little like this...

Yor is a caveman type seeking to find the answer to the mystery of a strange medallion around his neck with his friends Ka-Laa and Pak. After a load of terrible editing, bad voice-overs (as though the characters were saying anything comprehensible anyway), and cheesy post apocalyptic fighting, Yor makes his way to an island where he learns that his parents and others are resisting the power mad Overlord! Will Yor and his people defeat Overlord and usher in a new age? Will he get into Ka-Laa's knickers? Hey, sit through it like I did and find out!

Now, we've all heard of lousy little movies that have a following simply because they are sooo bad, but this mother takes the cake. Watching it really is painful, mainly because it is for the viewer, as it is for Yor, a voyage of self discovery. You'll learn you had zero taste as a kid.

A must have!!!
I remember watching this movie when I was a kid, I thought it was funny then and I was only 11! So when I found it used I jumped at this great deal! This movie is actually a plot worth being redone with a budget over $10,000! But really folks its so funny, the theme song is just plain gut bursting good fun the effects are also great! Wigs that just make you smile, and acting that not often seen, well anywhere!!! I think Yor is really worth adding to your collection of classics! If your reading this chances are you already saw this movie but it was a long time ago, so i am telling you give it another try years later and have fun!!!!

i really wish mst3k had done this one
i couldn't decide whether to give this 1 or 5 stars. it's so bad, it's fun to watch. the soundtrack is hilarious. it sounds like queen gone horribly wrong. a must see if you like cheesy movies.

This is the movie to slit your wrists to!
Thank god i'm still alive after seeing this movie. the only worse movie in existence is perhaps "Legend" from 1985 starring Tom Cruise. This movie WILL cause you to have an obnoxious bowel movement right there in your seat. After you recover, and watch "spacehunter 3D", you'll likely be dead for sure.

BEST FILM OF 1983
This is probably the best film of the decade. The script is overpowering and emotional, the soundtrack is beyond incredible, and the performances are top-notch. Best Actor for Reb Brown. The direction is also masterful. Ground-breaking special effects. The guy who plays Overlord is an acting genius. A neglected gem that is worth seeing over and over again. 5 stars all the way. Best movie of the '80s. ... Read more

Description

What begins as an innocent art class becomes a steamy triangle of erotic passions and forbidden love.A beautiful Japanese girl becomes the object of obsession in a devious relationship between the wife of a German diplomat and her husband. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

berlin affaire...
good film...for as the best, oh yeah...is drama, ok...but Gudrun Landgrebe great! for this eyes...like the film, great all, congratulations Liliana Cavani...but hope the new film in this way...for the woman of the family you understand? thank's!

An Unusual Story Of Seduction During The Third Reich
It has long been fashionable in critical circles to bash the films of Liliana Cavani. Her films tend to show sleazy low life characters---------even when they live in palatial mansions. Her controversial NIGHT PORTER was unjustly accused of being deplorable, and insult to the intelligence of the average moviegoer, an offense to Jews and women, and generally condemned by everyone of cinematic importance. For me, she is the modern purveyor of film noir at it's darkest.

THE BERLIN AFFAIR tells the story of Mitsuko, daughter of the Japanese ambassador to Germany during the Nazi era. She is publicly quiet and demure, but in private, flamboyantly bisexual and seduces the wife of a high Nazi official-------and eventually the husband himself. This leads to a rather unusual ménage a trois with each member of the triangle becoming more and more jealous of the others. Eventually, this self-destructive relationship becomes harder and harder to resist in spite of the personal dangers to the individuals and their respective families and political causes.

It would be easy to dismiss this film as another sleazy sex opera from Cavani. But a great deal is going on in this film---------politically, sexually, socially, racially and artistically. There is a definite message for those willing to see it-------and it would be more fun for each viewer to find it for himself. Ignore Leonard Maltin's opinion and decide for yourself. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Houdini, a wonderful movie to view and own.
Houdini, is a television based movie. I find that it has easily become my favorite movie. With the strange twists, it gives some insight as to what Houdini's life was like. Of course, the whole movie isn't based upon the truth, but that's something to expect from a TNT movie. Every good movie, be it based upon the truth or not, has at least a few plop twists. The movie begins with Houdini's early childhood, up to his death, and a little past for entertainment value. The love story - like moments in the movie are sure to make you smile. The comedic parts of the movie, will draw something from you. Finally, the reality of the movie, will give you somewhat of an insight to Houdini's daring escape illusions. The end of the movie, will most likely touch your hearts and perhaps even bring a tear to your eye, as it did for mine. Enjoy Houdini.

That's not how it happened!
Before I saw this film I saw as many documentries on Houdini as I could. They got the facts all wrong! That is NOT the way that those people were. That's not what happened that night, ten years after his death. Those hoping to learn anything of substance about the celebrated magician and illusionist will walk away disappointed, because writer-director Pen Densham's superfical and overly melodramatic biography turns Houdini into a shrill, unpleasant narcissist. This TNT original film has "TV movie" written all over it: The production values look cheap, and the most talented actors turn up in only brief supporting roles. We're still waiting for a definitive portrait.

"Houdini" makes you believe
The first time I saw this movie it touched my heart like few movies have. It makes you believe in the power of true love and how nothing is impossible as long as you believe. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

A mixed bag... but still good nostalgic fun
Bing Crosby croons the closing number in this flimsily-scripted wartime tossoff in which Paramount Studios hosts a patriotic all-star revue to entertain our men in uniform. Eddie Bracken is a goofy sailor back home to get a girl... Lucky for him that Betty Hutton -- in her first major role -- has her eyes set on him as well. She fast-talks and finagles (in a very Lucy-like way) to get Bing Crosby, Bob Hope, Fred MacMurray and a bunch of other stars to come on board for the (spontaneous, yet amazingly elaborate) really big show, and in the process Hutton gets her man. The song and dance numbers, despite being written by Johnny Mercer and Harold Arlen, are notably not first rate, although the Golden Gate Quartet have a nice cameo (even if they are playing train porters...) and a trio of starlets -- Paulette Goddard, Dorothy Lamour and (aroooogah!! woof! woof!) Veronica Lake -- do a hilarious number together, based on their images as stars. Also notable is a silly, prolonged skit in which men pretend to be women (eek.) and Bing's big patriotic number at the end, which is some of the clumsiest wartime propaganda committed to film. Betty Hutton is given the film's biggest role, and though she hams it up, she's still totally adorable. Let's see more of her!! Film buffs will also enjoy the chance to see director Preston Sturges and studio legend Cecil B. DeMille onscreen.

Absolutely crazy!
This combination of Paramount's stars during World War II is great! The storyline is typical of musical comedies from that era: Betty Hutton is a telephone operator at Paramount who, along with Victor Moore, pretends that Moore is the head director of the studio in order to impress Moore's sailor son (played by Eddie Bracken) and his shipmates. In reality, Moore is only a gate guard known as Pop, and when he is discovered by the director whom he is impersonating (Walter Abel) he and Hutton are fired and thrown off the lot. Unfortunately, they have promised Bracken that the stars of the studio will put on a show for the men on his ship. Hutton manages to sneak back into the studio and coaxes several actors and actresses to help their beloved Pop. The whole movie is a lot of fun. My family loves it, especially the part when Hutton is trying to get back into the studio! With a few exceptions--Hutton, Moore, Bracken, Abel, etc.--everyone in the movie plays themself, including several well-known Paramount directors of that time. Definitely a must-see if you love goofy movies from the forties! ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Dancing as an Equal
It was with mixed expectations that I bought and watched this movie. One reviewer said Betty was no Ginger and another said Betty was so good you watched her instead of Fred. As a long- time lover of musicals I must agree with the latter opinion. Fred's other partners (Ginger, Judy and Cyd come to mind) were women who made it their business to blend as smoothly as possible into Fred's style, highlighting his moves so that you were more liable to watch him than his women. They knew how to disappear (as women did in those days)into the male's technique. But Betty does it differently. She dances with Fred as an equal and because she is so darned good, you do indeed watch her instead of him.

It's almost as if he had the flu the entire movie. His cocky swagger and seductive smile are missing. His solo pieces are half-assed and his partnered dances make him seem thrown for a loss. He appears to not know how to dance with a woman who takes up the same space he does. Had Betty been Gene or Donald, there would have been no problem; Fred would have known how to relate. You can see the proof of this in the Cowboy number where Betty is a cowpoke. That being said, a sickly Fred is better than almost anyone else on a good day. I had to laugh when the greatgrandma calls Astaire "young man." Fred looked 40 at age 20 and 40 at age 60!

Betty is delightful in this movie. I didn't remember how beautiful she was. Ginger danced as if she practiced hard and has finally got it just right. Betty is a natural who expresses joy in every step and so looks spontaneous. The movie's worth watching, esp for the opening number. Betty acts better than Grable or Lana Turner, substituting their saccarine flavor with genuine sweetness. Her "over the top" behavior in other movies gives one pause. This came to define her and serious roles were then denied her. Pity. One wonders why she undermined herself as an actress in that way. Perhaps she never knew she was that good. What did "blond bombshells" do back then? What they were told, I'm sure. There was Mae West and Marilyn, two who attempted to carve their own path through Hollywood and both succeeded but at great cost. Betty shoulda been a contender, and this movie shows it.

I Can't Stop Talking About It!
This is one of the best, and funniest movies I have ever seen. It is absolutely hilarious and made me burst out laughing.

Fred is a genius. Though I think his performances in Top Hat, Follow the Fleet, and Swing Time were better, this is extremely good. Betty Hutton is just magnificent! She sparkles on the screen and adds a certian allure to the film. Though she certianly cannot compare with Ginger Rogers of some of Fred's earlier dance partners, she is wonderful for this film and I can't imagine anyone else in that role.

The songs aren't that great, but the performances of them make up for that deficiency. 'Oh Them Dudes' is magnificent and uproariously funny. 'I Can't Stop Talking About Him' is a laugh-out-loud hit with relatively good dancing on Betty's part. 'The Paino Dance' is fantastic and is definately one of my favorite Astaire solos of all time (and trust me, I've seen plenty!).

As for the plot; well, it's cute and funny. However, it gets a bit repetitive at times.

Don't miss out on this fabulous movie!

astaire, hutton shine
wonderful film,,,,very worth the while.........looked like these two stars had a blast making the film......and you'll have a blast watching it...nice to see astaire having to race to keep up with betty,,,,,,,,,the saloon scene is a classic

Could've Been Better
Let's Dance is one of the least popular Fred Astaire vehicles...with good reason. For generations, Astaire is synonymous with exciting, electric musical spectacles that pull the viewers out of their seats.

Let's Dance seems to be missing that little kick or spark that would have greatly helped this show get going. True, it wouldn't be fair to compare every other Astaire film to his RKO classics, such as Top Hat or Swing Time, but after setting a high standard such as that...well, needless to say, this one was a big letdown. Betty Hutton, fine performer that she is, just doesn't seem to mesh with Astaire at all. The routines lack charm and fall flat. One spot worth mentioning is a Western spoof put on by Astaire and Hutton. Call it a cowboy version of Easter Parade's "A Couple of Swells."

Let's Dance had some potential, but instead it leaves the viewer with a feeling that this show was hurriedly put together, and badly at that. Astaire and Hutton aren't all that bad, but you just know they could have been better.

A Mixed Bag
Fred Astaire and Betty Hutton team up for this "good, but not great" type of movie. On the positive side, Astaire and Hutton are energetic and delightful as a pair of former lovers trying to keep Hutton's son out of the hands of his great-grandmother.The supporting cast is fine, and the script is both witty and moving at the same time. However, this film has one fatel flaw that has kept it from becoming better known. The songs and dances just aren't that good. AND THIS IS A MUSICAL! Astaire is alright during "Jack and the Beanstock" and the "Piano Dance," but it's not comparable to his work in "Swing Time" or "Funny Face." The rest of the songs and dances are just awful, strange, since this material was done by the usualy reliable Frank Loesser. All in all, this movie can entertain an audience, but never make them stand up and say: "Wow, that was fantastic." And that is the difference between a good movie and a great one. ... Read more

Description

An attractive college student begins a journey of terror when she takes a class on fear from an "off center" professor who believes one must experience fear firsthand to understand it. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

THIS WAS A GOOD 80'S MOVIE!!!
FORGET THAT REVIEW ABOVE THIS THAT PERSON OBVIOUSLY WROTE FOR THE WRONG MOVIE....BUT THIS WAS A GOOD MOVIE A LIL DATED BUT THE STORY IS SO GOOD KIND OF UNIQUE.....ONLY ONE PROBLEM, TO MAKE THESE STORIES REALLY STAND OUT IT NEEDED MORE GORE AND THATS WHATS MISSING. BUT ALL IN ALL GREAT STORY WITH GREAT POTENTIAL. ALSO I LOVE THAT CUTE LIL ACTRESS PAMELA SEGALL!!!

Blind Love
This movie is about wanting something you can not have and willing not to stop until you get it. This woman keeps tabs on this man for years and works her way into marrying the most poweful man in the world.Once she finds him again the thrill begans again but the outcome backfires.Played by wonderful actors this is a must see movie. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Unforgivably inaccurate and insensitive portrayal...
This is a truly fictional account of the final days of Vincent van Gogh. Anyone who understands the life of this artist will be taken aback by this film's completely insensitive portrayal of Vincent's relationship with his brother. In one scene, Theo actually discount's Vincent's entire output, wishing he had painted more like the impressionists! This film would have you believe that despite a forbidden, sexual relationship with his physician's daughter (who is about half his age), Vincent is driven to commit suicide. First of all, there is no evidence that such a relationship ever occured. Further, the film offers no insite into the true character of the artist and the real reasons that he took his own life. I gave it one star because I can't go any lower... for an accurate account of this artist's life, see "Vincent & Theo" or "Lust for Life."

A distorted and pointless Van Gogh biography
This film--which could have been quite good because of its narrow focus on the last two months of Van Gogh's life--is, in the end, a disaster. The film is grossly inaccurate in its portrayals of Vincent, his brother Theo, Dr. Paul Gachet and Gachet's daughter, Marguerite. Director Maurice Pialat seems to have thrown virtually every known fact about Van Gogh out the window and has rewritten history according his own distorted (and actually extremely boring) vision.

A far better movie would be Robert Altman's "Vincent and Theo" starring Tim Roth. Pialat's film, unfortunately, is a mess.

As a lover of Van Gogh, I did not care for this movie.
Jacques Dutronc was great, it was the directing and the portrayal of Van Gogh that I thought was inaccurate. This movie is only based on the last 67 days of Van Gogh's life. Perhaps, I would have enjoyed it more if we could have watched how Van Gogh evolved. What was he like during the ten years before his death? I'd like to see a movie that can depict more of the essence of Van Gogh, and not only focus on "the worst days of his life". There is a huge misconception in the world, of who Van Gogh "is", and this movie only feeds it. Read "Dear Theo": Van Gogh's letters to his brother Theo. The book is far much better than this movie. At least, we can get the truth through Van Gogh's eyes, not Maurice Pialat's. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Star Trek fans were decidedly mixed in their reactions to this, the ninth big-screen feature in Paramount's lucrative Trek franchise, but die-hard loyalists will appreciate the way this Next Generation adventure rekindles the spirit of the original Trek TV series while combining a tolerable dose of New-Agey philosophy with a light-hearted plot for the NextGen cast. This time out, Picard (Patrick Stewart) and his executive crew must transport to a Shangri-la-like planet to see why their android crewmate Data (Brent Spiner) has run amuck in a village full of peaceful Ba'ku artisans who--thanks to their planet's "metaphasic radiation"--haven't aged in 309 years.

It turns out there's a conspiracy afoot, masterminded by the devious, gruesomely aged Ru'afo (F. Murray Abraham, hamming it up under makeup resembling a cosmetic surgeon's worst nightmare), who's in cahoots with a renegade Starfleet admiral (Anthony Zerbe, in one of his final screen roles). They covet the fountain-of-youth power of the Ba'ku planet, but because their takeover plan violates Starfleet's Prime Directive of noninterference, it's up to Picard & crew to stop the scheme. Along the way, they all benefit from the metaphasic effect, which manifests itself as Worf's puberty (visible as a conspicuous case of Klingon acne), Picard's youthful romance with a Ba'ku woman (the lovely Donna Murphy), the touching though temporary return of Geordi's natural eyesight, and a moment when Troi asks Dr. Crusher if she's noticed that her "boobs are firming up."

Some fans scoffed at these humorous asides, but they're what make this Trek film as entertaining as it is slightly disappointing. Without the laughs (including Data's rousing excerpt from Gilbert & Sullivan's HMS Pinafore), this is a pretty routine entry in the franchise, with no real surprises, a number of plot holes, and the overall appearance of a big-budget TV episode. As costar and director, Jonathan Frakes proves a capable carrier of the Star Trek flame--and it's nice to see women in their forties portrayed as smart and sexy--but while this is surely an adequate Trek adventure, it doesn't quite rank with the best in the series. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (393)

Is This Supposed To Be A Film? Write A Good Film For Once!!
Granted this film had the best morals and provoking thoughts than any film to date but who does paramount think they are making this cheese wagon of a film and trying to pass it off for a movie? Everyone associated with star trek need to be fired away from it except for ira stephen behr as someone wrote earlier who made ds9 one of t.v.'s greatest series. Yes folks-special effects have a lot to do by making a movie or episode entertaining-and so do battles in space or on the ground. People like war-look at 2, 6, and 8- duh! the best films in th series. As for Paramounts plans to dump all of the current casts for the next movie and series, dont do it or you will kill off whats left of your fan base. I had so much expectations for this film especially when i saw the trailers-- and now I cant forgive paramount for disappointing me so badly. Well- Jar Jar Episode 1 wasn't all that good either but at least it was entertaining unlike Trek 8 with its "here take this humor and like it no matter what" attempt at comedy. Action? What action? And what the heck is the deal with the Joystick Frakes?! Talk about embarassing to be a trek fan! If Voyager doesnt come around like DS9 Did in its 3rd season this upcoming Fall- I'm a Trek fan no more. Heres a story idea Paramount: Borg/Dysons Sphere/Dominion/make like Starwars and destroy the Federation and bring it back stronger than ever in a 125year later from the current timeline movie. Duh!! and Paramount, get rid of Berman and Moore and Braga- they ruined this saga and so are you if you dont wake up!!!!

Lighten up, fellow Star Trek fans!
In a TV series, especially a sci-fi series, you expect a certain number of shoot-em-up shows. You expect to see our heroes conquer evil aliens while overcoming seemingly impossible odds. but will someone please show me where in the rulebook it says every show should be about this? Some of the original series and TNG's best shows were about political, romantic, and/or humorous exploits of our favorite characters. "The trouble with Tribbles" is almost always in a listing of the top 5 shows whenever TV guide or simply a group of trekkies talk about their favorites, and "The city on the edge of Forever" won a Hugo for crying out loud and neither one of them were slashed with phaser fire. Yes, Insurrection may have been a little uneven in spots plotwise but I've not seen any you could drive a semi through. And the central theme of the displacing of a small group of people to satisfy the demands of a larger group as being a terrible injustice as well as a clear violation of Trek's prime directive is right on par with the overall vision of Star Trek. I don't think Roddenberry will turn over in his grave because of this one and neither should a true Trek fan get all disappointed just because the Borg, the Romulans, the Dominion or any other "traditional" Star Trek villian is not involved. In fact, I think this film breaks the so-called legacy of "odd-numbered" trek films being not so good as "even-numbered" films. No, Insurrection is no "Wrath of Khan" but it is a solid entry in the series. After all, Johnathan Frakes himself said they wanted to have to have some fun with this one and I think they accomplished that while still making an entertaining movie that lives up to Star Trek's ideals.

STAR TREK Lightens Things Up A Bit, To Mixed Results...
For STAR TREK: INSURRECTION (1998), unfortunately famous for Data saying the ultimate cheesy one-liner, "Lock & Load" (*cringe*), Jonathan "Two-Takes" Frakes, back in the director's chair, makes the atmosphere decidedly lighter. That's a good thing; however, after all is said and done in this, the ninth installment in the legendary STAR TREK film saga (and the third one featuring the "Next Generation" cast of characters), there is really not much meat on the bone. In this episode, which begins jarringly with a sudden murderous rampage by a malfunctioning android Lt. Commander Data (Brent Spiner, in not one of his finer moments as an actor here), the crew of the Enterprise "E" have beamed down to Planet Ba'ku and rather quickly become familiar with the peaceful residents of this planet. This planet is nicknamed "Paradise," correctly so because it has magical regenerative powers which prevent its people from aging and dying. These people, numbering only 600, are peaceful and seem to have a kind of neo-religious quality to their personalities, as they live in total harmony with nature and openly reject any kind of technology. (This leads to what is probably the best scene in the entire movie, as the Enterprise is revealed to be camouflaged to blend in with the lush surroundings!)

Anyway, as Capt. Jean-Luc Picard (the always-wonderful Patrick Stewart) begins to get friendly with one of the eligible female Ba'ku residents, and Commander Will Riker (Frakes) and Counselor Deanna Troi (Marina Sirtis) get friendlier with each other (leading to a surprisingly sensual hot-tub scene), there is trouble brewing in Paradise: an incredibly ugly band of aliens known as the So'na, led by the especially monstrous Ru'afo (F. Murray Abraham), who intends to displace the peace-loving Ba'ku residents and take over the planet for themselves, so as to de-uglify themselves (I'm not making this up). Not only that, but they are given full authority to do so by a suspicious Federation admiral (Anthony Zerbe, in his final film role). Because this order clearly violates the Prime Directive (which forbids the interfering of any sovereign planetary civilization), this puts Capt. Picard & crew into a conundrum: do they follow orders like good little Starfleet soldiers or do they uphold the Prime Directive to protect these peacemongers? Put it to you this way: Based on the title alone, plus what you know about the Next Generation characters, what do you THINK they will do??? Duh...Lock & Load!!!

Jonathan Frakes had an obviously daunting task: following up the incredible STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT (1996), one of the very best in the entire STAR TREK film saga. STAR TREK: INSURRECTION looks really nice (the visuals are, once again, truly amazing), but alas, there is not really much to care about here. F. Murray Abraham is one of the finest actors of our time, but he must have really needed the money in order to agree to fill a role in which he's not only unrecognizable, but also the recipient of the worst movie makeover in recent big-screen history. STAR TREK: INSURRECTION is certainly not the worst STAR TREK film ever made (that honor would unquestioningly go to the William Shatner-directed misfire STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER), but it's definitely not among the best. See it if you're a fan.

MODERATELY RECOMMENDED; AGES 10 & UP

It Takes Six...
The rule of odds and evens continues to apply in Star Trek Insurrection. Being the second true Next Generation film it is a must-see for fans.

The film opens with scenes on a tranquil, agricultural planet. Then things heat up as we run into Data and some Federation personnel. It seems they are observing the tranquil society in what is called Operation Duck Blind (the inhabitants don't know they are being looked at). From there we run into the rest of the main cast and the plot begins to develop. It involves a malfunction Data experiences while assisting at Operation Duck Blind that results in the mission being compromised.

As the crew of the Enterprise investigate what went wrong with Data they begin to raise more and more questions. As the main plot is revealed the crew must band together and stand up for what they feel is right. In the end the crew triumphs (did we really think it would be otherwise?).

This is really not a film for people who are not already fans of the show as it is the way the characters act and their personal interactions that makes the film so entertaining. Brent Spiner, Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis seem to have a tremendously fun time with this film. Fans are treated to some great scenes of their favorite characters (although Gates McFadden was not particularly important). We even learn some more about Data's design and operation. But do not be misled by the title and the trailer, the scenes are all there but in the trailer they tell a much different story.

There are a few technical problems in the movie but you don't really think about them until afterwards. These include small things like not being able to count (claiming two slave races and showing three), the Federation is pretty stupid (giving membership to a race that has just managed warpdrive but only has been around for less than a hundred years, has only six members and seems to have better ships). There is the inevitable total ignorance of nebulae and what they are and just how not dense they are. But these are all minor things that don't jump out as the movie progresses.

So if you are a Next Generation fan and want to see the crew back together in a story that is really just a long, but very good, episode, then you really should take the opportunity to see this one. On a final note it passes Lynch's Law for a successful Next Generation episode in that it does not rely on techno-babble to drive or advance the plot but uses situation, character and emotion for fuel instead.

Star Trek Takes a Nap
Star Trek:
Insurrection

If your looking for a movie to watch in your spare time, Star Trek Insurrection is a decent movie but definitely not one of my favorites. Starring Patrick Stewart as Jean Luc Picard and directed by Jonathan Frakes, this movie goes face first into face stretching action,literally.

Though not as exciting as First Contact, it still provides the cheesy action of an old guy [ Jean Luc] climbing in dangerous places with a big phaser rifle shooting aliens. I think it's funny because in this movie, two gramps meet and fight to the finish. One's got a facial problem [the bad guy], the other a mental problem, what kind of 70 year old man would think himself strong enough to fight wars?

I might suggest this movie to people who like to watch people from a nursing home duke it out. They never learned not to play with guns either. It's pure entertainment for people that like to watch strange movies and laugh at them.

The camera work could have been better. Towards the end, it doesn't show much of the enemy ship, there isn't much of an inside of a ship to see though. The special effects were all right, but the phasers looked kind of fake to me.

One scene made the movie purely messed up to me. Jean Luc runs around an enemy ship firing a phaser, right after that he says, " If you fire your phaser, you risk igniting your ship, you wouldn't risk that would you?" [The guy he was chasing is one of the old gramps I mentioned earlier]. Isn't that stupidly cheesy?

I don't under stand why everybody except the captain always wears the same stuff. The captain wears a dress suit and regular clothes but the rest of the crew always wears the same old red suit. All the Ba'ku wear different stuff.

Star Trek Insurrection is rated PG-13. I say a lot of people would like this movie. For other people though, it gets really annoying.

Anomynous ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Critics and audiences didn't seem too happy with this inventive, perhaps too clever sequel to the popular 1985 comedy about a high school kid (Michael J. Fox) who travels into the past and has to bring his parents together (or lose his own existence). Director Robert Zemeckis and cast bent over backwards to add layers of time-travel complication to this follow-up, and while it surely exercises the brain it isn't necessarily funny in the same way that its predecessor was. It's well worth a visit, though, just to appreciate the imagination that went into it, particularly in a finale that has Fox's character watching his own actions from the first film. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (101)

Inventive but uncharming sequel
"Back to the Future Part II" is an inventive 2nd adventure of Marty McFly and Doc Brown aboard their suped up Delorean, it is not however a great movie like the first film was. Part II retains none of the charm, warmth or wonder of the first film. Instead it's an effects filled roller coaster ride of confusing time paradoxes and visual effects.

The film begins as Doc Brown transports Marty and his girlfriend to the year 2015 to avert a McFly family disaster. This is certainly a promising start. After some brief exposistion seting up this installment by Doc Brown, Marty ventures into Hill Valley of 2015. This brief adventure is the best sequence in the film, in fact it's the only sequence that bears any similarity to the charm, wit and awe of Part I. I'll admit, I loved the future sequences. Marty from the 1980's, sees flying cars, bizarre people and a "Jaws" sequel.

The film soon leaves the future setting and focuses on a sinister alternate timeline which finds Marty and Doc Brown fighting for thier lives and travelling back and forth through time to repair damage to the space time continuum. This is an interesting premise, however it only hides the lack of a solid story. In each era Marty visits, he has no time to absorb the surroundings as he did in the first film, and no relationship to establish and this is due to the frantic fast pace.

The film would have been more appealing if the story focused entirely on the future and had Marty help his children. It would have served as a good counterbalance to the first film and be more appealing visually.

Overall "Part II" is NOT a bad film. It is filled with inventive plot twists, action and great visual effects. However, knowing how great the first film was, there was no reason for "Part II" to have been so disappointing.

Best of the 3
I am a big fan of the Back to the Future series, and I think the second one is the best. This one starts out where Marty McFly has recently returned from the 50's and is about to start relaxing when..................Doc Brown comes in and tells Marty he has to go to the future with him to save one of his future kids. While in the futur, Marty takes the place of his son, who looks like him, and tell's Biff's grandson he does not want to particapate in whatever get Marty's son in trouble. After that is settled Marty buys a sports almanac. He plans to go back to the 80's and win money on predictions (or already-known-answers) from the book. But, Biff steals the book, steals the time machine, goes to the 50's, gives young Biff the book, and soon Biff becomes powerful, rich, and married to Marty's mother. So now Marty has to go back to the 50's, get the book back, and safely return to the 80's without screwing anything up. How? Watch this GREAT movie to find out!

BEST MOVIE EVER!
I am a real sci-fi geek, but this movie was superb! It's a true sequel to Bttf Part 1 and I personally think it's the best movie EVER! It's my absolute favorite! This is a must-see!

My favorite of the trilogy
A film by Robert Zemeckis

The story of Marty McFly (Michael J Fox) continues in this sequel to 1985's "Back to the Future". The movie picks up right where the first film left off where Doc Brown (Christopher Lloyd) returns in the DeLorean and tells Marty and Jennifer (Elisabeth Shue, replacing Claudia Wells) that they have to come back with Doc to the future to help their future children. This scene was re-shot for this movie because of Elisabeth Shue taking over the role of Jennifer from Claudia Wells, but it is otherwise the exact same scene that we saw in the ending of "Back to the Future."

They are off to 2015 so that Marty can prevent his son, Marty Jr (also Michael J Fox) from getting into some trouble with Griff Tannen (Thomas F Wilson), the grandson of Biff Tannen (also Thomas F. Wilson). While they are in the future, there is a little problem. Marty stops Marty Jr from getting into trouble, but Jennifer is picked up by the police (Doc gave her something so she can just sleep and not get into any trouble) and returned to her future self's home. While Marty and Doc go to get her before she is seen by her family, the old Biff Tannen overhears them talking about time travel and grabs "Gray's Sports Almanac" and goes back to 1955 and gives the almanac to his younger self. Now the young Biff is free to gamble on sporting events knowing the outcome. When Marty and Doc return to 1985, it is an alternate 1985 because the town was changed when Biff won millions gambling. It changed everything in Hill Valley. The rest of the movie is Marty and Doc trying to find out what happened and fixing things back in 1955 (where a different Marty is already there doing what he did in the first "Back to the Future" movie").

This has always been my favorite of the Back to the Future movies. I like how it shows even more how seemingly small events can change what happens in the future. I like watching Marty see himself helping his parents in 1985 (more scenes that had to be re-filmed to get Marty in two places at once). I also appreciate how much attention to detail there was in relation to the first movie as well as what would foreshadow the third movie. The first movie may be considered the best, but this is my favorite.

BEST MOVIE!!!!!
I am a HUGE fan of the Back to the Future triliogy!! If i had to recmmend any of the 3 to own it would be this one, # 2!!!! It is the best of both worlds, going from present to past and future!!! It shows how the town transforms weather it is 1985, 2015 or 1955!!! BUY IT, WATCH IT, LOVE IT!! ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Back to Twin Peaks
A very strange, almost stock version of a David Lynchesque miscast. That said, I liked it anyhow.

Heather Graham plays a young widow who has witnessed her husband's murder and the murderer himself commit suicide(I think they were more than buddies wink wink.) There is no determined timeframe thereafter, but she is in a daze and living in an apartment alone and randomly and promiscuously engaging in sex with random guys, oh and one girl too. Well, the sex always revolves around her getting orally surfeited but that's of no matter is it? It's Heather Graham being sexed up! Anyhow somebody begins to stalk her and and and the police won't help and and and she keeps getting beaten and and and followed around by a big white car etc. Finally the mysterious stalker is exposed!

I'm giving it 4 1/2 stars on H. Graham alone being so lovely and just acting like a complete lulu. Her hair is wild, her demeanor is aloof to the things which don't interest her(which is everything) and she crouches over some guy lying on the floor, sans panties and rubs herself into his face. Even when she is at work typing, her shoulders bobbing and the doe-eyes are ghostly round, she is entrancing. I hope H. G. isn't a real-life Hollywood trollop because she sure made me buy into the movie on her presence alone. I even liked her in Say It Isn't So, a romantic comedy, which would make me gag normally. So what I am saying is that I am whoring out any objectivity principally on her aesthetics. But honestly, the movie wasn't bad either.

Random but cool
The movie was at the same time extremely scary but hysterically funny. The neurotic sensibility in Graham's performance is similar to Mia farrow in Rosemary's baby. It left a really deep impression on me since the whole film was so roughly presented and sharply scary. The film is so sharp and rough it even transcends into something really justifiable. Looking back on it I really loved it and how it could scare me like no other film (not anne rice, not from dusk till dawn, not even the baby of Rosemary.)

Not very intriguing
I like the way it gives you a twist when you actually think that there is someone real that is stalking her but a lot of scenes were cut out and that is what makes the movie a burial into the moritorium of movies. Other than that if I could just get my hands on an original uncut version that woud be fine too.Thank's..

Not Uncut
I bought this movie because of a still of the movie that I downloaded recently of Heather Graham sitting on the face of some guy. But when I watched this dvd I noticed to my horror that this particular scene had been edited out. I find this strange as the dvd is R rated.
A complete waste of my money and there's nothing I can do about it.

Not Uncut - beware
I bought this movie because of a still of the movie that I downloaded recently of Heather Graham sitting on the face of some guy. But when I watched this dvd I noticed to my horror that this particular scene had been edited out. I find this strange as the dvd is R rated.
A complete waste of my money and there's nothing I can do about it. ... Read more