Reviews (14)

Part Hitchcock, Part James Bond, All Escapist Fun!
Another fab Universal romantic thriller in the grand CHARADE tradition, including some of the same personnel! If director Stanley Donen's classic 1963 comedy-thriller CHARADE is Hitchcock Lite, then ARABESQUE is Hitchcock Lite after taking a few classes in James Bond 101 (including an opening title sequence by Maurice Binder, who also did the honors for CHARADE as well as for most of the Bond movies). As the hieroglyphics expert embroiled in Middle Eastern intrigue while decoding the cipher everyone's after, Gregory Peck's usual woodenness is oddly effective as he tries to deliver Cary Grant-like witticisms (from co-scripter `Pierre Marton,' a.k.a. the late, great CHARADE alumnus Peter Stone). Peck may not be Mr. Glib, but he seems so delighted to get an opportunity to deliver bon mots after all his serious roles that he's downright endearing, like a child trying out new words for the first time. Co-star Sophia Loren, at her most alluring as an Arab femme fatale, can make any guy look suave and sexy! Christopher Challis's dazzling, inventive cinematography won the BAFTA (the British equivalent of the Oscars), and Christian Dior got a BAFTA nomination for Loren's elegant costumes. Suspenseful and sparkling as this twist-filled adventure is, ARABESQUE's biggest mystery is why it's still only available in VHS format. If this gem ever gets deluxe treatment as a DVD (including letterboxing, please!), I sure hope they get Donen to do the kind of entertaining, informative commentary he did with Stone for Criterion's CHARADE DVD -- perhaps they could even get Loren to put in her two cents!

Reading between the lines
"Arabesque" has star appeal, fine chase scenes and a jaunty music score but a rather confusing plot about deciphering a coded message that everyone in the film is trying to get their hands on. Suave Gregory Peck and pretty Sophia Loren pair up to supply the romance while trying to escape from dangerous situations as they flee their pursuers through the streets of London, a zoo and a racetrack. The cipher and an assassination attempt are at the heart of this story and even Peck's Oxford professor can't figure out which side Loren's Yazmin is on as she tells Mr. Pollock one tale after another while they try to rescue an Arabian Prime Minister from grave danger. Sexy Sophia is not believable as a spy but nevertheless is a fine compliment to Peck in this enjoyable spy caper that parallels 1963's "Charade" but is not in the same class as that film.

Son of Charade!
This movie is ALMOST as good as its immediate predecessor with Grant and Hepburn. It's without a doubt Gregory Peck's best comedy, Roman Holiday or no. Stanley Donen again pairs two mega-stars who normally don't make movies together, (though in the case of Grant and Hepburn, they SHOULD have!) and produces good chemistry. Peck has great, clever lines and so does Loren in spots. However, there are a couple of scenes in the movie that keep me from giving it the full five or four star treatment.

This is a Peck, may he rest in peace, that you haven't seen before. His flippant, tossed-off lines suit the situations the writers have put his character in to a tee. He plays a professor reluctantly helping a slimy character, who KIDNAPS him to acquire his services, to decipher a piece of paper with a hieroglyphic inscription on it that a lot of people seem to be after. That hieroglyphic ISN'T exactly what concerns them, though!

Loren and the general intrigue, drag the poor man through being drugged out of his mind on a well-used freeway riding a bicycle, being abducted by yet more shady types, (a short-haired hipster and his gang), and evading armed arabs in a helicopter on horseback. Peck's character, however, dilutes any sympathy he'd get for all this by holding a knife to the exquisite Ms. Loren's throat early in the film! What's even weirder is that Loren SMILES at him after he does it since they were both trying to escape the mansion Loren was being held in. The whole thing was HER idea!

All the while, Peck throws out bon mots like there's no tomorrow, making you wonder why he didn't make more comedies, (Peter O'Toole, George Hamilton and Candice Bergen would make you think the same thing in breakout comedies THEY'VE made!) Loren is absolutely GORGEOUS with those almond eyes, incredible figure, sculpted upper lip, magnificent tan and body by Fisher! She has a couple of great scenes in the movie, one where she tries to distract a Palace Guard in England and another where she's stuck in a shower, nude, where Peck has hidden to avoid being nabbed by her extremely possessive and decadent "keeper" in the beginning of the film.

Though people might argue to the contrary, this film really doesn't resemble "Charade" all that much, except for the fact that two stellar actors are doing a glamorous mystery trifle. The theme involves international intrigue, rather than a murder mystery and you know who Peck is from the beginning. It's actually LOREN who's the iffy one of the two....in the back of the van in the middle of the film, just before Peck goes on the comical bicycle ride on the freeway, it really looks like she's one of the bad guys as she cuddles with the character that first batters then drugs Peck.

Like Charade, however, the O. Henry machine is in overdrive as you never know who's who or what's what, except for Peck. One British government agent even surprises you!

There's a teaser scene, just before the credits run, that has one of the employees of Beshravi, the man keeping Loren, actually dropping ACID in some poor, unsuspecting soul's eyes. This, along with the knife scene with Loren and Peck, are the two scenes that keep me from giving this film a full family recommendation....However, if you have a strong stomach, it's one of the more entertaining 60s spy spoofs and definitely one of the better comedies for both Peck and Loren.

Great Movie
Arabesque is an extremeley entertaining and amusing movie. Peck and Loren are an excellent pair and their relationship kept me laughing throughout most of the movie. If you like spy movies and comedies, or if you just like Gregory Peck this is a movie for you. Anyway, I just liked it so much that I wanted to write a review for it, so I hope this helps.

RACIST YET DECADENT FLICK
Even though I am not Arab (just an advocate of human rights), this sumptous movie would have gotten 5 Stars if it weren't for the offensive and mistaken portrayal of Arabs and Muslims. Especially the name, "Arabesque" must be truly offensive to them ....

OTHER THAN THAT, if you can take this movie lightheartedly, non-judgementally and tongue-in-cheek (although we can't expect Arabs to!) than it is great entertainment with tonz of wit, TONZ of DRAMA!!!, decedant fashion scenes (of Sophia Loren trying on shoes!), and the chemistry between the two is pure romance. Although you wonder how they can ever top what they've been through - adventure-wise!

All in all, WORTH the money. Decadent close-ups of Sophia's make-up and a nice amount of outfit changes. An inspiration to women with inner glamour. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

With its high-intensity plot about an attempt to assassinate French President Charles de Gaulle, the bestselling novel by Frederick Forsyth was a prime candidate for screen adaptation. Director Fred Zinnemann brought his veteran skills to bear on what has become a timeless classic of screen suspense. Not to be confused with the later remake The Jackal starring Bruce Willis (which shamelessly embraced all the bombast that Zinnemann so wisely avoided), this 1973 thriller opts for lethal elegance and low-key tenacity in the form of the Jackal, the suave assassin played with consummate British coolness by Edward Fox. He's a killer of the highest order, a master of disguise and international elusiveness, and this riveting film follows his path to de Gaulle with an intense, straightforward documentary style. Perhaps one of the last great films from a bygone age of pure, down-to-basics suspense (and a kind of debonair European alternative to the American grittiness of The French Connection), The Day of the Jackal is a cat-and-mouse thriller that keeps you on the edge of your seat until its brilliantly executed final scene (pardon the pun), by which time Fox has achieved cinematic immortality as one of the screen's most memorable killers. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (72)

Why can't they make movies like this any more?
Rarely does a movie do justice to a book, but Fred Zinneman's production of "The Day of the Jackal" is wonderful adaptation of Frederick Forsyth's novel which, I continue to believe, is one of the greatest thrillers ever written.

It's hard to put a finger on what exactly makes this film great: excellent performances by relatively unknown actors, a wonderful plot, fantastic location shooting or a complete desire to avoid the bells and whistles, special effects laden movies that are all that makes up the "suspense" genre of films these days. Like other reviewers have said, be this the first or the fiftieth time that you watch this film, you will be left on the edge of your seat with its "cat and mouse" plot of the search for a lone assassin hired to murder President De Gaulle. The young Edward Fox is brilliant in the title role and the supporting cast excellent.

If anything, this film proves that you do not need big named stars, explosions around every corner or computer generated effects to make a fantastic film. The only downside to watching this film is that you realise that the movie industry just does not make films like this any more.

Highly, highly recommended.

ONE SHOT IS NEVER ENOUGH !
Fred Zinnemann's THE DAY OF THE JACKAL is not the kind of thriller you are familiar with nowadays. For once, french actors don't look silly and have the terrible task to trace Edward "The Jackal" Fox who gives an award-deserving performance.

DAY OF THE JACKAL made me think of these cold war spy movies of the seventies. Do you remember ? We had the impression they were filmed only in green and blue, the characters didn't speak much leaving to the audience the task to understand the plot by itself. You will feel this kind of atmosphere in this film with the difference that Zinnemann worked with a solid gold screenplay.

The final scene, the day of the jackal, is about 30 minutes long and is already part of Motion picture History.

A few problems with the images ; white spots, images standing still during 1 or 2 seconds. The sound is, in my opinion, the best we can expect from a 1973 movie.

A DVD worthy of multiple viewings.

Excellent adaptation from Forsyth's novel. A winner!
Why not the jackal?
This is the answer given by the hard and cold assasin who signs the agreement to kill De Gaulle.
The story runs through a set of historical issues who are part of the story. A group of officers decides by themselves to revenge the lost honor of France due the fact about the independence of Algiers.
Edward Fox - one of the best actors of his generation - played with sublime perfection the demanding role of the Jackal.
So from the first images of the film you'll be engaged with this chess film. All the movements of this exceptional mind are guided by an amazing sense of hunter behavior. He acts like a western samurai , without blinking , he kills when the circunstances don't let him other choice. The feelings don't exist in this professional.
You are invited to presence an authentical tour de force. And since the moment an important link is arrested , your histamina and cold sweat will invade you.
The efforts of Le Surete for following any possible clue leads to an unforgettable mind game to spark the human chase since the moment the Jackal decides to go ahead with the plan and drive to France from Niza.
The rest of the story runs for you when you acquire this legendary and hair raising punch thriller. And once more you'll admire how the famous film maker Fred Zinemann could win with this story.
The locations and the sense of the drama are extraordinary made. And the words are not enough to describe the countless sequences of hard beating you'll experience.
A perfect film and believe me ; you won't feel the 140 min of the picture.
This is the first and best version!

A First Rate Spy Thriller

Not so much "spy" as "assassin," though, for Edward Fox is cast as an assassin, doing a job that will earn him his retirement. He is to kill President Charles de Gaulle, "le Grand Charles" himself, in Liberation Day, as we eventually find out--but not until much later in the film.

The killer goes through many personalities, disguises, and changes, and manages to kill a few innocents on the way to his final conquest. He is unknown to the gendarme, who are on his trail early, with the help of an informer on the inside, but eventually his appearance becomes known to them--and even then, in spite of an alert commissioner of police in Paris who is every bit his match, Inspector Lebel (Michel Lonsdale)--he almost makes his kill. Had he done so, of course history would have had to be re-written because of a movie, an unlikely event--so we knew that he would fail, but still the plot was so well played that the suspense was never lost.

Written by Frederick Forsyth and directed by Fred Zinneman, perhaps this film was predestined for greatness, but in any case it is one of the great ones.

Joseph (Joe) Pierre

author of Handguns and Freedom...their care and maintenance
and other books

If only it had had a happy ending
_Day of the Jackal_ is one of the best film adaptations of a book ever done, the directors managed to keep the vital elements of the plot and the pacing of the book and successfully transfer them from one medium to another. When I read the book after seeing the movie I was amazed at how much they had managed to keep. Edward Fox was perfect as the Jackal, it's a pity that he's ended up starring in so many bad films in his career as he is truly a fantastic actor. There are some wonderful moments of irony such as when the leader of the French terrorists says that no soldier of France will ever raise a weapon against him and then is shown being shot by firing squad the next day. The only thing that would have improved this movie is if the Jackal had succeeded in blowing Charles DeGaulle's head all over the pavement in Paris, I mean really, the guy goes to all of this work and fails in the end, and come on, he's trying to shoot DeGaulle, it's not as if he was attempting to shoot a decent human being or something, heck, even Eisenhower and Churchill wanted to shoot DeGaulle because he was such a useless, vainglorious prick. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Beautiful Rita Hayworth Shines In Legendary Bible Epic
"Salome", has really come in for it's fair share of criticism in the years since it's 1953 release. Criticised for it's blatant altering of the New Testament story that depicts the beheading of John the Baptist, it has been called everything from a campy mess to an insult to scholars of the Bible. However I always just appreciate the film for it's many outstanding qualities that well and truly earn it a place in my personal pantheon of great 1950's Biblical Epics. Lacking the wide scope of for example "The Ten Commandments", "Salome", takes a short incident in the Bible and turns it into a highly entertaining and at times tragic story. It certainly succeeded in provided an eye filling showcase for actress Rita Hayworth, only recently arrived back in Hollywood after an unsuccessful marriage to Prince Aly Khan. Despite the break from Hollywood she has never been more alive and sensual as in this role and her justly famous rendition of the notorious "Dance of the Seven Veils", is the dramatic and indeed sensual climax of the film. If for nothing else Rita Hayworth will always be imprinted in viewers minds as the Princess Salome seductively performing this dance before an obviously besotted King Herod just prior to John the Baptist's head being brought into the room on a platter.

We have all read about John the Baptist as children and how Princess Salome agreed to do the "Dance of the Seven Veils", in return for the Baptist's head. Hollywood being Hollywood, has altered the story and Salome is now not the total wanton of the Bible story but a basically decent girl surrounded by total corrupting influences. This artistic licence aside the story is an affectivly told one and includes some terrific actors having the time of their lives with their colourful characters. The story opens with young Princess Salome residing in the Rome of the Emperor Tiberius (Cedric Hardwicke). She has been sent there by her mother Queen Herodias (Judith Anderson), who is intent on keeping her away from the incestuous attention of her step father King Herod (Charles Laughton). Salome however runs foul of the Emperor when she falls in love with Marcellus a relative of the Emperor. Refusing to allow his family to marry "barbarians", Salome is sent back to her parents in Galilea. On the journey over she is placed in the care of Roman Commander Claudius (Stewart Granger), and the two begin a definite love /hate relationship. Upon arriving back in her homeland Salome discovers all is not well as her mother Queen Herodias, who is trapped in a loveless marriage with Herod, has consuming ambitions for the throne and rather disturbingly King Herod takes an unwelcome and decidely unheathy interest in his beautiful step daughter. The kingdom is rife with unrest and John the Baptist is constantly speaking out against the corruption and godlessness of the ruler and his court. When he speaks out at the Queen as an adulteress Salome goes to find out more about this outspoken preacher and discovers that Claudius who she now realises she loves, is actually one of his followers. Queen Herodias makes plans to have the baptist assassinated however it fails and Herod takes him into his custody to keep him out of the way. The people meanwhile begin to rise up in protest at John's imprisonment and Salome learns the true nature of her evil mother when she asks her to perform the Dance of the Seven Veils, before Herod in return for the Bapist's head. Dancing before the King is simply another word for prostitution and Salome decides to leave the Palace. A visit with Claudius to the imprisoned John makes her see the power of what he is preaching about the Lord's word and she decides to save him by appeasing her father in law and performing the dance. However Herodias has her way and John is beheaded much to Salome's horror who now sets out on her own life as a Christian with Claudius.

Glitzy hokum? Perhaps, but highly entertaining nevertheless. "Salome", was for a long time a project dear to the heart of Cecil B. DeMille who would have been in his element with such an exotic story. He envisioned using Rita Hayworth as the legendary Salome however it never came to be. It was finally up to Columbia chief Harry Cohn fifteeen years later to finally put this project into reality. No expenses was spared on talent both in front of and behind the camera and it shows in the final film. Luscious costumes designed by Jean Louis, breathtaking colour photography and the typical trademarks of 1950's Epics, lavish sets and intrigue are poured on thick in "Salome". Rita Hayworth despite not resembling a Princess native to the Holy Land does well in the role and in her famous dance shows off the skills that served her well as a dancer earlier in her career. Judith Anderson as the evil Queen steals every scene she is in in another classic nasty performance and Charles Laughton performs to his hammy best as the decadent King Herod. These two veteran performers by their colourful playing really bring "Salome", alive in their scenes. "Salome", benefits from some truly superb camerawork for both the palace scenes and also for the actual locations in the Holy Land which were used for the first time with this film. These locations give a rich and realistic look to many of the outdoor scenes in "Salome", recreating the times of the New Testament perfectly.

Being a huge fan of these lavish biblical epics produced in the 1950's I can still see the obvious holes in this film version of "Salome". Rather than seeing them as faults however one has to just take the film at face value, not take it too seriously and just enjoy it for the great production it is. It has romance, intrigue, gorgeous sets and costumes and enough action to satisfy most epic movie lovers. For a "refashioned", look at one of the Bible's more famous stories you are sure to love Columbia Studios lavish "Salome", starring the legendary Rita Hayworth.

Of couse it's bad BUT
It's great fun to watch! Everything about this is wrong -- te story of Salome is changed to make Salome a victim of her evil mother Herodias. Rita Hayworth looks more like 1950's Hollywood -- complete with gold hair, -- than a first century Jewish-Mediterrenean princess. But the prize for giving the most unintended laughs goes to John the Baptist in the hammiest, most overacted role ever in ANY Biblical film -- and indeed Hollywood has dozens of overacted Biblical films them. This film is enjoyable, pure kitschy entertainment - don't expect any deep theological interpretations of the Gospel account. Don't even expect an accurate interpretation.

There will never be another Rita Hayworth
If there is one benchmark film that displays the timeless, ravishing beauty of Rita Hayworth then Salome is it. Salome serves more for its artistic as opposed to historical value, but what's wrong with that? (If you want to know the facts then read the Bible.)
The Dance of Seven Veils rivals any scene in filmdom for pure sensuality without need for gratuitous sex. (A close second might be the Holden and Novak dance in "Picnic".) Please treat yourself to an evening of lovliness.

Hayworth was made for color film!
Religious epics from the 50's ran the gamut from well-made and reverential films like "The Robe" and Academy Award-winning champ "Ben-Hur" to the camp entertainment of "The Ten Commandments" to downright awful productions like "The Silver Chalice"(Jack Palance at his overacting best).

Well, "Salome" falls somewhere in the middle. It is both historically inaccurate and captivatingly seductive while attempting to be as pious as audiences of the decade demanded in their Bible-based dramas.

This Rita Hayworth vehicle does well as a showcase for the actress/dancer whose natural beauty was enhanced in glorious Technicolor. As the daughter of King Herod, Hayworth's Salome is a study in contrasts: one that is torn between her duty to the monarchy and to the romantic advances of Christian-convert Stewart Granger.

Charles Laughton is somewhat hammy as Herod, but all great actors have their occasional over-the-top roles. Dame Judith Anderson adds another evil matriarch to her long line of "bad girls" as Heroditus, wife of Herod and chief catalyst behind the beheading of John the Baptist (Alan Badel).

Hey, the flick ain't Shakespeare, but it does hold the interest especially Hayworth's "Dance of the Seven Veils".

Salome
The screen play was very good. You will not waste your money on this vidio. The costumes are opulant and the scenery is good. Rita Hayworth put on a very good performance ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Book better
I read the book before I saw the movie and the book was quite good. The movie isn't as good as the book but the never are. But it is a very good movie. It is also quite violent.

It starts out with Dax as a young boy & in the movie we watch him grow up and see some of the hell he had to live with. In the
end he is a man still fighting for what he believes is right.

good cast.

The adventurers
I saw this movie when it first came out,and really enjoyed every aspect of it. It is sad, but its content is being played out this very day.

It's Not That Bad, Really It's Not
I caught this movie in theatres a couple of times when it was first released in 1970. It impressed me then and still does, for several reasons. First, it has a very good cast. And they are not completely wasted, only 75 percent wasted. Second, it has plenty of sex, violence, and the other human failings that make watching other people so much fun. Third, sure, it's overly ambitious, and falls well short of its grand intentions. But, it is a trip worth taking even if you know you're headed down a dead-end street. Don't listen to the so-called experts. This movie is one that is worth making up your own mind. I'm still enjoying this film some 30 years later, and I think you will, too.

Never mind the acting, hear the music
I saw this movie when it came out and I have never forgotten it, though I don't remember the acting or the script. What I remember is that it has great music, an original score by the now legendary Antonio Carlos Jobim. Worth seeing for that reason alone - wish I could get a soundtrack CD. Jobim wrote scores for several movies, most of which were never seen in English. Black Orpheus is the only well known one.

Atrocious soap opera set in a lamebrained fictional country
Moth-balled, laughably atrocious soap opera set in a lamebrained fictional country in South America, with revolutions, protests, chemistry-less romantic triangles, and embarrassing performances thrown in for equal measure. Tries to be a serious political drama, but fails to conjure up any emotion or offer anything new. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Ameen4L
This is an excellent movie. Richard Burton is superb. Why is this movie not in DVD?

Burton is a brooding ,sensual anti-hero for the masses.
This is the film that got me interested in Burton. I first saw it on British television many years ago,and Burtons portrayal of an intelligent, but massively tortured man is reminiscent of his own life.He had a "gift" which would ultimately tear him apart.This film is not currently available on video in the UK.That is a disgrace.

This movie is absolutely fantasic
I have seen this film three times on British television and I can recommend it to all. Richard Burton is at his absolute peak in the dark and menacing lead. The film itself is beautifully crafted, and works on numerous levels. It is not unknown for me to ask relative strangers what their favourite movie is and be told "The Medusa Touch" which is quite astounding since it is a little known title. If you get the opportunity to watch this film, I implore you to grab it with both hands.

The scarriest movie ever
I loved this movie i was tottaly blown and i saw this movie and i was so scared it is the most interesting and brain twisting movie ive ever seen

Telekinesis related to ...... skeptic times
the magnetic potential in brain wave WHY NOT To Beta FATHER DAMIEN i Hope To see it in Broad casting execute _Thank us ... Read more

Reviews (8)

nicky, don't lose that number...
Great Cold War intrigue with all the nifty spy vs. spy plots and subplots with the obligatory "follow that car/plane" action sequences.

Nicky (Nicholas Dalchimsky, played by Donald Pleasance) goes on a rampage calling all those ex-KGB agents with a deadly phone mantra that rekindles their brain implanted directives to blow up some antiquated American military facility.

In order to stop this madness, staid agent Charles Bronson gets hooked up with with his flighty counterpart, Lee Remick, and sparks immediately fly! This matchup provides great tension and inevitable release between the two principals. They go on a cross-country romp to try to predict the antagonist's next move. The plot gets thicker as those who control the two aforementioned agents have ideas of their own.

Tyne Daly does the screen justice with her portrayal as the nerdy CIA computer whiz, who statistically narrows down who the adversary might be.

The story line moves along at a nice pace, augmented by the varied locales that are encountered on their mission to stop this madman. A must for Cold War buffs!

Another Bronson Thriller
Wow, another Bronson thriller. Bronson as a KGB agent trying to stop a potential World War 3 after the cold war has ended some time ago. Sleeper agents are blowing up everything, and Bronson is the only one that has a chance to find the man that is setting them off with that triggering "telefon" call. Lots of action. This movie makes you think: is this really based on fiction? You never really know who is living right next door to you....do you?

Telefon
This is a great movie. It should be on DVD. It is an interesting Cold War Era Spy thriller. Bronson does a particularly good job portraying a Russian KGB agent. Buy it it is great. This is truly some of Bronson's best work. Excellent Actin throughout the film.

A Mediocre But Entertaining Charles Bronson Action Movie
In 1978, I saw this film in a theater on a double-bill with the Peter Sellers' comedy "The Pink Panther Strikes Again." "Telefon" is a forgettable yet fun Charles Bronson thriller.

Crazed Russian defector Donald Pleasence sets out to activate a group of hypnotized human-time bombs who were programmed many years earlier. Russian agent Charles Bronson is out to stop Pleasence.

"Telefon" is a so-so yet entertaining Charles Bronson picture. As a brainwashing-oriented political paranoia thriller, "Telefon" is nowhere near as witty and chilling as John Frankenheimer's "The Manchurian Candidate." Nevertheless, "Telefon" is still a fun movie. The film also has none of the sleaziness that would characterize the Bronson movies of the 1980s. "Telefon" never has a dull moment from start to finish. Charles Bronson may have been the greatest action hero of the big screen. Bronson exudes an absolutely formidable presence. Donald Pleasence, who previously worked with Bronson in the unforgettable classic "The Great Escape," is one of cinema's more underrated villains. A pre-"Cagney And Lacey" Tyne Daly has a small supporting role.

Although the film doesn't qualify as a classic, "Telefon" is for all Charles Bronson fans.

Excellent Thriller During the Cold War Era !
I just finished seeing this movie on Turner Classic Movies in Letterbox format,it looks excellent. I thinks its time Mgm does
the same thing. Its about a Russian experiment gone wrong and Bronson must do to stop the menace before war breaks out. A must for Bronson fans ... Read more

Reviews (4)

A film for lovers of classic boats and adventure
This is a excellent film especially for those interested in traditional wooden boats and a good adventure story. The film follows the book fairly closely and apart from the German laughter which seems to be produced at the point of a sword, is well acted. Please bring it out on DVD as my VHS copy is just about worn out

A good smooth thriller with a little action thrown in.
The movie is an adaptation of the classic and politically controversial (at the time) novel about a pair of lower upper class Englishmen who discover that Kaiser Willhem II was planning an invasion of England by the undefended west coast using barges as transport. It is an exciting and charming film with Michael York playing an initially sceptical Foreign Office clerk who is drawn into the suspicions of Davies (Simon MacCorkindale), an expert sailor. The movie is charmingly infused with late Victorian optimism and self confidence.

Riddle of the Sands
Excellent adapation of the book. Bring it out on DVD!

Fantastic adventure story
An amazing adventure set several years before the outbreak of WWI. Two Englishmen on a sailing holiday off the Frisian Islands discover the Germans are up to no good. Fantastic story and camera work. Please bring this film out on DVD! ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Too Beautiful, So Fragile- And A Visual Feast For The Eyes
I'm not going to write too much about this exceptional film- The reviewer before me has already done a superb job. I will say this: I saw Nijinsky upon its first release in 1980, and I was impressed enough to return to the theatre again, to see if my original impressions were accurate. I was both enchanted and more than pleased by the entire production. I've read the definitive 1970 biography Nijinsky by Richard Buckle (in fact I still own it), and this film is as close as you will ever get to seeing a portrait of his time. Not only the man, but his peers, and events that shaped and inspired his turbulent vision are portrayed with great care and thought. The colors of the film are vibrant and rich, and true to the art of Leon Bakst, principal designer to the ballet troupe. I felt like I was transported to this marvellous age, when electricity was still a wonder, great luxury liners rode the waves, and the airplane was discovering the sky while the automobile and railroads crossed the land. It was the age of Empires, yet the world still held unexplored places waiting to be mapped. The Arts really could present The Shock Of The New, while the working classes discovered their strength in strikes and unions and the wealthy lived in opulence. For me, this film worked on every level. A mirror in time, and the breakdown of an artist's mind. A distant era, a beautiful film, a sad ending... Yet we are left knowing that Nijinsky, with all his visions of light and shadow, was never left alone, never forgotten. This broken man was cared for, and still loved. We should all be so fortunate. If I have any regret about this film, it is that it has yet to be released on dvd. I sincerely hope that oversight will one day be corrected.

Well Worth A Viewing
Hard to believe that "Nijinsky" is now a twenty-two-year-old film; its look and performances are so fresh that it could be the latest from Ivory-Merchant.

The film focuses on the period 1912-1913, when Vaslav Nijinsky was both at his height as a choreographer, and at his lowest point personally. He was under the guidance and domination of impresario Sergei Diaghilev in his work and his love life, and he was also being pursued by ballet groupie Romola de Pulzsky, who eventually met and indeed married him.

The film is based on actual events, but viewers should be aware that the script takes minor liberties with historical time frames, character motivations, and events to advance its story. The production is mounted most handsomely, with the London Festival Ballet helping to recreate Nijinsky's most famous works. The ballet sequences are beautifully filmed, but many suffer from being cut very short. However, "L'Apres-midi d'un Faune" is presented at decent length, and there is an amazing, if too-brief, re-creation of the lost Nijinsky ballet "Jeux", done entirely from old photos and Valentine Gross's drawings of the original production.

The major performances are beautifully detailled; George de la Pena's Nijinsky is as winning and as troubled as we believe the actual man to have been. Alan Bates' Sergei Diaghilev is charming, ruthless, and ultimately defeated. Italian ballerina Carla Fracci plays Nijinsky's dancing partner Tamara Karsavina as tender, elegant, and nobody's fool- which is, according to Fracci enthusiasts, type-casting at its best. The one performance that is somewhat vague and unformed is Leslie Browne's as Romola; it may be that she or director Herbert Ross was trying to suggest that Romola was too immature to manage the torrents of emotion she unleashed between herself, Nijinsky, and Diaghilev. Alan Badel gives his final screen performance as Diaghilev's financial backer Baron de Guinzbourg; his plummy portrayal is one of the film's chief delights.

I've heard this movie described as disappointing by others, but I think the trouble stems from the history it portrays. The love triangle ends badly, with Nijinsky leaving lover Diaghilev to marry Romola, and subsequently descending into madness. This obviously is not satisfactory dramatic structure, but that's the way it happened, folks, and the movie begs, as it must, the unanswerable question of whether Nijinsky's marriage had anything to do with his illness.

For those who want to know what happened after this film's story ends, Romola stood by Nijinsky for the three decades of his schizophrenia, making certain that he had the funds and the care he needed. Shepherding someone through such an illness in Central Europe over the course of two world wars was certainly an act of the most extreme devotion. As Alan Bates' Diaghilev says to Romola at the end of the movie, "I suspect you are the best thing that could have happened to him."

Whether you agree or not, you won't regret the time spent watching this one.

Great dancing in an otherwise overblown soap opera
Considering the star power in this movie (Bates, DeLaPena, Irons, Badel, and directed by Herbert Ross) it misfires at just about every point. The life story of the great dancer Nijinsky has been put into a box of soapflakes and churned with a lot of soft water to produce an awful lot of suds, but nothing much actually comes out clean and bright and we are left with annoying residue. Ross seems to have fixated on the sexual relationship between Diaghilev and Nijinsky so much so that a much more balanced and fair story was abandoned to tittilating sensationalism. The film also gives us the impression that Nijinsky went crazy because of his inability to come to terms with his sexuality as well as his break with Diaghilev which are, psychologically, simply not true at all. Perhaps in today's world Nijinsky could be treated with Lithium or other potent drugs for bipolar abnormalities or schizophrenia, but to suggest that he went crazy because of a broken love affair is just plain silly. Unfortunately, all this whipped cream and soap flakes melodrama leaves the dancing very much in the lurch. What there is of it (the dancing) is wonderful and the film would have been MUCH better had Ross and company focused on that aspect rather than the bedroom nonsense we are for the most part already aware of (and so what?). George DeLaPena is a wonderful dancer and actor, or should I say a "dancing actor" and he is much underused in this movie in which he has the title role. Even Nijinsky's extraordinarily controversial ending of "The Afternoon of a Faun" is, by all historical reports, grossly overdone in this movie. The other ballets are given slight notice, even the brillant "Scherazade" with the beautiful original costumes and sets by Leon Bakst is given short shrift. On the plus side, Alan Bates gives a fine performance as Diaghilev (although he is working with a very poor script), and as I've said, George DeLaPena is wonderful as Nijinsky (again, crippled by a bad script). Perhaps one day someone will make a really good movie of these fascinating people. They deserve it, as all truly great theatrical geniuses do. As an aside, I've long thought that the impressario in the movie "The Red Shoes" (Lermontov, played by the brillant Anton Walbrook) was meant to be Diaghilev. Now, if you want to see a really GOOD movie about ballet and ballet dancers, check that one out ("The Red Shoes"), and Ross's "The Turning Point" is also a winner. Too bad "Nijinsky" is a turkey. ... Read more

Description

What really happened to mystery writer Agatha Christie when she vanished for 11 days in 1926? Dustin Hoffman and Vanessa Redgrave star in this ingenious solution to an enduring mystery. Year: 1979 Director: Michael Apted Starring:Dusin Hoffman, Vanessa Redgrave, Timothy Dalton ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Intriguing but Hollow...
As an Agatha Christie fan, I was very curious when I happened upon this video recently. As Christie always seems so cool, collected and in control as the voice behind her mysteries, I assumed that that was how she was in real life. Thus as I read the video description and learned that she was a painfully shy woman who clung to her husband for support, I was very interested in learning more.

What made this film even more intriguing is that in writing a screenplay about Christie, the minds behind this film did so playfully. They focused on an 11 day period when Christie disappeared, and set the whole thing up as a mystery plot...in classic Agatha style...

Or so they thought. The mystery part of this movie left no real mystery to solve. The "surprise twist" at the end was a minor twist that didn't really fulfill expectations. Otherwise, everything was painstakingly clear.

If you can leave aside the whole mystery story as a bold but ultimately doomed attempt (doomed simply by the confines of reality), the rest of the story did hold its own. The plot moved slowly, dialog was sometimes hard to understand and minor characters were hard to keep track of...all of which are typical of older films. However, the characters were engaging and the plot kept things moving along.

The build-up of the relationship between Christie and Apted is fully believable, except they don't get together in the end. This is not a "Roman Holiday" situation where they can't because of circumstances. Rather, it is because Apted is fictional and therefore not true to Christie's real life story. Thus, you are left emotionally baffled.

All that said, the greatest value I personally received from the film was a MUCH BETTER understanding of Christie herself and also of England in the 1920's. Additionally, I enjoyed Hoffman's character thoroughly. He really shone in his role.

A Movie Sadly Lost Like Agatha Herself..
I want to counter one review here. I had seen this movie when it first came out. It DID NOT do well in the box office, BUT! This movie was beautifully filmed with excellent focus adjustments that mirrored the "mystery" that never took place, but could have. I also want to say that if anyone "falls asleep" at the beautiful music of Johnny Mandel, especially the closing title song "Close Enough for Love" then they think 50 cent is a gospel singer (By the way it has been recorded by more great singers and jazz artists than almost any song of Mandel's since the Shadow of Your Smile). This is first rate fiction and while Hoffman's character is almost plastic in its portrayal, Redgrave's and Dalton's is first rate. This one will disappear into obscurity, evidenced by its lack of DVD availablility.I am afraid, like so many movies that we are now trying to pull from the celluliod graveyard, it will be re-discovered way too late. You need to grab this one and remember the choice is yours a "cigarette or a kiss."

11 days of amnesia
In 1926 acclaimed English mystery writer Agatha Christie disappeared after her car was found in the countryside. She later reappeared at the Harrogate Spa claiming "amnesia" and unable to explain what had taken place. The screenplay by Kathleen Tynan and Arthur Hopcraft constructs a solution to Christie's real life mystery by suggesting that she followed her husband's mistress to Harrogate Spa. What is intriguing about this idea is the way the treatment has Christie use the skills she presumably used to create her novels, to investigate the potentially lethal electrical apparatus used at the Spa as slimming devices. However outweighing the thriller elements of the film is the romantic approach by director Michael Apted, represented by the casting of Vanessa Redgrave as Christie, Dustin Hoffman as an American journalist following her, the lighting by Vittorio Storaro and the production design by Shirley Russell. Redgrave encapsulates the shy genius Christie who hides in her clothes and her partnership with the dandy played by Hoffman is both the coming together of two oddballs, and the excitement of seeing two great actors complement each other. Hoffman is as aware that Redgrave is Christie though she uses a false name as much as Redgrave is as aware of his awareness. Apted uses this double act of voyeurism of Hoffman spying on Redgrave and Redgrave's Christie spying on her husband's mistress as a demonstration of the public's fascination with celebrity, even celebrity as unwilling as Christie is - at a launch of her book at the film's opening, Christie can barely speak to say thank you for the attention. Redgrave and Hoffman have a delicious moment when she stoops to kiss him in profile, and Redgrave's tear as she half sings They Didn't Believe Me is memorable. Also good are Timothy Dalton as Mr Christie - a role drenched in irony given Dalton's then real life relationship with Redgrave - and Australian actress Helen Morse, radiant as someone who befriends Redgrave at the Spa. As Pauline Kael points out in the review in her collection, When the Lights Go Down, there can be no substance to the mystery theory since it is known Christie was found and her days accounted for - therefore she cannot be seen to harm anyone and particularly not herself. The plot then is about a death scheme that is foiled. And though we know Christie will divorce the husband she returns to, giving him what he wanted all along, and we know that she will not rush to Hoffman because his role is fictional, we question Redgrave's final gift to Hoffman because there is no way it can be used other than as a personal rememberance. Perhaps, as Kael, suggested it would make more sense if Hoffman's role were more the yellow journalist or envious writer, but then that would be a different movie. As it is, it appears merely the parting gesture of people that we don't want to see part.

Agatha's portrayal of someone who tastes loss
The title of this English movie refers to one of the world's most famous writer, Agatha Christie, who, in 1926, left her home without warning and created a public speculation about her fate. The director, Michael Apted, gives us a great amount of solemnity, using it to balance with the most trivial of human behaviors. Dustin Hoffman is rather theatrical in his portrayal of a famous journalist that falls in love with the fragile and dependent writer and Vanessa Redgrave captures perfectly the loss and solitude of the character. And suddenly, when the movie itself was imbued in its quietness, becomes something close to a thriller, a race against time, and its cleverness never compensates the unexpected loss. But it is a beautiful film, carefully constructed and with some good dialogue. Victorio Storaro's cinematography is excellent as usual and Timothy Dalton probably gives his finest performance as a rigid and paternal husband who doesn't allow his wife to act as one.

COULD OF BEEN A LITTLE MORE INTERESTING
With an exceptional cast Like Dustin Hoffman, Vannesa Redgrave, Timothy Dalton you would think see a fine film, not so in this case. Hoffman plays a swarmy news reporter(with a slick hairdo that makes him look like Alpaha from the Rascals) who investgates the mystreoius 11 day dissaperence of famed author Agatha Christie. The producers had a good story but loused it up with boring melodrama and phony background music that will either make people laugh or fall asleep. Michael Apted was not

in full swing here, but did a better job directing Sissy`s Spacek in COAL MINER`S DAUGHTER As for AGATHA this film lacks oringality and any decent performances ... Read more

Reviews (41)

Underrated?
I admit I have had a soft spot for this movie ever since I saw it during its theatrical run when I was 8 which is why I give it four stars instead of three. But I've always felt it is a fun action-adventure film with a great cast and fantastic vistas of the Yugoslavian countryside. Critics have lambasted it as being a highly inferior sequel to one of the classic war movies of the 60's, and maybe some of that criticism has some merit. Yet "Force 10 from Navarone" as viewed on its own merits without the comparisons to "Guns" is not too shabby. A straight-foward action story of an Allied force consisting of two British commandoes (Robert Shaw and Edward Fox), an American Ranger (Harrison Ford), and an escaped American prisoner (Carl Weathers) trying help Yugoslavian partisans blow-up a bridge to foil a German offensive. It's not Oscar material, but it is fun and definetly not as bad as the critics claimed.

Great WWII action movie!
First off, I enjoy anything having to do with World War II. I remember seeing this movie as a kid before I saw the original "Guns of Navarone." I was flipping channels last night and saw that "Force 10" was on. I watched it and remembered how much I enjoyed it the first time.

Not only does this film focus on a remote battlefield (remote in the sense that it's not a Normandy or anything you might have seen in "Patton"), but it provides an exciting story that the viewer just can't forget. After so many years, I fondly remembered Carl Weathers' knife fight with that big guy (the name escapes me, but he played the character Jaws in two Bond films), the amusing explosives expert Miller, and all the crazy twists and turns that took the commandos to their final objective - destroy a dam to destroy a bridge. (What I never understood, though, was why didn't the Germans just have their armored and infantry divisions cross the dam rather than face hostile fire on the bridge from the Partisans!).

Anyhow, the film is great. They just don't make movies like this anymore. Harrison Ford and Robert Shaw (and the rest) make a great team, best shown when they walk cavalierly away from that ticking bomb that's about to explode in the dam! Yes, a great war flick that I highly recommend and rank right up there with the best.

"We're Talking About the Wrong Target!"
I first saw this movie as an in-flight movie while flying from Copenhagen to Seattle in September 1979. A sequel to "The Guns of Navarone" (1961) that starred Gregory Peck who played Keith Mallory and David Niven as Dusty Miller, Mallory and Miller return to action with Robert Shaw as Mallory and Edward Fox as Miller who have been assigned to a new mission in Yugoslavia to kill a Nazi agent posing as a Yugoslav partisan. Here they tag on with Force 10 led by American Army Ranger Lt. Col. Mike Barnsby (Harrison Ford) whose mission was to blow up a bridge to prevent the Nazis from crossing into the region defended by the partisans. The sequel was planned for filming back in 1967 with Peck and Niven playing their respective roles. The novel by Alistair MacLean was released in 1968, becoming his 17th million-copy best seller, but due to creative and economic concerns, the movie version was stalled. By 1977, the plans for filming commenced. Because of their ages, Peck and Niven would not star in the sequel. The following year the movie was released with Shaw, Ford and Fox. Sadly, Shaw did not live to see the film's release when he died of a heart attack August 28, 1978 in Tourmakeady, Ireland at the age of 51. Former Oakland Raider Carl Weathers plays his role well as the fiery Sgt. Weaver who merely "invited" himself on the mission, not knowing what was going on at first. Franco Nero plays Capt. Nikolai Leskovar, the Nazi agent Mallory was assigned to kill. Alan Badel plays the partisan leader Maj. Petrovich who assigned his daughter Maritza (Barbara Bach, also known as Mrs. Ringo Starr) as a partisan agent to spy on the Nazis and their Chetnick allies at a camp where they were operating. Richard Kiel plays the Chetnick leader Capt. Drazak who dupes Force 10, leading them to the camp where they would fall into the hands of the Germans commanded by Maj. Schroeder (Michael Byrne).

Like "The Guns of Navarone" the sequel is action-packed from start to finish from the stealing of an R.A.F. Lancaster at Termoli Air Base in Italy to the destruction of a dam that washes away the targeted bridge with several million tons of water. This is a great movie for those who love action dating back to World War II.

force 10 uncut is not for my kids
I love this movie. I have seen it many times on television but when I rented it I was suprised to see that this rated PG movie had full frontal female nudity. I was lucky that I wasn't watching it with my kids. I really don't understand how a pg movie can have this but its there. Just a warning in case any parents are considering it for a family war movie like I was. After all war is a good family history lesson.

very mediocre
Passes the time, that's all. Notable that the Partisans (Communist anti-nazis) are portrayed as purely heroic, while the Chetniks (anti-communist anti-nazis) are shown as purely evil. In fact the film portrays the Chetniks as in essence a German auxiliary force--very very few historians would agree with that idea. But then, if you're filming on location in a Yugoslavia under Marshall Tito's communist dictatorship I guess you have to toe the local ideological line. Hey, it's only a movie, right? ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Love it or hate it.
Some have called this movie "Luther according to Freud." Luther's struggles (spiritual and psychological) are the focus of this film, which was originally a stage play. It is true, Luther did have his struggles, but he also had his triumphs, which are not shown much in this movie. The whole film is done on one set, which gives the viewer a feeling of isolation. Keach does give an amazing performance as Luther the struggling monk and preacher. The ending is puzzling. Though a bit more bookish, the 1953 B/W classic "Martin Luther" gives a broader and more balanced view of his life. 2003's "Luther" with Joseph Fiennes should be out on DVD in Spring of 2004. That one is better yet!

Martin Luther
There is supposed to be a new film on Martin Luther done by the director Till with Alfred Molinari, and financed by the Lutheran Churches. I think Martin Luther is one of the greatest historical figures, and few people today realise just how revolutionary it was to break away from the Universal Catholic Church which controlled Church and State throughout Western Europe, and before the split with the Orthodox Church, Christendom was quite monolithic.

For a man who did not want to break with Rome, but wanted Rome to be scripturally-based rather than a multinational commercial enterprise; he it was who brought individual conscience when relating to God in place of Church and a hierarchical priesthood to the apex of God's representative on earth, the Pope; who combined this with being a Prince amongst nations.

If the West and its industrialisation, liberty, and split between Church and State can claim any one man as its initiator, it was Martin Luther; but as we all know, Luther was but the leading actor in a cast of many. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

The Children: We Are Here For the Same Reason You Are
There is the unfortunate but understandable tendency to judge the merits of THE CHILDREN OF THE DAMNED against its highly successful predecessor, VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED. In the latter, director Wolf Rilla created crackling suspense with the birth of a brood of telepathic blond children who are clearly the result of extraterrestrial intervention. Their mission was to create more of their own kind; hence the mutually antagonistic Darwinian confrontation between them and humanity. With the former, however, director Anton Leader shifts the focus from the why of the children to the how. Several times, a human scientist asks the children, "Why are you here?" Each time, the reply is noncommital. For the most part the children are eeriely silent, and it is only toward the end that they can verbalize, however imperfectly, their mission. Just before the inevitable bloodbath, the children's spokesboy Paul notes: "We are here for the same reason you are." This reply raises more questions than it answers since humanity is here only because as a species human beings have run roughshod over all competitors.

This film is not meant to be a sequel to the earlier VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED, despite the similar titles and storyline. CHILDREN OF THE DAMNED is a stand alone film that is typical of the British thrillers of the mid 1960's. The production is starkly filmed in harsh shades of black and white with an earnest cast that delivers considerable suspense, even if none of the actors is known to American viewers. Both films suggest that humanity is quite willing to meet all threats to its safety with a singlemindedess of purpose that is at least as fixed as any the children could produce.

Not as good as Village of the Damned.
I like both versions of Village of the Damned. The children are eerie and a little scary, so cold-blooded and cruel. The children in this movie, six children from different countries staying in an abandoned church in London, don't look as eerie and seem to be confused rather than evil. The small town in the first movie is also a more interesting environment than the big city in this sequel.

The acting is quite fair but the screenplay is far from as good as the one of the first movie. The cinematography is quite good, but this sequel should have been better, but it's not a bad movie, watch this if it is on TV but don't pay too much to see it. If you have seen neither of them, watch Village of the Damned, it's quite much better. I give this movie 6 points of 10. I wouldn't buy this movie.

a decent movie in it's own right, but not really a sequel
While many people seem to think this movie is a sequel to Village of the Damned, it really isn't. This fact should be clear to anyone who has seen both films. Children of the Damned is actually a completely different take on the same basic theme presented in Village of the Damned (kids with super brains and psychic powers wreaking havoc). There is no continuity between the two films. In Village of the Damned, women have alien children artificially implanted into their wombs. Children of the Damned creates the same problem by having children mysteriously born with a mutation that causes them to be a million years ahead of ordinary humans in the process of evolution. One should also notice that all the children in Village of the Damned were blond. This is not the case with Children of the Damned. This movie is well acted and suspenseful. It is a solid piece of early 60's black and white horror. In my opinion, it is not quite as good as Village of the Damned for two reasons, the first one being that the story is very vague about the cause of the children's existence and what is motivating them to terrorize people. The second reason is that this movie is simply not as creepy as Village of the Damned. All that having been said, It's still a great movie if you like old sci-fi and horror flicks, so definitely see it!

Another uneven sequel to a classic. . .
Perhaps Children of the Damned would have been a lot more effective had it not been for the heightened expectations created by the original Village of the Damned. By itself, it's not a bad little chiller, combining strong elements of suspense, horror, some unintentional humor, and adequate special effects. The plot is a bit too predictable and the action too slow in developing. The action/horror sequences lack the surprise and unpredictability of the earlier film, but are decent in their own right. This is a perfect three-star effort, not too good, not too bad. If you really like modern variations of gothic horror, you'll enjoy Children of the Damned. If you only like truly good horror films, or your tastes lean markedly in another direction, this one probably isn't worth the effort.

A thriller of not knowing what's going to happen next
This movie was great and very suspense! I think it took imagination and a lot of thinking! You never knew what was going to happen and I had to take breaks just to calm myself down! I would recomend this to a lot of people! 12 and older is just the age you have to be! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Generally underrated by critics, this 1978 sequel to the famous Guns of Navarone finds a miscellaneous group of commandos and spies trying to hinder the Nazis by destroying a bridge between them and the partisans. The story (based on a novel by Alistair MacLean) has nothing to do with the first film, but it is a tightly woven and entertaining piece with sharp performances and delightful character alliances. Director Guy Hamilton (Goldfinger) brings his trademark eye for handsome vistas to the canvas as well, so this is hardly the shoddy and dull knockoff many reviewers have previously suggested. No classic, perhaps, but a lot of fun. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (41)

Underrated?
I admit I have had a soft spot for this movie ever since I saw it during its theatrical run when I was 8 which is why I give it four stars instead of three. But I've always felt it is a fun action-adventure film with a great cast and fantastic vistas of the Yugoslavian countryside. Critics have lambasted it as being a highly inferior sequel to one of the classic war movies of the 60's, and maybe some of that criticism has some merit. Yet "Force 10 from Navarone" as viewed on its own merits without the comparisons to "Guns" is not too shabby. A straight-foward action story of an Allied force consisting of two British commandoes (Robert Shaw and Edward Fox), an American Ranger (Harrison Ford), and an escaped American prisoner (Carl Weathers) trying help Yugoslavian partisans blow-up a bridge to foil a German offensive. It's not Oscar material, but it is fun and definetly not as bad as the critics claimed.

Great WWII action movie!
First off, I enjoy anything having to do with World War II. I remember seeing this movie as a kid before I saw the original "Guns of Navarone." I was flipping channels last night and saw that "Force 10" was on. I watched it and remembered how much I enjoyed it the first time.

Not only does this film focus on a remote battlefield (remote in the sense that it's not a Normandy or anything you might have seen in "Patton"), but it provides an exciting story that the viewer just can't forget. After so many years, I fondly remembered Carl Weathers' knife fight with that big guy (the name escapes me, but he played the character Jaws in two Bond films), the amusing explosives expert Miller, and all the crazy twists and turns that took the commandos to their final objective - destroy a dam to destroy a bridge. (What I never understood, though, was why didn't the Germans just have their armored and infantry divisions cross the dam rather than face hostile fire on the bridge from the Partisans!).

Anyhow, the film is great. They just don't make movies like this anymore. Harrison Ford and Robert Shaw (and the rest) make a great team, best shown when they walk cavalierly away from that ticking bomb that's about to explode in the dam! Yes, a great war flick that I highly recommend and rank right up there with the best.

"We're Talking About the Wrong Target!"
I first saw this movie as an in-flight movie while flying from Copenhagen to Seattle in September 1979. A sequel to "The Guns of Navarone" (1961) that starred Gregory Peck who played Keith Mallory and David Niven as Dusty Miller, Mallory and Miller return to action with Robert Shaw as Mallory and Edward Fox as Miller who have been assigned to a new mission in Yugoslavia to kill a Nazi agent posing as a Yugoslav partisan. Here they tag on with Force 10 led by American Army Ranger Lt. Col. Mike Barnsby (Harrison Ford) whose mission was to blow up a bridge to prevent the Nazis from crossing into the region defended by the partisans. The sequel was planned for filming back in 1967 with Peck and Niven playing their respective roles. The novel by Alistair MacLean was released in 1968, becoming his 17th million-copy best seller, but due to creative and economic concerns, the movie version was stalled. By 1977, the plans for filming commenced. Because of their ages, Peck and Niven would not star in the sequel. The following year the movie was released with Shaw, Ford and Fox. Sadly, Shaw did not live to see the film's release when he died of a heart attack August 28, 1978 in Tourmakeady, Ireland at the age of 51. Former Oakland Raider Carl Weathers plays his role well as the fiery Sgt. Weaver who merely "invited" himself on the mission, not knowing what was going on at first. Franco Nero plays Capt. Nikolai Leskovar, the Nazi agent Mallory was assigned to kill. Alan Badel plays the partisan leader Maj. Petrovich who assigned his daughter Maritza (Barbara Bach, also known as Mrs. Ringo Starr) as a partisan agent to spy on the Nazis and their Chetnick allies at a camp where they were operating. Richard Kiel plays the Chetnick leader Capt. Drazak who dupes Force 10, leading them to the camp where they would fall into the hands of the Germans commanded by Maj. Schroeder (Michael Byrne).

Like "The Guns of Navarone" the sequel is action-packed from start to finish from the stealing of an R.A.F. Lancaster at Termoli Air Base in Italy to the destruction of a dam that washes away the targeted bridge with several million tons of water. This is a great movie for those who love action dating back to World War II.

force 10 uncut is not for my kids
I love this movie. I have seen it many times on television but when I rented it I was suprised to see that this rated PG movie had full frontal female nudity. I was lucky that I wasn't watching it with my kids. I really don't understand how a pg movie can have this but its there. Just a warning in case any parents are considering it for a family war movie like I was. After all war is a good family history lesson.

very mediocre
Passes the time, that's all. Notable that the Partisans (Communist anti-nazis) are portrayed as purely heroic, while the Chetniks (anti-communist anti-nazis) are shown as purely evil. In fact the film portrays the Chetniks as in essence a German auxiliary force--very very few historians would agree with that idea. But then, if you're filming on location in a Yugoslavia under Marshall Tito's communist dictatorship I guess you have to toe the local ideological line. Hey, it's only a movie, right? ... Read more

Amazon.com

Originally broadcast in September of 1980 as a 5-part, 12-hourminiseries, Shogun stood out from the pack of television events at the time with its boldness of action and calculated risks. Based on JamesClavell's epic novel, Shogun stars Richard Chamberlain as JohnBlackthorne, a 17th-century English pilot commanding a Dutch ship that wrecks off the coast of Japan. Viewed suspiciously by local authorities, Blackthorneis at first in some danger of being executed. But with little hope ofreturning to Britain anytime soon, he begins to assimilate into the feudalsociety, befriending a powerful warlord (Toshiro Mifune) and wearing therobes of a samurai. Inevitably, Blackthorne begins to think of himself asJapanese, defending his hosts in battle, learning the language, and falling in love with an interpreter (Yoko Shimada). At the same time, his presence there exacerbates a problem with would-be European colonialists gazing at Japan covetously. Directed by journeyman Jerry London, Shogun immediatelycaught on with its blend of romance, exoticism, and compelling myth of anoutsider's reinvention--a story that becomes sadder as it becomes clear that Blackthorne may never see his home again. The production deliberately pushed hard against various television taboos and audience expectations, including the extensive use of Japanese dialogue, startling violence, near nudity, and profane behavior. That all looks tamer now, of course, but Shogun is still a unique entry in the phenomenon of prestige miniseries from the late 1970s and early '80s. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (13)

Viewing this will only make you yen for the original...
I just spent the weekend watching the complete video tape version of this classic mini-series and I thought I would give the one tape version a second viewing. To be fair, this version is, as others have noted, an above average job of reducing "Shogun" to a single cassette. But doing so really takes away a complete dimension from this epic. Ultimately it is comprehensible only to those who have read the book and/or seen the complete mini-series. You will constantly be thinking back to what they have cut out, filling in all of the jettisoned backstories of the supporting characters who gave "Shogun" its breadth and depth (especially Lord Yabu and Omi). You also lose the sense of the political intrigue, focusing more on the love affair between Pilot-Major Blackthorne and Mariko. Consequently, viewing this edited version is only going to make you want to go back to the complete mini-series or Clavell's novel. Therefore, you should just go do that in the first place. "Shogun" is on a level with "Roots" and "I, Claudius." Can you imagine them doing this to either of those classics?

Of course this begs the question: Why did they even bother to make this version? If memory serves, this was released at a time when no one had really tested the market in terms of making an entire mini-series available on tape. Fortunately, our local library has not only "Shogun" but just about every other major mini-series you can mention. Once I month I grab one for a major weekend viewing session. It is truly the only way to go.

a guro
I was waiting for this movie to end. It was so boring and just empty in content. Don't waste your time on it.

Cliff Notes
At this point in my young life I have learned to love literature in all ways possible. For the past few weeks I have been reading "Shogun", and I must say that it is worth it. However, while I was in the begining of the book, my parents encouraged me to watch the movie/TV. mini-seris "Shogun". So, as the story continues, I bought the two-hour version, and I must say it is horrible! The editers cut out three-quarters out of the book, so i must assume the same went for the original edition of "Shogun- The Epic Story". Basically if you have not read the book you will be completely lost, and if you have read the book, you would be appaled. This movie is merely, cliff notes, and nothing more than that. If you intend to receive the true meaning of the book, with out reading it, than i suggest to buy the original five day made-for-TV. movie, on Amazon, and sell it back used. Overall, the movie did not carry the theme of the book, so all "Shogun" fans if you buy this, do not expect much. Besides, the movie was extremly chopy. The person, whoever edited the movie did a fairly poor job.

SORRY BUT I WAS TERRIBLE
Shogun is a condensed movie, which has been edited from a mini-series. Therefore the entire story is not told. It is rather cut down to the base essentials of the plot, which consist of describing the experiences of the main character, a sea pirate for sailed for Japan. The story describes his experiences when he reaches Japan. By the editing of the footage the story can be followed but it makes less sense. For example, why does the main character the enemy of the translator. Or why is the main character drawing a map in another of the scenes. The editing allows the views to receive an idea of the plot but not really get into it in full force. The movie puts the Japanese into a poor light, especially at the beginning of the movie. They are presented as savages who lack compassion for the lives of those who have landed onto their island. One English speaking pirate exclaims, "Everything in this rotten country is upside-down." In this movie, which takes place in Japan, they characters who are Japanese speak their native language. The characters who know English speak in English as they really would. Therefore the experience is as thought you were really in Japan and everyone is speaking their native tongue. Apparently I am supposed to simulate the main character's experience of being in a native land in which I do not know the language. This method certainly makes the translations given more effective. However, it is quite annoying not be know the predominant amount of speak that is occurring in this film. When the main character learns the language, as he does, we still have yet to learn it (other than the word for yes) and so do not synthesize the main character's experience. Perhaps subtitles would have been more effective? This special effects were not the best in this film. For instance the rain sounded like static. Even the speak of the characters could sometimes not be understood (perhaps this is because of their heavy accent) For example, a character said, "I cannot live with out shame." I thought she said, "I cannot leave with out shame," and was left to ponder where she could not leave. (This method of threatening to kill themselves to get what they demanded was used quite effectively twice in the movie) All in all this was not a terrible movie, but it does not receive my recommendation because it is very difficult to remain interested in the movie when it is spoken like it is a foreign movie without subtitles. Perhaps the movie would have been more effective if it did not have the characters speak in Japanese quite as much. They could still speak about ¼ or the time but the movie would be mostly in English-therefore we would be able to understand what was going on, and not be left in the darkness.

good
It could only get the five stars if it was the full version. Does anyone know where I can get the full version? I need it, or at least want it pretty bad. ... Read more

Description

This wonderfully eerie film is based on three mysteries by Somerset Maugham, Roderick Wilkinson, and Brett Halliday.In the first tale, a doomed museum guard is magically transported into his favorite painting.In the second, two friends fall in love with the same woman, who is suddenly killed.The dramatic finale stars Orson Welles as a statesman driven mad by guilt after he destroys his political rival. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Wonderful
This is classic movies at their best. All three short story's are great, but the last one is a delight to watch over, and over again. Even if your not a Welles fan you'll like these storie