Reviews (14)

Childhood memories of the best film ever.
It was around 1988, I was 12 years old and returned from the video shop with my best mate Dave clutching this absolute classic. It was a toss up between 'The Barbarians' and the latest Van Damme movie, thank you fickle fate for guiding my young hand. It's got it all, big muscley warriors, girls in fur bikinis, sword-fights, fist-fights, gladiator-fights (to a 12 year boy fighting is very important), a magical belly stone and top quality bad dialogue. The best bit is when the brothers get hanged but escape by - wait for it - bursting the nooses by tensing their neck muscles! Dave's Mum had to come in to stop the cheering! I thought this movie was lost to me forever but now I've tracked it down I will be handing over my dollars with a mile wide grin on my face. This is a must-see, must-own, amazing movie.

A Must Have for My DVD Collection!!!
I am so happy to hear that I am not insane and other people like this movie as well. This was my favorite movie growing up and still is in my personal top ten! It is a hilarious movie about two barely audible barbarians who fall into the classic fantasy adventure! Being a huge fantasy fan I must say that if you have not seen it, it is deffinately worth the time to watch. I promise you will not regret it!!!

The Barbarians
This movie, when I was a kid was the best movie Ive ever seen. I still rememeber the whole movie from beginging to end. It gave me inspiration for my fantasy art that I do today. I would tell anyone who loves scifi or frazzeta art would love this cult classic.Reminds of great memories of being a kid.

This Movie should Be on DVD
I have too many copies of this classic, perhaps my FAVORITE, Sword and Sorcery movie that have deteriorated due to over-use. If one movie were to ever wish be realeased on DVD...it would be this...probably on a double disc with Think Big...The Barbarian brothers are my heroes...

In a time of savage splendor...
... from an age of ripped jeans, cropped sweatshirts, high-top Reeboks and feathered hair... when inarticulate body builders made movies celebrating inadvertant homoerotica... comes this sword-and-sandal epic adventure about two brothers captured by evil men and raised to fight as gladiators. Somehow, the film's producers were competent enough to hire two sets of twins to play the brothers, as children and as adults. That seems to have strained everyone's moviemaking capacities to the breaking point.

Eventually, the backstory borrowed from "Conan the Barbarian" (but twice as good, because there are two Conans!) gives way to some sort of slapdash plot about a magical belly stone, and a lot of oily people named Lemone and Canary and Kadar and Zibbidy-zoh and Flappity Jackson (okay, I made that last one up) do oily things to each other while extras in rags stumble around. Then someone pulls a sword, like people often do when their feelings get hurt. At that point, the screaming starts, which startles you... until you realize it's you who's screaming and you turn this off immediately.

"The Barbarians." Named for its stars, David and Peter Paul, also in "DC Cab" and the truck-driving comedy adventure "Think Big." Quite a filmography. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

"Family-freindly" my butt!!
This movie was very poor. For one thing this is NOT family friendly. For example in one scene these dogs get mad and they attack each other and in the end of that scene one of the dogs WAS RIPPED APART AND WAS VERY BLOODY. Also my Mom says that a scene were cut. Also the music is horrible. Also there was one very stupid curse they called the dogs(very ironic) also if you know spanish you can get an easter egg from the song they sing. In a few scenes all of a sudden stuff is completely red.

such a shame
i was telling my wife of a film i had seen when i was a child that was both excellent and moving.......CALL OF THE WILD

so i sourced it from australia as the dvd is deleted in the uk.
i thought i had given my money to a con man who had sent me a pirate copy until i read reviews from other buyers.

never have i seen such a rough dvd with the most awful picture and sound quality. the film is also one of the most dissapointing i have seen and i am embarrassed that i admitted to my wife that it made me cry when i was a kid!!!
i can only presume that it was the trauma of sitting through such badly worked material that upset my childhood.....

do yourself a favour and buy white fang instead.

such a shame

poor quality
Sorry ragmuffin, for being honest, I thank you for your 1 nice email,
but object to your other 2 " not so nice email's "
I will give you 100% for very good delivery very quick to the uk...thank you.
picture cover on dvd was different to advertised on amazon. very weary on buying again on amazon.

Not worth it
My mom purchased the video for my viewing pleasure, but I wasn't pleased. The music in the beginning sounds sort of alienated, the picture quality is horrible, and you actually see dogs tearing apart an animal and leaving its blood everywhere! I could only watch twelve minutes before I decided that it was not worth it to watch. If you ever, for any reason, actually WANT to watch the movie, then I recommend you read the book first, because the book is MUCH better than the movie.

Only Charlton Heston could keep me watching a dog like this
It's never a good plan to make a film where the dog is named Buck and the star is called Chuck, but this film's got more problems than that. Silly acting, weak photography, and a mediocre script that only sparks when it turns violent and nasty. In Charlton Heston's thoughtful 'In the Arena' autobiography, he considers this film "a total failure". He may not know good politics, but he has enough taste and sense to avoid film debacles most actors of his age have lived off for decades. So if Chuck actually writes "please don't watch this", listen to the man. Or listen to Paramount Studios, which shelved this film after they saw it.

"The Call of the Wild" is not unwatchable, but it's bad enough, one of the worst movies in Heston's career. Place this on the Turkey shelf next to Heston's equally bad "The Awakening", a ridiculous 1980 Exorcist/Omen knockoff. I haven't read Jack London's book, but this movie seems, um, a very loose adaptation.

The extras in the Alaska town are played by an assortment of German/Italian/British/American/Spanish actors, mostly overdubbed. What gems they say: one jumps onto a bicycle and yells "Yippee! Yippeeeee!" (Note: "Yippee!" will never be acceptable in a Hollywood script, and is punishable if done in real-life.) Heston's human co-star runs into that same town, yelling "Hi! Hi! Hi!" like a stoner coming down from the mountain commune. If all of the movie was as corny as the townspeople, we might have had a comedy for the ages. Alas.

As amusing as the vomiting town drunkard was, it was Charlton Heston, always a powerful presence, who kept me watching. He looks a little grumpier than usual, perhaps he noticed that the many wolves in the film are actually hybrid dogs that don't look much like North American wolves. However, his scenes with Buck are touching, against all odds and logic. I never thought of actors having on-screen chemistry with animals, but Heston proves it does exist. Those scenes keep the film from being a complete waste of film stock, but there aren't nearly enough of them.

Still, this dull film contains one classic Chuck Heston line - words he was born to speak: "Mister, if you touch that dog again I'm gonna shoot ya!" Yippee! ... Read more

Reviews (53)

It's About Time
For extended criticism of the film itself see my review of the VHS below.

The DVD of 'Satyricon' has been available overseas for some time, and I've been waiting impatiently for it to be released here in the US. The producers have done a good job with it. The picture is amazingly clear, and the colors are saturated, so that the sets are even more eerie than before. For a film with such highly designed sets, it's pleasant to be able to stop the film and get a good look at things that appear for only a fraction of a second at normal speed. I watched this on my computer, and I was pausing every few frames to get a good look.

An English soundtrack is provided. The lip-sync there is no worse than the Italian since the film was recorded in several languages. Supposedly the three main characters - Encolpio, Ascylto, and Gitone - were English hippies who Fellini picked up in Trafalgar square, and they spoke the dialogue in English. But I prefer the Italian; it justs sounds better. I wish they had provided Italian subtitles too. There's very little in the way of other extras. I would have liked some commentary, but I can't complain too much about this DVD.

This movie is terrible
This was the first and the last Fellini movie I will ever purchase. The movie is totally incoherant. I do not see what is so compelling about this movie. It was a waste of my time.

You don't get it? You may be the one being taunted,friend.
I firmly believe that if one does not "get" this film, then they are the type of person this film is satirizing. Something tells me that Fellini, with this film, came closer to illustrating the atmosphere of ancient Rome than anybody. It shows the pitfalls of superstition, how drugs and illusion play a role in what people have called "witchcraft","voodoo","macumba" and such. It shows the unmasked view of the delight that some people take in others' misery, in watching them suffer, and in confusing and bewildering them with smoke and mirrors. I enjoyed the scenes that depicted the morally reprehensible theatre of ancient Rome, especially in using period sound effects to illustrate how what we today see and hear in film and theatre is not so far advanced from the illusions that the ancient Romans used to propagandize and marginalize the lives of it's people. The parallel to modern society is so great that those who fit that materialistic mold won't get it, because their minds will protect them from the truth. However, we see over-indulgent despotic emperors using their wealth and power to seduce the minds of the populace. We see the same social elite engaging in disgusting orgies of food and sex. The main character, Encolpius, believing himself to be on a path of discovery is actually being lead through a maze of snares and traps at the delight of his so-called mentor. Soon one might be asking themselves if this man is mentor or tor-mentor to poor Encolpius. This film is a such a startling comparison to modern life that it could stop all temporal arrogance. How dare we think we're so advanced when our society behaves the same as they do, only the names and methods have changed. This is Rome, we live in Rome, it's only been transplanted over here and updated to "modern sensibilities" but Rome is still as decadent and wasteful as ever, as if we think we're rising above nature by destroying it. Well, isn't that how "civilization" works? Destroy one people's way of life and force them to conform to yours. This is Satyricon.

Satire of the Satyr
Some movies you just have to see -- forget about plot synopses or snippets of dialogue, you just have to see it to understand. For these movies, there's no way to answer that most natural and inevitable of questions: What's it about? Satyricon is one of these movies.

I've been a fan of Satyricon for about four years, when I first took it out of the public library. I'd heard it was weird and had also seem some stills in movie books like LIFE Goes to the Movies. Something about freaks, absurdity, ancient Rome, I gathered. Maybe that was actually as much as I needed to know since that's what it all boils down to, at its essence.

I probably would have had more of an idea what to expect that first if I'd simply known about the director, Federico Fellini. At that time, I didn't, and so when I first sat down with Satyricon it struck me not just as an anomaly but as a major shock. Sure, I'd heard of Fellini, but this? This was Fellini? Why hadn't anyone told me? They should have shown this movie to me while I was in the crib, it was so cool.

Later on, through watching another great and bizarre film of his, Roma, I figured out what some of the Fellini motifs were and how strongly his personality and taste come through, but at the time, it was a bit of a mind-blower. This guy had survived making this film? Nobody put him in an insane asylum? He was considered great? Certainly I thought he was great, watching the movie, but I tend not to give fellow humans that much credit.

Knowing a bit more about Fellini at this point, I can say that while Satyricon isn't the anomaly I once thought -- Roma is pretty similar and I've heard other of his films also follow along in a similar style -- it is certainly in a class of its own. What's it about? Again, I can't say really, but pressed to the wall with a gun to my head, I'd squeal and saying it's a crazy experience, a vicarious exploration of insanity, of dreams, of an absurd adventure by a blond-haired poet who just wants to get his boy lover back and be done with it all. That summary doesn't really express any of it, but it's the best I can do and there it is.

Perhaps giving a little background would help. First of all, Fellini didn't make the story up, although the film is certainly a product of his imagination and he did make up a few scenes. The plot, such as it is, springs from that most bizarre and unprecedented of ancient works, Satyricon by Petronius. Nobody actually knows much about the author and this is his only work, but what can be said is that it's a book very different from what most people would expect of an ancient book. You can actually get a hint of this by its very title, which is a pun on satyr (from the Greek saturos) and satire (from the Latin satira), meaning that it's an attack on human vice or folly and a depiction of some serious depravity. Did I mention that this was written around the time of the reign of Nero?

Again, having read the original book -- had to having seen the movie -- I can say that it's nothing like any ancient work I've ever run into except possibly the poetry of Catullus, which is hysterically coarse at times. It's simply not ponderous. It doesn't dwell on gods or philosophy or sublime human comedy. No, instead, the book just creates its own territories and definitions. People have tried to analyze it -- the fragments that are left, now that several sections have been missing for ages -- and the general conclusion, so I've read, is that the novel, like the movie, is something far afield from the norm, a twisted tale of such originality as to make analysis within normal frames of reference irrelevant.

The question resurfaces: What's it about? A few scenes may help to convey a sense of its atmosphere at least, if not the plot, since the plot is rather secondary. Picture this: Our hero (well, anti-hero really) Encolpio ends up on a mission to collect a hermaphroditic god(ess) from a hidden temple. He and his companions show up in a cave where they find the god(ess) pale and weak, lying in a pool surrounded by worshippers seeking to be healed. They steal the god(ess), throwing the deity into a cart and fleeing across the desert. Unfortunately the god(ess) is weak and needs water. The god(ess) dies and for that, there is a punishment.

Encolpio and friends end up in another town (where he ends up in a battle with a man wearing a bull mask... don't ask) and although Encolpio is basically rewarded by getting to bed an insatiable woman, he is embarrassed before a crowd of hundreds when he can't get it up. He's been made impotent! To make things better, he's sent to a special treatment facility where he's put in a room filled with dozens of extremely exotic prostitutes who proceed to try just about everything to get a rise out of him. They pin him down and flog him. There's something about a giant swinging canopy with bevies of girls on it but even thought I've seen the film a half dozen times, I can't remember the specifics, nor do I remember if the "cure" was successful. It's besides the point.

I do remember more, though. I know an Roman couple lives in home built into the base of a cliff. They end up committing suicide by slitting their wrists. Later Encolpio and friends run around inside their house and find an African slave girl who speaks in clicks and squawks. There's another big section with a huge ship on rough seas; they capture a giant creature that looks like an ancient depiction of a whale. There's a theater of the absurd, a gallery of freaks, a hysterically fake earthquake, a massively disgusting feast, and oh, it's all in dubbed Italian (at the time, the Italians dubbed over everything, even Italian) with the subtitles making some sense but not all that much since really you use your eyes to understand. Ah, why do I bother trying to explain? What does it add up to? What does it mean? What's it about? Go and see it -- that way you'll find out.

One of the Greatest Movies
Occasionally a movie comes along in which a simplistic, mono-dimensional meaning isn't laid out in such a way that even the laziest minds just couldn't miss it. I remember as a teenager seeing this movie for the first time, and being astounded that all that people seemed to see were shocking depictions of Roman decadence. I had sat through the movie amazed at its extraordinary cinematography, and overwhelmed by a moral story of epic proportions. Like most great art, the meaning of Satyricon is multi-layered, and reflects against itself enough to hold a richness of ambiguity that unfolds more for me each time I see it. I was also incredulous to read reviews accusing the movie of being formless. On the contrary, Fellini had created a beautifully structured work out Petronius' rather episodic tales.
Satyricon is a powerful portrayal of a young man's quest to rediscover the potency he has lost in a corrupt world (our world being no less corrupt than that of Fellini's Rome), both sexually and aesthetically. The events and characters in the movie resonate deeply with mythic archetypes, all playing a part in Encolpio's quest.
If you want a key for delving into the structural and metaphysical meaning of this movie, consider the two legacies of Eumolpus: the first he offers to Encolpius as they lie in the fallow fields after being evicted from Trimalchio's Feast, just as the dawning sun begins to lighten the sky. The second he leaves at the end of the movie to those who will consume his body. The first is the wealth of poetry, of the heavens, the earth, the air, of life itself. The second is worldly wealth and its corruptions. How beautiful is the moment when Encolpius joins the ecstatic, dancing, laughing servants of Eumolpus to sail away from the bizarre funeral feast to the true legacy of the great artist. So with us: what are we able to take from the legacy of Satyricon - does Fellini offer us merely a superficial indulgence in the perversity of Roman decadence .... or rather, are we able to comprehend his true gift, a profound vision of the potency of life itself? ... Read more

Reviews (4)

The best, and worst movie of all time.
I have seen Warriors of the Wasteland more times than I can count. It is without a doubt, the best movie ever made. At the same time, it is the worst movie ever made. That's what makes it so great. If you're into a good laugh with friends, and don't have some sort of Road Warrior loyalty, check this out! If anything, you can make fun of it the whole time it's on. The version sold here is slightly different than the original. Miramax tried to capatalize on Fred Williamson's psuedo-success. This movie isn't nearly as good as the box makes it look. In my reccomendation, you should buy it.... now.

ITALIAM-MADE ROAD WARRIOR RE-HASH WITH A NEW TITLE
The film starts promisingly with a mushroom cloud over a city as the openning credits roll and moody '80's techno movie music plays. Next we see a caravan of wandering survivors seeking something on the radio and rationing out their last scraps of food. Of course they are attacked and massacred by a band of white-clad motorcyclists, and the adventure begins to go downhill. Our hero, "Scorpion," is a blatant Mad Max rip-off. The key differences are that he has grey on both temples, not one, he wears a sheepskin, not leather, and drives a sedan musclecar, not a sports musclecar.

I had just seen "The Road Warrior" not long before I saw this in a double feature on 42nd Street. The Post-Apocalypse had just become my favorite movie genre, what with the Reagan-era cold war in full swing. This movie was filled with so many absurdities, I hated it. There is a young kid who is an inventor. Fred Williamson plays an archer with explosive arrows in a beautiful polished leather outfit. The leader of the bad guys has some sort of gun that shoots explosives that vary in destructiveness for no reason. The bad guys call themselves "Templars" and have a manifesto that God sent down the apocalypse to rid the world of humans and they are there to finish the job. Our hero gets captured by the templars and in a nightime torchlight "initiation," they bend him over and...

I had really dug the earthy realism, the feeling of decay, improvisation, and dwindling resources that permeated the esthetic of such films as "The Road Warrior" and "Escape From New York." There was some of that, but certain things, such as the Templars' uniforms, Fred Williamson's outfit, the way the firearms and explovives were used so freely, that got away from the sense that civilization was truly dead (which I thought was sort of the point of this sort of movie). I had thought that the filmakers were that dumb to not consider this. Now, with the advantage of time, I see that they just wanted to make an exciting action film that pretended to be just serious enough to keep a low-common-denominator crowd interested.

The plot has nothing really original in it, combining certain elements of "The Road Warrior" and "Yojimbo/Fistfull of Dollars." The writing shows brief moments of serviceability, with instances of absurdity thrown in. The acting spans the gamut from passable to over-the top to really bad.

I recommend watching this no more than once, and then, be in the mood to do it up MST3K style. Then you can say you've done it and warn people away.

If this review looks familiar, there's a reason for that: This movie is "Warriors of the Wasteland under a new title.

Interesting footnote: when I wrote this review, there was an "auction recommendation" of a lobby card set for "Sword of the Barbarians." This was the second feature I saw on 42nd Street with this movie.

ITALIAN-MADE ROAD WARRIOR REHASH
The film starts promisingly with a mushroom cloud over a city as the openning credits roll and moody '80's techno movie music plays. Next we see a caravan of wandering survivors seeking something on the radio and rationing out their last scraps of food. Of course they are attacked and massacred by a band of white-clad motorcyclists, and the adventure begins to go downhill. Our hero, "Scorpion," is a blatant Mad Max rip-off. The key differences are that he has grey on both temples, not one, he wears a sheepskin, not leather, and drives a sedan musclecar, not a sports musclecar.

I had just seen "The Road Warrior" not long before I saw this in a double feature on 42nd Street. The Post-Apocalypse had just become my favorite movie genre, what with the Reagan-era cold war in full swing. This movie was filled with so many absurdities, I hated it. There is a young kid who is an inventor. Fred Williamson plays an archer with explosive arrows in a beautiful polished leather outfit. The leader of the bad guys has some sort of gun that shoots explosives that vary in destructiveness for no reason. The bad guys call themselves "Templars" and have a manifesto that God sent down the apocalypse to rid the world of humans and they are there to finish the job. Our hero gets captured by the templars and in a nightime torchlight "initiation," they bend him over and...

I had really dug the earthy realism, the feeling of decay, improvisation, and dwindling resources that permeated the esthetic of such films as "The Road Warrior" and "Escape From New York." There was some of that, but certain things, such as the Templars' uniforms, Fred Williamson's outfit, the way the firearms and explovives were used so freely, that got away from the sense that civilization was truly dead (which I thought was sort of the point of this sort of movie). I had thought that the filmakers were that dumb to not consider this. Now, with the advantage of time, I see that they just wanted to make an exciting action film that pretended to be just serious enough to keep a low-common-denominator crowd interested.

The plot has nothing really original in it, combining certain elements of "The Road Warrior" and "Yojimbo/Fistfull of Dollars." The writing shows brief moments of serviceability, with instances of absurdity thrown in. The acting spans the gamut from passable to over-the top to really bad.

I recommend watching this no more than once, and then, be in the mood to do it up MST3K style. Then you can say you've done it and warn people away.

Stop The New Barbarians! One Man Makes A Difference!
It's 2019 A.D The nuclear holocaust is over. Now only small bands of human and mutants live in scattered clans and barely scrape out an existance. No one is blameless in this disgraceful demolition of the earth, but the futuristic tribe of the Templates vow to purify the land with the blood of their enemies. Follow the explosive action and nonstop warfare as the end of the earth seems inevitable unless someone (Fred Williamson) can stop the New Barbarians. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

An Artist in the Making
This is the most unusual western of them all. A "spaghetti" western from 1967 written and directed by Lina Wertmuller who would go on to international acclaim with "Love & Anarchy," "Swept Away" and "Seven Beauties" for which she became the first woman to be nominated for a Best Director Oscar. In "Belle Starr" (terrible transfer, terrible dubbing) you can see where she was coming from and where she was going. With little or no understanding of the American west or its myth, or even a knowledge of the western film genre, Lina's Belle Starr comes to the old west from a fashion layout in 1966. Then Lina tells the story of men and women (and guns) in very much the same way she would in subsequent films. Make no mistake, this is not "The Wild Bunch" or "The Searchers" but it compares favorably to any of the slew of European westerns from the 60's except those by Sergio Leone. For fans of Lina Wertmuller, this film is a must-see.

Which Belle Starr?
No, this is NOT the 1941 movie with Gene Tierney and Randolph Scott, directed by Irving Cummings. Unfortunately that classic seems to be no longer available on video (or never was).

i need more information
hi,
need more information on this moive. is this moive really about belle starr the "banditt queen" or what.please email me with the following queistons.

1. need pictures
2. maybe buy the moive if thats what im looking for

thanks alot ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Trippy is as trippy does, even when you're talking about a movie set in ancient Rome. This 1969 Fellini opus was among the most visually arresting entries in a year when the psychedelic experience was trying to claw its way into every movie coming down the pike. But Fellini, in telling a negligible story about two young men tasting the various pleasures of Nero's hedonistic and priapic reign, aimed for images that jarred as well as seduced. He found humor in freakishness, contrasting beauty and ugliness while effortlessly passing judgment on the emptiness of a life devoted to sensation and personal freedom. More of a fever dream than a linear story, Fellini Satyricon crystallized the director'sreputation as a visionary--but may have trapped him into spending the rest of his career (with the exception of Amarcord) trying to top himself in reaching new levels of outrageousness. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (53)

It's About Time
For extended criticism of the film itself see my review of the VHS below.

The DVD of 'Satyricon' has been available overseas for some time, and I've been waiting impatiently for it to be released here in the US. The producers have done a good job with it. The picture is amazingly clear, and the colors are saturated, so that the sets are even more eerie than before. For a film with such highly designed sets, it's pleasant to be able to stop the film and get a good look at things that appear for only a fraction of a second at normal speed. I watched this on my computer, and I was pausing every few frames to get a good look.

An English soundtrack is provided. The lip-sync there is no worse than the Italian since the film was recorded in several languages. Supposedly the three main characters - Encolpio, Ascylto, and Gitone - were English hippies who Fellini picked up in Trafalgar square, and they spoke the dialogue in English. But I prefer the Italian; it justs sounds better. I wish they had provided Italian subtitles too. There's very little in the way of other extras. I would have liked some commentary, but I can't complain too much about this DVD.

This movie is terrible
This was the first and the last Fellini movie I will ever purchase. The movie is totally incoherant. I do not see what is so compelling about this movie. It was a waste of my time.

You don't get it? You may be the one being taunted,friend.
I firmly believe that if one does not "get" this film, then they are the type of person this film is satirizing. Something tells me that Fellini, with this film, came closer to illustrating the atmosphere of ancient Rome than anybody. It shows the pitfalls of superstition, how drugs and illusion play a role in what people have called "witchcraft","voodoo","macumba" and such. It shows the unmasked view of the delight that some people take in others' misery, in watching them suffer, and in confusing and bewildering them with smoke and mirrors. I enjoyed the scenes that depicted the morally reprehensible theatre of ancient Rome, especially in using period sound effects to illustrate how what we today see and hear in film and theatre is not so far advanced from the illusions that the ancient Romans used to propagandize and marginalize the lives of it's people. The parallel to modern society is so great that those who fit that materialistic mold won't get it, because their minds will protect them from the truth. However, we see over-indulgent despotic emperors using their wealth and power to seduce the minds of the populace. We see the same social elite engaging in disgusting orgies of food and sex. The main character, Encolpius, believing himself to be on a path of discovery is actually being lead through a maze of snares and traps at the delight of his so-called mentor. Soon one might be asking themselves if this man is mentor or tor-mentor to poor Encolpius. This film is a such a startling comparison to modern life that it could stop all temporal arrogance. How dare we think we're so advanced when our society behaves the same as they do, only the names and methods have changed. This is Rome, we live in Rome, it's only been transplanted over here and updated to "modern sensibilities" but Rome is still as decadent and wasteful as ever, as if we think we're rising above nature by destroying it. Well, isn't that how "civilization" works? Destroy one people's way of life and force them to conform to yours. This is Satyricon.

Satire of the Satyr
Some movies you just have to see -- forget about plot synopses or snippets of dialogue, you just have to see it to understand. For these movies, there's no way to answer that most natural and inevitable of questions: What's it about? Satyricon is one of these movies.

I've been a fan of Satyricon for about four years, when I first took it out of the public library. I'd heard it was weird and had also seem some stills in movie books like LIFE Goes to the Movies. Something about freaks, absurdity, ancient Rome, I gathered. Maybe that was actually as much as I needed to know since that's what it all boils down to, at its essence.

I probably would have had more of an idea what to expect that first if I'd simply known about the director, Federico Fellini. At that time, I didn't, and so when I first sat down with Satyricon it struck me not just as an anomaly but as a major shock. Sure, I'd heard of Fellini, but this? This was Fellini? Why hadn't anyone told me? They should have shown this movie to me while I was in the crib, it was so cool.

Later on, through watching another great and bizarre film of his, Roma, I figured out what some of the Fellini motifs were and how strongly his personality and taste come through, but at the time, it was a bit of a mind-blower. This guy had survived making this film? Nobody put him in an insane asylum? He was considered great? Certainly I thought he was great, watching the movie, but I tend not to give fellow humans that much credit.

Knowing a bit more about Fellini at this point, I can say that while Satyricon isn't the anomaly I once thought -- Roma is pretty similar and I've heard other of his films also follow along in a similar style -- it is certainly in a class of its own. What's it about? Again, I can't say really, but pressed to the wall with a gun to my head, I'd squeal and saying it's a crazy experience, a vicarious exploration of insanity, of dreams, of an absurd adventure by a blond-haired poet who just wants to get his boy lover back and be done with it all. That summary doesn't really express any of it, but it's the best I can do and there it is.

Perhaps giving a little background would help. First of all, Fellini didn't make the story up, although the film is certainly a product of his imagination and he did make up a few scenes. The plot, such as it is, springs from that most bizarre and unprecedented of ancient works, Satyricon by Petronius. Nobody actually knows much about the author and this is his only work, but what can be said is that it's a book very different from what most people would expect of an ancient book. You can actually get a hint of this by its very title, which is a pun on satyr (from the Greek saturos) and satire (from the Latin satira), meaning that it's an attack on human vice or folly and a depiction of some serious depravity. Did I mention that this was written around the time of the reign of Nero?

Again, having read the original book -- had to having seen the movie -- I can say that it's nothing like any ancient work I've ever run into except possibly the poetry of Catullus, which is hysterically coarse at times. It's simply not ponderous. It doesn't dwell on gods or philosophy or sublime human comedy. No, instead, the book just creates its own territories and definitions. People have tried to analyze it -- the fragments that are left, now that several sections have been missing for ages -- and the general conclusion, so I've read, is that the novel, like the movie, is something far afield from the norm, a twisted tale of such originality as to make analysis within normal frames of reference irrelevant.

The question resurfaces: What's it about? A few scenes may help to convey a sense of its atmosphere at least, if not the plot, since the plot is rather secondary. Picture this: Our hero (well, anti-hero really) Encolpio ends up on a mission to collect a hermaphroditic god(ess) from a hidden temple. He and his companions show up in a cave where they find the god(ess) pale and weak, lying in a pool surrounded by worshippers seeking to be healed. They steal the god(ess), throwing the deity into a cart and fleeing across the desert. Unfortunately the god(ess) is weak and needs water. The god(ess) dies and for that, there is a punishment.

Encolpio and friends end up in another town (where he ends up in a battle with a man wearing a bull mask... don't ask) and although Encolpio is basically rewarded by getting to bed an insatiable woman, he is embarrassed before a crowd of hundreds when he can't get it up. He's been made impotent! To make things better, he's sent to a special treatment facility where he's put in a room filled with dozens of extremely exotic prostitutes who proceed to try just about everything to get a rise out of him. They pin him down and flog him. There's something about a giant swinging canopy with bevies of girls on it but even thought I've seen the film a half dozen times, I can't remember the specifics, nor do I remember if the "cure" was successful. It's besides the point.

I do remember more, though. I know an Roman couple lives in home built into the base of a cliff. They end up committing suicide by slitting their wrists. Later Encolpio and friends run around inside their house and find an African slave girl who speaks in clicks and squawks. There's another big section with a huge ship on rough seas; they capture a giant creature that looks like an ancient depiction of a whale. There's a theater of the absurd, a gallery of freaks, a hysterically fake earthquake, a massively disgusting feast, and oh, it's all in dubbed Italian (at the time, the Italians dubbed over everything, even Italian) with the subtitles making some sense but not all that much since really you use your eyes to understand. Ah, why do I bother trying to explain? What does it add up to? What does it mean? What's it about? Go and see it -- that way you'll find out.

One of the Greatest Movies
Occasionally a movie comes along in which a simplistic, mono-dimensional meaning isn't laid out in such a way that even the laziest minds just couldn't miss it. I remember as a teenager seeing this movie for the first time, and being astounded that all that people seemed to see were shocking depictions of Roman decadence. I had sat through the movie amazed at its extraordinary cinematography, and overwhelmed by a moral story of epic proportions. Like most great art, the meaning of Satyricon is multi-layered, and reflects against itself enough to hold a richness of ambiguity that unfolds more for me each time I see it. I was also incredulous to read reviews accusing the movie of being formless. On the contrary, Fellini had created a beautifully structured work out Petronius' rather episodic tales.
Satyricon is a powerful portrayal of a young man's quest to rediscover the potency he has lost in a corrupt world (our world being no less corrupt than that of Fellini's Rome), both sexually and aesthetically. The events and characters in the movie resonate deeply with mythic archetypes, all playing a part in Encolpio's quest.
If you want a key for delving into the structural and metaphysical meaning of this movie, consider the two legacies of Eumolpus: the first he offers to Encolpius as they lie in the fallow fields after being evicted from Trimalchio's Feast, just as the dawning sun begins to lighten the sky. The second he leaves at the end of the movie to those who will consume his body. The first is the wealth of poetry, of the heavens, the earth, the air, of life itself. The second is worldly wealth and its corruptions. How beautiful is the moment when Encolpius joins the ecstatic, dancing, laughing servants of Eumolpus to sail away from the bizarre funeral feast to the true legacy of the great artist. So with us: what are we able to take from the legacy of Satyricon - does Fellini offer us merely a superficial indulgence in the perversity of Roman decadence .... or rather, are we able to comprehend his true gift, a profound vision of the potency of life itself? ... Read more

Reviews (9)

One of the Best Movies of the 90's
I must say The Bronx Warriors was one of the best movies i seen it starts out with the Trash and his gang pull up on there bikes and get the fighting with a rival gang, and of course Trash Gang wins the battle,Trash weapon is so tight,Fred Williamson is a king in this movie,one of my favorite parts of the movie is when Trash and some of the guys find one of there's friends chain and hangin,then this gang called The Scavengers jump out and the fight yet again is on of course Trash had 2 get pay back for what they did to there friend and after the fight Trash watch his best friend die, i can go on and on bout the whole movie but i recommend you check this flick out 4 real guarenteed you'll get your money worth.

......also check out

1.Escape from the Bronx
2.The Warriors
3.Warriors of the Wasteland
4.Escape from New York
5.Escape from L.A
6.Original Gangsters

One of the Best Movies of the early 90's
I must say The Bronx Warriors was one of the best movies i seen it starts out with the Trash and his gang pull up on there bikes and get the fighting with a rival gang, and of course Trash Gang wins the battle,Trash weapon is so tight,Fred Williamson is a king in this movie,one of my favorite parts of the movie is when Trash and some of the guys find one of there's friends chain and hangin,then this gang called The Scavengers jump out and the fight yet again is on of course Trash had 2 get pay back for what they did to there friend and after the fight Trash watch his best friend die, i can go on and on bout the whole movie but i recommend you check this flick out 4 real guarenteed you'll get your money worth.

......also check out

1.Escape from the Bronx
2.The Warriors
3.Warriors of the Wasteland
4.Escape from New York
5.Escape from L.A
6.Original Gangsters

TRASH STILL RULES!
Trash is back and he is as deadly as ever! This time he even has a whole gang of awesome bikers with him. Ice, Rat, Blade, and Hot Dog are just a few of the bad boys you need to look out for. Chaos, is the only word that can describe the future of the Bronx. It's every gang for themselves as they fight for territory and their lives. The fights between the rival gangs were completly hardcore and I loved every minute of them. Unlike in Escape From the Bronx Trash shows a more sensitive side and delivers a stunning speech about death, but don't worry he is still a complete reble and you will see him at his best in the last scene of the movie. I loved the way flamethower horsemen charged in at the end of the movie. The Oger was alos awesome and I can't foreget about Trashs' spiked elbowpad. Overall it was an excellent action movie however I am still a little confused about the mysterious drummer that popped in and out of the movie. Keep up the good work Trash!

Cool movie. I love the 70s and 80s.
This is the best B-rated sci-fi punk action movie ever made (and one of the only films from Italy I like that is not an Lucio Fulci film). It seems to be a movie "inspired" by Walter Hill's THE WARRIORS (1980), John Carpenter's ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK (1981), the HELL'S ANGELS films, and the mote ripped off film of all time, George Miller's MAD MAX (1979). But this film is not a rip of these movies, does the look is. The story is set in the future (1990) Bronx, now overrun by gangs. A psychotic law-enforcer named The Hammer is set in to "rescue" a runaway Manhattan girl from the hero of the film, named Trash. The film is nothing like 2001 or THE MATRIX or any thing like that, but this movie is cool.

1982. Deaf Films. 85 MINS.

Rated R for Strong Language and Scenes of Violent Action.

Classically Bad
This is one of those movies that is really hard to review. It's either a no star movie, or a five star movie. This might be the single worst movie of all time, however, it's so bad that it's hilariously funny. Every time i've rented it, and yes i've rented it more than once, everyone of my friends who've watched it have laughed until they cried. Essentially a take off on "The Warriors" this movie is so bad it makes "The Warriors" look like Masterpiece Theatre. My favorite part is when the main character, Trash talks about how New York is deserted and has been for years and in the background you see rush hour traffic moving back and forth on the Brooklyn Bridge.

So, if you are in the mood for a really, really bad movie that will most likely make you laugh like crazy, you might give it a try, but don't say i didn't warn you. This movie is a turkey with all the stuffing! ... Read more

Reviews (3)

An Artist in the Making
This is the most unusual western of them all. A "spaghetti" western from 1967 written and directed by Lina Wertmuller who would go on to international acclaim with "Love & Anarchy," "Swept Away" and "Seven Beauties" for which she became the first woman to be nominated for a Best Director Oscar. In "Belle Starr" (terrible transfer, terrible dubbing) you can see where she was coming from and where she was going. With little or no understanding of the American west or its myth, or even a knowledge of the western film genre, Lina's Belle Starr comes to the old west from a fashion layout in 1966. Then Lina tells the story of men and women (and guns) in very much the same way she would in subsequent films. Make no mistake, this is not "The Wild Bunch" or "The Searchers" but it compares favorably to any of the slew of European westerns from the 60's except those by Sergio Leone. For fans of Lina Wertmuller, this film is a must-see.

Which Belle Starr?
No, this is NOT the 1941 movie with Gene Tierney and Randolph Scott, directed by Irving Cummings. Unfortunately that classic seems to be no longer available on video (or never was).

i need more information
hi,
need more information on this moive. is this moive really about belle starr the "banditt queen" or what.please email me with the following queistons.

1. need pictures
2. maybe buy the moive if thats what im looking for

thanks alot ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Great Italian scifi
Hands of Steel is an often overlooked Italian scifi movie, from director Sergio Martino, the director of the best Italian post-apocaplyse movie, "After the Fall of New York". It stars Daniel Greene (the truck driver who died from "Falcon Crest"), as a cyborg named Paco Querack. He is ordered by his superiors to kill revolutionary environmentalist Arthur Mosely, but at the last second his conscience kicks in, and Paco lets him live. Paco is now on the run from the men who created him.

With great music from Claudio Simonetti (of Goblin) and featuring the last performance of Claudio Cassinelli (who died in a helicopter crash during the making of this movie), Hands of Steel is an excellent scifi film (although not quite post-apocalypse). ... Read more

Reviews (12)

"Family-freindly" my butt!!
This movie was very poor. For one thing this is NOT family friendly. For example in one scene these dogs get mad and they attack each other and in the end of that scene one of the dogs WAS RIPPED APART AND WAS VERY BLOODY. Also my Mom says that a scene were cut. Also the music is horrible. Also there was one very stupid curse they called the dogs(very ironic) also if you know spanish you can get an easter egg from the song they sing. In a few scenes all of a sudden stuff is completely red.

such a shame
i was telling my wife of a film i had seen when i was a child that was both excellent and moving.......CALL OF THE WILD

so i sourced it from australia as the dvd is deleted in the uk.
i thought i had given my money to a con man who had sent me a pirate copy until i read reviews from other buyers.

never have i seen such a rough dvd with the most awful picture and sound quality. the film is also one of the most dissapointing i have seen and i am embarrassed that i admitted to my wife that it made me cry when i was a kid!!!
i can only presume that it was the trauma of sitting through such badly worked material that upset my childhood.....

do yourself a favour and buy white fang instead.

such a shame

poor quality
Sorry ragmuffin, for being honest, I thank you for your 1 nice email,
but object to your other 2 " not so nice email's "
I will give you 100% for very good delivery very quick to the uk...thank you.
picture cover on dvd was different to advertised on amazon. very weary on buying again on amazon.

Not worth it
My mom purchased the video for my viewing pleasure, but I wasn't pleased. The music in the beginning sounds sort of alienated, the picture quality is horrible, and you actually see dogs tearing apart an animal and leaving its blood everywhere! I could only watch twelve minutes before I decided that it was not worth it to watch. If you ever, for any reason, actually WANT to watch the movie, then I recommend you read the book first, because the book is MUCH better than the movie.

Only Charlton Heston could keep me watching a dog like this
It's never a good plan to make a film where the dog is named Buck and the star is called Chuck, but this film's got more problems than that. Silly acting, weak photography, and a mediocre script that only sparks when it turns violent and nasty. In Charlton Heston's thoughtful 'In the Arena' autobiography, he considers this film "a total failure". He may not know good politics, but he has enough taste and sense to avoid film debacles most actors of his age have lived off for decades. So if Chuck actually writes "please don't watch this", listen to the man. Or listen to Paramount Studios, which shelved this film after they saw it.

"The Call of the Wild" is not unwatchable, but it's bad enough, one of the worst movies in Heston's career. Place this on the Turkey shelf next to Heston's equally bad "The Awakening", a ridiculous 1980 Exorcist/Omen knockoff. I haven't read Jack London's book, but this movie seems, um, a very loose adaptation.

The extras in the Alaska town are played by an assortment of German/Italian/British/American/Spanish actors, mostly overdubbed. What gems they say: one jumps onto a bicycle and yells "Yippee! Yippeeeee!" (Note: "Yippee!" will never be acceptable in a Hollywood script, and is punishable if done in real-life.) Heston's human co-star runs into that same town, yelling "Hi! Hi! Hi!" like a stoner coming down from the mountain commune. If all of the movie was as corny as the townspeople, we might have had a comedy for the ages. Alas.

As amusing as the vomiting town drunkard was, it was Charlton Heston, always a powerful presence, who kept me watching. He looks a little grumpier than usual, perhaps he noticed that the many wolves in the film are actually hybrid dogs that don't look much like North American wolves. However, his scenes with Buck are touching, against all odds and logic. I never thought of actors having on-screen chemistry with animals, but Heston proves it does exist. Those scenes keep the film from being a complete waste of film stock, but there aren't nearly enough of them.

Still, this dull film contains one classic Chuck Heston line - words he was born to speak: "Mister, if you touch that dog again I'm gonna shoot ya!" Yippee! ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Great Italian scifi
Hands of Steel is an often overlooked Italian scifi movie, from director Sergio Martino, the director of the best Italian post-apocaplyse movie, "After the Fall of New York". It stars Daniel Greene (the truck driver who died from "Falcon Crest"), as a cyborg named Paco Querack. He is ordered by his superiors to kill revolutionary environmentalist Arthur Mosely, but at the last second his conscience kicks in, and Paco lets him live. Paco is now on the run from the men who created him.

With great music from Claudio Simonetti (of Goblin) and featuring the last performance of Claudio Cassinelli (who died in a helicopter crash during the making of this movie), Hands of Steel is an excellent scifi film (although not quite post-apocalypse). ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Cheesy On A Level Rarely Imagined! But Fun!
After the emergence of John Carpenter's 1981 "Escape From New York," numerous cheap imitations appeared as if by magic. Made mostly by Italian filmmakers like Sergio Martino and Enzo G. Castellari, the Italian science fiction genre never got off the ground because it suffered from numerous fundamental failures. One deficit these directors encountered was meager budgets. Granted, "Escape From New York" did have a lower budget, but John Carpenter overcame this deficit quite nicely because even with less money (by American standards) his funds still towered over anything the Italians could ever hope to raise. Moreover, Carpenter's cast list for his science fiction epic boasted such notable talents as Kurt Russell, Harry Dean Stanton, Ernest Borgnine, Adrienne Barbeau, Isaac Hayes, and Donald Pleasance. With such a stellar ensemble as this one, Carpenter could hardly have failed to produce something worth watching. Sergio Martino's "2019: After The Fall of New York" cast is, with notable exceptions, largely forgettable, and the movie really suffers from a host of cheesy special effects because of budgetary restraints. Having said that, there is enough all around silliness in this film to keep a B movie fan hooting from beginning to end.

"2019: After the Fall of New York" begins with a voice over. According to this monologue, New York along with the rest of the country fell into nuclear chaos some twenty years before 2019. As the camera pans over a ravaged New York, we discover that the Euracs now occupy New York City and other regions of the former United States. These Euracs (an abbreviation referring to a confederation between Europe, Africa, and Asia) now roam through the blasted streets of New York City in search of the only fertile woman left on the planet. The Euracs need this woman in order to perpetuate their iron rule over this conquered territory. Moreover, the power to have children will also allow the Eurac confederation to finally vanquish any smoldering remnants of the PAN, the good guys of a Pacific-American orientation. The Euracs aren't completely sure PAN survives, but that's because they cannot see into the frigid realms of Alaska where PAN has its secret base. In the meantime, the Euracs spend their time riding around the ruins of New York on horses and attacking the local population with flamethrowers (always a good sign for this viewer) and weird laser guns shaped like cheesy crossbows. These thugs even dress in black capes complete with helmets that look a lot like catcher's masks. Those Euracs are nasty people!

Fortunately, the future of humanity has a hero in the form of Parsifal, played with iron-faced solidity by Michael Sopkiw. An American male model who only made four low budget films in his career, Sopkiw is sort of a hero to certain segments of the B movie fan base. Notice I say CERTAIN elements of the fan base because most people watching this film will roar with laughter over Sopkiw's acting skills. I know I did. This guy makes Joe Dallesandro look like Robin Williams. The good thing about saving the future, however, is that you do not need to be a good actor. When we first meet up with Parsifal, he's earning bucks and babes by taking part in a smash 'em up car derby somewhere out in Nevada. After winning this race by killing several opponents, Parsifal soon finds himself transported to PAN headquarters in Alaska, where the president of PAN (played by Edmund Purdom! What the heck is he doing in THIS?!?) informs our hero about a mission to rescue the last fertile woman. If Parsifal accomplishes this mission, he gets to take the girl and blast off the ruined earth in a hidden rocket ship. To help him on his assignment, the president sends a whopping back up force of two men along with Parsifal.

At this point, the movie really begins to pick up. Martino treats us to endless battle scenes as Parsifal and gang move through the streets of New York in search of the woman with the golden womb. The three heroes encounter street gangs, Eurac soldiers, a group of midgets, and a band of half man/half ape creatures during their quest. The whole thing is completely ridiculous, of course, and only gets more so as the picture progresses. In fact, you will be amazed at the imaginative leaps you will make just to keep up with the unfolding plot. The final segments of the film where Parsifal and the gang ride through a tunnel on the way out of the city should win an award for the hokiest action sequence ever filmed in motion picture history. There is some underlying message about hope for humanity throughout the film, but it is buried under layers of bad acting, metacheesy special effects, bad editing, and a lame script. The only thing that really appeals is the gore, with exploding heads and gunshot wounds aplenty in nearly every scene.

I find it difficult to condemn this movie, though, because it's too much fun to watch it. Especially amusing is George Eastman, an actor better known from such films as "Anthropophagus," in the role of Big Ape, the leader of the carnival gang. At one point in the film, you will hear the following line, "I'm from the stick people. You're Big Ape, right?" Need I say more? With lines like that, who needs big budget Hollywood productions? Amazingly, when you get done with the movie, you can look through the extras on this Media Blasters DVD. Extras? For a film of this caliber? You bet! Interviews with Sergio Martino, George Eastman, and Al Yamanouchi all appear on the disc, along with a short introduction to the film by an aging Michael Sopkiw. You simply cannot believe how cheesy this movie is, so only diehard B movie fans should spend time with this one.

The GREATEST film Micheal Sopkiw ever made!
From the mind of director Sergio Martino, this post nuke classic exemplifies the genre. Classic action, classic effects, and classic score by Oliver Onions!!
Includes a Bonus Commentary!

excellent post-apocalyptic fun
"After the Fall of New York" was one of the post-apocalyptic films that came out en masse in 1983 from italy. It's real title should be "After the Success of Escape from New York", as its location borrows rather heavily from that film. However, the plot is strikingly original, concerning the evil Euracs and the last fertile woman on earth (all the others were rendered sterile by the radioactivity). It has a very dark atmosphere, yet it is also very flamboyant and imaginative. However, if you don't like gore, you shouldn't see this movie (there are scenes with people getting their faces blown off, eyes gouged out, etc). Overall, it is an excellent movie, especially for fans of action, scifi, gore, post apocalyptic movies or "Escape from New York" (like myself). I garuntee you will have a fun time watching it!

Surprisingly good Italian post-apocalypse
After the success of such movies as "The Road Warrior" and "Escape From New York," The Italian low-budget movie industry started creating bunches of post-apocalypse movies, much like their famous "spaghetti westerns" and "sword-and-sandal" epics. Sometimes, they came up with a good one, surprisingly well thought out and offering genuine thrills and occasionally even a deeper meaning. This is one of those.

The story is set in the early 21st centry, some time after a nuclear war, when the Eurax (Europe-Asia-Africa union) has taken over much of the world, and people have become sterile. A gladiatorial warrior is recruited by the Pan-American Alliance to find and bring back the last fertile female, who happens to be somewhere in the ruins of New York, which is held by Eurax. In the couse of his adventure, we find various subterranean tribes of survivors and mutants, as well as the evil technocratic empire. There are messages about the potential dangers of technology and the power of love. Low-budget action legends George Eastman and Al Yamaguchi show up as leaders of survivor tribes. Eastman especially gets a surprisingly sensitive and important role as "Big Ape," the leader of a mutant carnival.

The production doesn't skimp on the gore or the grit. This isn't a "splatter" film in the traditional sense, but almost every bloody wound is shown in gory detail The setting in the post-apocalyptic world are suitably ugly for a collapsed society that is scavenging what it can and making do with what's falling apart. This is brought in to contrast by the clean, sterile, geometric designs in the Eurax fortress.

There is some cheapness to the special effects and of course it's all dubbed, but that goes with the territory in low-budget italian movies.

There is a haunting sense of loss throughout the movie, as if the filmakers actually believed that a nuclear war and the end of humanity was a terrible thing, not just a great setting for an action movie. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Good Film But No Actual Gore
I saw this movie and i liked it.
If you are the type of person who`s looking for gore this is not the place to look,
okay it had a little gore but it was limited.
there are approx 3 good scenes of gore in this movie so i wouldent reccommend it to splatterfans.
This film goes also under the name Anthropophagus 2
Synopsis:
A Priest comes to a small village on a secret mission. He aims to search for and destroy demonic spirits and inhuman beasts that are terrorizing the villagers.
While he searches, a ZOMBIE is loose and the body count is rising!
The priest encounters a lot more than he bargained for- a fiendish witch, mutated creatures and a myriad of other unspeakable terrors wich destroy the souls of their victims.
Good zombie flick but not a Splatter! ... Read more

Reviews (12)

"Family-freindly" my butt!!
This movie was very poor. For one thing this is NOT family friendly. For example in one scene these dogs get mad and they attack each other and in the end of that scene one of the dogs WAS RIPPED APART AND WAS VERY BLOODY. Also my Mom says that a scene were cut. Also the music is horrible. Also there was one very stupid curse they called the dogs(very ironic) also if you know spanish you can get an easter egg from the song they sing. In a few scenes all of a sudden stuff is completely red.

such a shame
i was telling my wife of a film i had seen when i was a child that was both excellent and moving.......CALL OF THE WILD

so i sourced it from australia as the dvd is deleted in the uk.
i thought i had given my money to a con man who had sent me a pirate copy until i read reviews from other buyers.

never have i seen such a rough dvd with the most awful picture and sound quality. the film is also one of the most dissapointing i have seen and i am embarrassed that i admitted to my wife that it made me cry when i was a kid!!!
i can only presume that it was the trauma of sitting through such badly worked material that upset my childhood.....

do yourself a favour and buy white fang instead.

such a shame

poor quality
Sorry ragmuffin, for being honest, I thank you for your 1 nice email,
but object to your other 2 " not so nice email's "
I will give you 100% for very good delivery very quick to the uk...thank you.
picture cover on dvd was different to advertised on amazon. very weary on buying again on amazon.

Not worth it
My mom purchased the video for my viewing pleasure, but I wasn't pleased. The music in the beginning sounds sort of alienated, the picture quality is horrible, and you actually see dogs tearing apart an animal and leaving its blood everywhere! I could only watch twelve minutes before I decided that it was not worth it to watch. If you ever, for any reason, actually WANT to watch the movie, then I recommend you read the book first, because the book is MUCH better than the movie.

Only Charlton Heston could keep me watching a dog like this
It's never a good plan to make a film where the dog is named Buck and the star is called Chuck, but this film's got more problems than that. Silly acting, weak photography, and a mediocre script that only sparks when it turns violent and nasty. In Charlton Heston's thoughtful 'In the Arena' autobiography, he considers this film "a total failure". He may not know good politics, but he has enough taste and sense to avoid film debacles most actors of his age have lived off for decades. So if Chuck actually writes "please don't watch this", listen to the man. Or listen to Paramount Studios, which shelved this film after they saw it.

"The Call of the Wild" is not unwatchable, but it's bad enough, one of the worst movies in Heston's career. Place this on the Turkey shelf next to Heston's equally bad "The Awakening", a ridiculous 1980 Exorcist/Omen knockoff. I haven't read Jack London's book, but this movie seems, um, a very loose adaptation.

The extras in the Alaska town are played by an assortment of German/Italian/British/American/Spanish actors, mostly overdubbed. What gems they say: one jumps onto a bicycle and yells "Yippee! Yippeeeee!" (Note: "Yippee!" will never be acceptable in a Hollywood script, and is punishable if done in real-life.) Heston's human co-star runs into that same town, yelling "Hi! Hi! Hi!" like a stoner coming down from the mountain commune. If all of the movie was as corny as the townspeople, we might have had a comedy for the ages. Alas.

As amusing as the vomiting town drunkard was, it was Charlton Heston, always a powerful presence, who kept me watching. He looks a little grumpier than usual, perhaps he noticed that the many wolves in the film are actually hybrid dogs that don't look much like North American wolves. However, his scenes with Buck are touching, against all odds and logic. I never thought of actors having on-screen chemistry with animals, but Heston proves it does exist. Those scenes keep the film from being a complete waste of film stock, but there aren't nearly enough of them.

Still, this dull film contains one classic Chuck Heston line - words he was born to speak: "Mister, if you touch that dog again I'm gonna shoot ya!" Yippee! ... Read more

Reviews (12)

"Family-freindly" my butt!!
This movie was very poor. For one thing this is NOT family friendly. For example in one scene these dogs get mad and they attack each other and in the end of that scene one of the dogs WAS RIPPED APART AND WAS VERY BLOODY. Also my Mom says that a scene were cut. Also the music is horrible. Also there was one very stupid curse they called the dogs(very ironic) also if you know spanish you can get an easter egg from the song they sing. In a few scenes all of a sudden stuff is completely red.

such a shame
i was telling my wife of a film i had seen when i was a child that was both excellent and moving.......CALL OF THE WILD

so i sourced it from australia as the dvd is deleted in the uk.
i thought i had given my money to a con man who had sent me a pirate copy until i read reviews from other buyers.

never have i seen such a rough dvd with the most awful picture and sound quality. the film is also one of the most dissapointing i have seen and i am embarrassed that i admitted to my wife that it made me cry when i was a kid!!!
i can only presume that it was the trauma of sitting through such badly worked material that upset my childhood.....

do yourself a favour and buy white fang instead.

such a shame

poor quality
Sorry ragmuffin, for being honest, I thank you for your 1 nice email,
but object to your other 2 " not so nice email's "
I will give you 100% for very good delivery very quick to the uk...thank you.
picture cover on dvd was different to advertised on amazon. very weary on buying again on amazon.

Not worth it
My mom purchased the video for my viewing pleasure, but I wasn't pleased. The music in the beginning sounds sort of alienated, the picture quality is horrible, and you actually see dogs tearing apart an animal and leaving its blood everywhere! I could only watch twelve minutes before I decided that it was not worth it to watch. If you ever, for any reason, actually WANT to watch the movie, then I recommend you read the book first, because the book is MUCH better than the movie.

Only Charlton Heston could keep me watching a dog like this
It's never a good plan to make a film where the dog is named Buck and the star is called Chuck, but this film's got more problems than that. Silly acting, weak photography, and a mediocre script that only sparks when it turns violent and nasty. In Charlton Heston's thoughtful 'In the Arena' autobiography, he considers this film "a total failure". He may not know good politics, but he has enough taste and sense to avoid film debacles most actors of his age have lived off for decades. So if Chuck actually writes "please don't watch this", listen to the man. Or listen to Paramount Studios, which shelved this film after they saw it.

"The Call of the Wild" is not unwatchable, but it's bad enough, one of the worst movies in Heston's career. Place this on the Turkey shelf next to Heston's equally bad "The Awakening", a ridiculous 1980 Exorcist/Omen knockoff. I haven't read Jack London's book, but this movie seems, um, a very loose adaptation.

The extras in the Alaska town are played by an assortment of German/Italian/British/American/Spanish actors, mostly overdubbed. What gems they say: one jumps onto a bicycle and yells "Yippee! Yippeeeee!" (Note: "Yippee!" will never be acceptable in a Hollywood script, and is punishable if done in real-life.) Heston's human co-star runs into that same town, yelling "Hi! Hi! Hi!" like a stoner coming down from the mountain commune. If all of the movie was as corny as the townspeople, we might have had a comedy for the ages. Alas.

As amusing as the vomiting town drunkard was, it was Charlton Heston, always a powerful presence, who kept me watching. He looks a little grumpier than usual, perhaps he noticed that the many wolves in the film are actually hybrid dogs that don't look much like North American wolves. However, his scenes with Buck are touching, against all odds and logic. I never thought of actors having on-screen chemistry with animals, but Heston proves it does exist. Those scenes keep the film from being a complete waste of film stock, but there aren't nearly enough of them.

Still, this dull film contains one classic Chuck Heston line - words he was born to speak: "Mister, if you touch that dog again I'm gonna shoot ya!" Yippee! ... Read more

Reviews (2)

ONE MORE THING...
There is nothing in the movie that looks anything like what's on the front of the box. The box looks like bizarre fantasy. The movie is strictly caveman.

Italian-Made Heroic Caveman Schlock
Ever wonder how man discovered iron? Well it's pretty certain it wasn't this way.

In this dreadful Italian-made "epic," an evil caveman is exiled from his tribe, but discovers iron in the aftermath of a volcano. With the help of a strange mystical woman, he learns to fashion it into a weapon, with which he raises an army and attacks the tribe. The hero winds up in a village of more advanced prehistoric people who presumably represent goodness and culture. Events of course lead to a climactic showdown and a moral lesson. There are no real surprises in this except how remarkably lame the script is and how bad the acting is. The fighting scenes are occasionally interesting, but it's really hard to imagine watching this whole movie for such a small payoff. Searchers for that great, groundbreakingly good caveman movie need not stop here. People who love chuckling at "spaghetti epics" will find some satisfaction.

I have seen three other movies, "2001, a Space Oddysy," "Quest For Fire," and "Caveman" (and I'm sure there are others) which have mined similar territory (prehistoric humans or pre-humans make a technological breakthrough). Two of them, though pretensious, were done seriously and the third was a total comedy. They were all done well enough to be taken on their own merits. This movie does n