Amazon.com essential video

Talk about epic grandeur! This magnificently photographed account of the first cattle drive on the Chisholm Trail has everything you could ever want in a western: gunfights, stampedes, Indian attacks, hangings, betrayal, revenge, romance, glorious scenery, and a towering performance by John Wayne that prefigured his definitive portrayal of the bitter Ethan Edwards in John Ford's The Searchers eight years later. Tom Dunson (Wayne) adopts a young boy, Matt (brilliantly played as an adult by Montgomery Clift), whose family has been massacred by Indians. Years later, after Dunson has become a successful rancher, mentor and protege have an acrimonious falling out during a grueling cattle drive and go their separate ways, with Dunson vowing to kill Matt. Red River is a true classic and unquestionably one of the greatest westerns of all time. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (41)

THE cattle-drive movie
Having weighed-in on _The Culpepper Cattle Company_, I have to genuflect at the altar of THE cattle-drive movie-- _Red River_.

This film pre-dates _The Searchers_ by about eight years. The lead character, Tom Dunson, is a sort of prototype for Ethan Edwards. This is John Wayne without sentiment or schmaltz, until the final scene which differs from the story on which the film is based, and which jars a bit.

That being said, _Red River_ still stands as the definitive cattle-drive movie. Wayne/Dunson builds an empire but then must head the herd north on a drive that simply _has_ to get through-- despite conflicts with nature, rustlers, Indians, and between Dunson and his men, including his adopted son, Matthew Garth.

Wayne is cast against his own stereotype as Dunson and comes across as a hard and unlikeable character. Walter Brennan as his sidekick, Groot, nearly steals the show just as he did (again) in Hawk's _Rio Bravo_. Montgomery Clift does a passable job as Matthew Garth, but is outclassed by John Ireland as Cherry Valance, the gunfighter turned cowhand.

The rest of the cast is outstanding. You need only look at the cast list to appreciate the fine ensemble company that Howard Hawks put together for this movie. This is also on of Dimitri Tiomkin's finest musical scores.

Finally, I agree with Maltin on this point: beware edited and abridged copies of this film. Anything less than a 133 minute running time should not be bothered with.

"Take `em to Missouri, Matt!"

A Flawed Western
For an hour and 20 minutes or so, Red River is a great western (even with such embarrassing moments such as Wayne killing the Indian and discovering the bracelet he had given his girl, the stuttering cowboy who is killed in the stampede, etc.). It boasts a stunning Dimitri Tiomkin score, terrific B&W photography by Russell Harlan, a wonderful performance from Montgomery Clift, a powerful (if typically one-note) performance from John Wayne ... and then Joanne Dru enters the story and it basically falls apart from this point on. She is so completely incompetent that she manages to almost sink the film! Her dialogue is, admittedly, terrible (Hawks bragged that he wrote most of it!), but her line readings are so terrible that it just makes the awkward dialogue even more awkward. The ending is absurd, a complete build-up to a deadly collision and it ends up a rather weak fist-fight. Perhaps, had Wayne's performance included emotional shadings, the ending might have worked, but since he is so one-note hard and uncompromising throughout, not for one moment do I believe the final sequence. In the original Borden Chase novel, the character dies at the end. It should have happened here, also (same major flaw in Wayne's The Searchers, too). On top of which, the John Ireland character is built up as a major challenge to Montgomery Clift, but this is simply dropped halfway through. Indeed, the Ireland character is allowed to fizzle out. The auteur theory is what keeps critics from analysing this film from a more objective viewpoint. But it is very watchable and its strengths certainly outnumber its weaknesses.

Black and white sensation!
John Wayne's Red River is one of the most exciting and classical westerns of our century. So, if somebody hates black and white, screw them, it's their problem. Don't even review the product, genius! Alongside The Searchers, this is one of the Duke's landmark films. Also, John Wayne was our ultimate hero, prevailing in every gunfight and every story. His acting AND his strength certainly prevail here. Also filled with action packed gunfights and suspenseful scenes. The ending is fine.
The DVD transfer is nothing special, and somewhat grainy at times. MGM DVDS are not known to be the best DVD makers on the market. To shape up this classic western, expect a Criterion Collection re release and enjoy!

An American Treasure
In the rich history of American film, this piece of work by Howard Hawks makes the short list. It has been used as a template for any filmmaker wishing to make a Western, and further, it is one of those rare pieces of culture by which a society defines itself. If you needed to demonstrate to a foreigner what the American character is all about, you could show them this movie.

As a Western, it certainly has it all: cowboys killing Indians, men leaving women for the call of the trail, gunfights, stampedes, love, betrayal, and finally redemption. It is also gorgeously filmed, beautifully written, and well acted throughout. And finally, it stars John Wayne, an actor that towers over today's crop of male actors like an oak over weeping willows.

This film also stars Montgomery Clift as the surrogate son that eventually challenges Wayne for control of the drive. In terms of acting styles, Clift and Wayne were about as different as two actors could be: Wayne seemed always to act on instinct and charisma, while Clift was one of the young Turks through the 40's and 50's, a proponent of a new style of acting - the method developed by Lee Strasburg (one can easily imagine Wayne giving his crooked sarcastic grin over the very idea of a "school" where young people learn acting). Yet, casting these two together works. By all reports, the two hated each other at the beginning of the production, but had developed an actor's respect for one another by the end of filming. Wayne, after watching Clift in one of his scenes, was quoted as saying something like "damn, that little queer sure can act."

John Wayne, for his part, goes toe-to-toe with the new school of internal acting and more than holds his own. His portrayal of a powerful, unbending man who slowly descends into bitterness and hate is a real treat to watch. His performance was, to use a phrase Wayne would have hated, multi-layered and very, very skillful.

Other performances to watch: the ever-faithful Walter Brennan, one of the greatest character actors of all time, is perfect as Wayne's partner/friend. It is in watching Brennan's reaction to Wayne's increasing dementia that we see how far off track he's gone. John Ireland also is a standout as Cherry Valance, the pistoleer, who is full of casual grace and menace. As if all the above wasn't enough, the great Harry Carey is onboard briefly as Mr. Melville, radiating authority.

Every film lover should own this film and watch it at least once annually.

Every American should treasure it as a source of national pride.

One note: this is one film that simply demands a better DVD treatment. The picture and sound isn't bad, but it isn't widescreen, and there are absolutely no special features. C'mon, Criterion Collections, where are you? --Mykal

Mutiny on the plains
Howard Hawks' 1948 RED RIVER is an ambitious, sprawling, epic western. It's on a number of top-100 lists, and it belongs there.
The movie tells the story of cattle rancher Tom Dunson and the first drive along the fabled Chisholm Trail. It's based on Borden Chase's "The Chisholm Trail"
The movie hits the ground running. Within the first five minutes there's a romantic leave taking, an indian attack and a burning wagon train. The romantic parting of Dunson (John Wayne) and his intended is a key incident in the development of this bitter and hard-driven character. Dunson and Groot Nadine (Walter Brennan), who left the wagon train with Dunson, are joined by a survivor of the massacre, Matt Garth - who, fourteen years later, will become the quick-drawing Montgomery Clift. The shocked boy is leading a cow, Dunson and Groot have a surviving bull, and with this bovine first couple they make for the open land south of the Red River.
Fast forward 14 years and Dunson has 10,000 head of cattle and a depressed, post-Civil War southern economy that can't afford to buy them. They must drive them to Missouri and sell them to the more prosperous northerners or face ruin. During that drive Dunson descends to near insanity and Matt ascends as a moderating influence and, apparently, becomes the only one who can successfully lead the men and cattle to market. Without giving too much away, something happens on the drive that will drastically change Dunson's and Matt's relationship and jeopardize both of their lives.
It's pretty heavy stuff, and John Wayne is rock solid great as the troubled Dunson. This is one of the greatest roles in the career of a sometimes under-rated actor. Montgomery Clift is fine in his screen debut.
Walter Brennan's Groot is a marvel. That guy was such a good actor. Like all good sidekicks, and Brennan was the best, Groot is part court jester and part moral barometer. It helps that he plays most of the movie without his upper teeth in, too. Brennan was always better when his mouth was half empty.
There are some images that will stick with you for a while. Thousands of cattle crossing the Red River, a midnight stampede with a couple of hair-raising rescues. And there's a neat little bit with an angry John Wayne striding down a long street crowded with cattle - Wayne doesn't break stride, of course, and the cattle move out of his way like a longhorn Red Sea parting for an angry Moses.
For the most part the script is well written, and there's enough amusing scenes (usually including Brennan) to keep the whole thing from collapsing under it's own weight.
For instance, when Dunson and Matt are deciding who's to go along on the drive, Dunson excludes Groot (bum leg.) Groot mutters to himself like a live-action Popeye while Dunson and Matt continue their conversation. A distracted and exasperated Dunson finally says:
Dunson: What are you saying? I can't understand you. Where's your store teeth Matt bought you?
Groot: They're in my pocket.
Dunson: Well, why don't you use them?
Groot: 'Cause they whistle. I use them for eating.

Then there's the Joanne Dru character, Tess Millay. It doesn't help that her first appearance occurs in the third scene. One hour and forty-one minutes into the 2:20 movie, by my clock. My guess is the scriptwriters didn't want to clutter up the action with a romantic subplot until absolutely necessary. Fair enough, but it means that Millay's and Matt's romance has to be telescoped severely. Basically they meet, fall in love, and part in a day. It stretches an audience some. Worse, Dru as an actress simply wasn't right for the part.
One of her character traits, as written, is to talk and keep on talking when something worries or frightens her. She does this to negligible effect. It's a role that seemed to have been custom written for Jean Arthur, who always could blabber on to good effect, who could always drop her voice down to a husky purr or have it emit an abrupt squeak for maximum dramatic effect. Unfortunately Arthur was nearly fifty when this movie was made, so I guess casting her as a romantic lead opposite the young Clift would have, uh, added an strange and unwelcome dimension to the movie. Dru, in one of her earliest roles, just doesn't have the chops to carry off the role convincingly. All things considered, I think this piece of miscasting is more Hawks' fault that anyone elses. Anyway, I shaved a point off because of it.
I don't normally notice bad transfers, but there are a few dark night scenes in RED RIVER that look like someone lit a Fourth of July sparkler. And, less forgivable, my new factory-sealed-from-a-reputable-national-outlet retailer did NOT contain the advertised four page booklet. Finally, I've played the movie twice so far, and each time the start up menu screen doesn't appear until AFTER the movie is over. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

The most famous and sublime treatment of the gunfight at the O.K. Corral, John Ford's My Darling Clementine is by any measure one of the most classically perfect Westerns ever made. Henry Fonda plays a hard, serious Wyatt Earp leading a cattle drive west with his brothers when a stopover in the wild town of Tombstone ends in the murder of his youngest brother. Wyatt takes up the badge he had turned down earlier and tames the wide-open town with his brothers (Ward Bond and Tim Holt), all the while waiting for the wild Clantons (led by Walter Brennan's ruthless Old Man Clanton) to make a mistake. Victor Mature delivers perhaps his finest performance as the tubercular gambler Doc Holliday, an alcoholic Eastern doctor escaping civilization in the Wild West. Ford takes great liberties with history, bending the story to fit his ideal of the West, a balance of social law and pioneer spirit. Though the film reaches its climax in the legendary gunfight between the Earps (with Doc Holliday) and the Clantons, the most powerful moment is the moving Sunday morning church social played out on the floor of the unfinished church. As Earp dances with Clementine (Cathy Downs)--Fonda's stiff, self-conscious movements showing a man unaccustomed to such social interaction--Ford's camera frames them against the open sky: the town and the wilderness merge into the new Eden of the West for a brief moment. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (38)

Shakespeare in Tombstone
Of the many movies that I love and own, this is one of the DVDs I would grab if the house was on fire.

My Darling Clementine is fundamentally about the shootout at the OK Corral, arguably the most famous 30 seconds in American history. But in John Ford's loving hands, the story takes its time getting there and, in the process, becomes as graceful and easily beautiful a piece of film-making as you will ever see.

In this age when movie goers prize realism, sheer violence, and de-mythology, Ford has become something of a whipping boy for those who point out the glaring historical inaccuracies present in Hollywood's traditional portrayal of the American West. These folks miss the larger picture and are the poorer for their narrow, fashionable view. In this archetypal story of Wyatt Earp, Doc Holiday, and the Clanton family, Ford was not interested in historical detail. He was creating legends, not historical accounts for the archives.

Ford was a film maker. When a movie lover approaches a Ford film, it becomes necessary to give oneself over to the power of film. Once one does that, tremendous pleasures await. Such as: the townspeople of Tombstone having a dance around the skeletal frame of a half-built church while the huge, flat buttes of Monument Valley tower in the background; or Henry Fonda as Earp watching with great sympathy as Victor Mature (Doc Holiday) recites Hamlet's suicide soliloquy in a barroom (as hokey as this sounds, it is Fonda's expression that will move you, I guarantee).

Other images worth mentioning: Fonda/Earp walking alone through the rain of Tombstone at night; or the final shot of Clementine (meaningless in the film other than as a perfect symbol of all the things men love but can never have) standing framed against the Arizona sky and a picket fence - or the way Walter Brennan as Old Man Clanton, flashes through his scenes like a rattler's hiss.

Loving a John Ford Western is a bit like believing in a religion: it requires a leap of faith - a belief in something that might not be tangible reality, but is instead an ideal no less worthy of love.

This DVD is an absolute must for Ford fans, Western fans, or movie lovers. As an extra bonus, the special feature commentary by Ford biographer, Scott Eyman, is absolutely superb. Mr. Eyman's concise and rich commentary is nearly as enjoyable as the film itself. All in all, a real treasure for John Ford fans. -Mykal Banta

Ford and Fonda at their Finest
"My Darling Clementine" has to rank as one of John Ford's three or four finest films, as well as one of Henry Fonda's finest performances. It is only incidentally about the Gunfight at the OK Corral--rather than attempt a factual retelling of the gunfight, Ford uses the story of the Earps, Doc Holliday, and the Clantons to illustrate the sacrifices that have to be made in order for the West to be civilized.

This theme of sacrifice runs through many of Ford's Westerns--see also "Wagonmaster" and "The Searchers," for example. In order for the malevolent lawlessness symbolized by the Clantons to be driven out, there are some others, not malevolent themselves, who are nevertheless doomed by their inability to adapt to civilization (Doc Holliday). Wyatt represents those who must give up something they love--any hope of a future with Clementine Carter--in order to continue doing things that need doing.

As previous reviewers have noted, Ford's account is a far cry from the historical events of the OK Corral gunfight. His biggest alteration of history is to change the relationship between Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday from friendship to antagonism that is somewhat softened by mutual respect, and eventually evolves into alliance. The genuine tension between Wyatt and Doc strengthens the film.

The cast is very strong. Henry Fonda's performance as Wyatt is magnificent. Walter Brennan is equally superb as the malevolent Old Man Clanton, while Victor Mature's consumptive Doc Holliday is, if not memorable, very competent. A number of Ford regulars such as Ward Bond, Russell Simpson, and Jane Darwell provide solid support. The awkward slapstick humor of some of Ford's other films is not a big factor in this one, which is another plus.

Ford was the master of filming outdoor pictures in black and white. Several scenes, such as the dance at the church, are visually stunning.

Of the half dozen or more films about the OK Corral gunfight, this is by far the finest, with "Tombstone" a respectable, but distant second. I highly recommend it to all.

A Really Good Movie
MY DARLING CLEMENTINE

There has been a number of movies made about the gunfight at OK Corral, however this one happens to be my favorite.
I personally enjoy classic black and white movies and I am an avid fan of Victor Mature, who plays Doc Holliday in this movie.
One thing that makes this movie especially interesting is the development of the characters, for example, Wyatt Earp's misgivings about the town, the apparent conflict between Chihuahua (Doc Hollidays's girlfriend, played by Linda Darnell) and Wyatt Earp (played by Henry Fonda) and the conflict between Doc Holliday and Clementine (played by Cathy Downs), all of which add a human element to this film.
I highly recommend adding this film to your collection.

Beautifully Paced Western
I have always put"My Darling Clementine" in my top-ten westerns as do some critics,and after viewing it recently on the excellent DVD version I am considering it to be the best! The alternative version on the disc might not be to everyones taste but westerns should be slow paced(check out the excellent "Open Range")not just shoot-ups added for padding every 20 minutes or so. One of the best scenes in this movie or any other western is the excellent dance scene,especially the moment when Henry Fonda asks Kathy Downes to dance. Definetely Ford at his best and Victor Mature,s best hour as well. Kudos to all for a well produced DVD package

Ford Prints the Legend - Sublimely
This is arguably the best Western by the best director of Westerns in the history of the genre. Ostensibly the story of the gunfight at the O.K. Corral, the legendary John Ford gives us a vision of the Old West that is violent yet idealized, frightening yet warm, grim yet majestic. Ford has often been called a visual poet, and the sublime "My Darling Clementine" is perhaps the best example of visual poetry that anyone has ever put to celluloid.

Forget about comparing this film to actual historical events. While Ford knew Wyatt Earp from his early Hollywood days when Ford was a prop boy, and he claimed that Earp told him how the gunfight really happened, he also said he wasn't trying to make a documentary when he directed "Clementine". The "facts", whatever they may be, don't matter here. As the newspaperman tells Senator Ransom Stoddard in Ford's "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance", "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."

Henry Fonda's Earp is the classic Ford hero, somewhat distant and removed from society, quietly confident and basically nonviolent, but nevertheless commanding the utter respect of others (partly because of his reputation which has preceded him, and its inherent threat of violence). And, most importantly, he is ultimately unable to share in the peace and security that he makes possible for others. Next to his portrayal of Tom Joad in Ford's "The Grapes Of Wrath", this is perhaps Fonda's finest performance. He has never appeared more cool and comfortable in a role, as he laconically and assuredly inhabits the lawless frontier town of Tombstone.

Contrasting Wyatt's sanguine pragmatism, Doc Holliday (Victor Mature) is a haunted, tragic outcast who has uprooted himself from civilization and drifted West. We learn that Doc was once a surgeon (the real Doc Holliday was a dentist, another negligible historical discrepancy), a valuable, functioning member of society, his career presumably cut short by alcoholism, consumption and undisclosed ghosts, which apparently still haunt him.

The Clanton family provides the reason for Wyatt's accepting the job as marshal of Tombstone, by murdering his youngest brother, James, and making off with the Earp brothers' cattle. The miscreant Clantons, like the Cleggs family in Ford's "Wagonmaster", are the personification of evil, demented and motherless. The leader of their clan, known only as "Pa" (ominously played by Walter Brennan), would like nothing better than for Tombstone to remain open and lawless and free for the taking.

Clementine Carter (Cathy Downs) appears as a civilizing angel from the East, who has come to rescue Doc from himself and bring him back to Boston (Ford's eternal bastion of Civilization in the worst sense, invariably inhabited by bigoted grotesques - though Miss Carter seems to have been spared this characterization). The tempestuous Chihuahua (Linda Darnell), who wants to run away with Doc to Mexico, embodies the wild, open frontier.

While the climax naturally takes place at the O.K. Corral, the centerpiece of the film, as in many Ford films, is a dance. Its prelude unfolds majestically as Wyatt and Clementine meet in the lobby of the hotel and begin a stately walk toward the framework of the unfinished "first church of Tombstone", the sound of a tolling church bell and the strains of one of Ford's old favorite hymns, "Shall We Gather at the River" growing louder as the couple approaches the assembled congregation. Like many great moments in great films, the beauty of several elements melding flawlessly to create this sequence defies verbal description.

The church, to Ford, helps legitimize the existence of a community, not only for religious reasons, but as a place where people can come together in fellowship, providing a foundation for that community's future existence. The dance, which takes place on the physical foundation of the unfinished church, is the turning point of the film, and provides possibly the most transcendent moment in all of Ford's work. It is the embodiment of the spiritual establishment of a real and lasting community, which, until the arrival of Wyatt and Clementine, and all that they stand for, had no solid foundation.

Ford's use of comedy, often criticized for its broadness (but of which he was nevertheless proud), is sparing and deft in "Clementine". It is gentler and more restrained than his usual comedic fare, as in the humorous references to the aroma of the eau de toilette which the enthusiastic proprietor of the Bon Ton Tonsorial Parlor has applied to Wyatt's freshly shaven and coiffed person: "I love your town in the morning, Marshal", says Clementine, as she and Wyatt step out onto the front porch of the hotel; "the scent of the desert flower . . ." "That's me," corrects Wyatt, adding, explanatorily, "Barber." There is also the justly praised bit of business of Wyatt doing his seated "dance" on the front porch of the hotel, as he, somewhat passive aggressively, ignores the shrewish admonishments of Chihuahua. This casual, reportedly spontaneous creation of Fonda's (or Ford's, depending on the source) succinctly captures the essence of the relationship between the two characters.

Ford's innately masterful sense of composition and lighting, which he displayed throughout his career, is magnificently displayed in "Clementine". The sweeping diagonal of the bar in the saloon as Wyatt walks to the door after Chihuahua's operation; the expressionistic shadows which constantly envelop the doomed Holliday's face; the somber, monumental tableau of Wyatt and Morgan, bending over the dead body of their brother Virgil in the street at night; all of these images resonate indefinitely in the viewer's memory, and all reveal a visual master in his prime.

Many of the reassuringly familiar faces of Ford's legendary "stock company" are faithfully present, as was nearly always the case - with slight variations - over the years. Ward Bond, Jane Darwell, Russell Simpson, Mae Marsh, J. Farrell MacDonald and the ever-present, ever-endearing Francis Ford, John's older brother and former mentor (and a veteran of Hollywood from its infancy), all add their warm, familial qualities, counterbalancing the darker aspects of the film.

Of all the Westerns I've seen, "My Darling Clementine" is the most eloquent, the most understatedly awe-inspiring - the most poetic.

John Ford printed the legend. Sublimely. ... Read more

Reviews (107)

A Cry for Freedom
Even though the story of SPARTACUS takes place in ancient Rome, the film itself is a profoundly contemporary work of the time that it was made; the eve of the Civil Rights movement in the US, and at the end of the HUAC witch hunt in Hollywood.

The chief engineer of this project is producer Kirk Douglas who portrayed the salve hero, but the wisdom behind all that is screenwriter Dalton Trumbo, black-listed in Hollywood, worked under various pseudonyms during the fifties for films such as ROMAN HOLIDAY, here properly restored to his rightful position of one of the best screenwriter in the business, with his own name credited on screen. The original novel is also written by another black-listed writer, Howard Fast, who claims that the idea of writing a film about the slave revolt came into his mind during the time that he spent in prison.

So the message that its story carries is unviersal, and even contemporary: man's struggle for freedom, striving for human equality, the solidarity of all that are oppressed disregarding their creed, birth and color of skin--the gladiator whose death triggers Spartacus' revolt is portrayed by Woody Strode, afro-american actor and a regular of John Ford's movies. The film embraces humanity, freedom to chose the way he wants to live, the freedom to trust one's friend, even the freedom of sexuality --Spartucus and his lover Varinia are never legally married, but she gives birth to his son--, and the freedom and passion to sacrifice oneself for the sake of his pears and the great cause of human freedom.

One the other hand, the film strongly accusse the corruption of power, the decadence of those who have power, and the rise of fascism. Democratic politician Charles Laughton, with all the virtues and vices that a regular politician has, taken over and eventually eliminated by seemingly much "cleaner" military leader Laurence Olivier. Needless to say, the clashes performed by those two great actors is a great excitment to watch.

Kirk Douglas gives one of his most convincing performances as the revolutionary leader of slaves, Jean Simmons plays his innocent, healthy and strong partner with a healthy sensuality, and Tony Curtis gives credibility to Spartacus' surrogate son who represents culture and education; they are not barbaric slaves, they can be as cultured as their masters are, and even better because they are true, honest humans as opposed to the corrupted masters whose wealth and culture are based on oppression of other humans.

To simply put, SPARTACUS is a fine example of how a good entertaining movie can carry a powerful message; when it truly suceeds, it'a great joy to watch.

This fully packed DVD is a re-issue of Criterion's celebrated LaserDisc edition. Added to a interesting commentary track by the filmmakers including Douglas and Peter Ustinov who won an oscar for his performance, there is another track on which Dulton Trumbo's notes to the rough cut of the film is read--a great lesson to all those who wants to learn how to write a film. Othe supplements includes a hillarious interview with Peter Ustinov, a lot of scketches and stills, and more. It's a great DVD. Please enjoy it as many times as you want.

note: the superb package design is a reproduction of the original poser art created by Saul Bass. The poster is also among the suplements of this DVD.

Strong story, weak depth, but epic & entertaining
Based on the novel by Howard Fast, Spartacus recounts the life of a slave turned gladiator turned freedom fighter. The story of Spartacus begins with him as a free spirited Thracian slave in 70BC. Spartacus is trained in a gladiator school, where he meets and falls in love with the slave girl Varinia. He then leads the other gladiators in revolt, and assembles a huge army of thousands of slaves to challenge the might of Rome. The ending is tragic, but not without hope. Spartacus was in fact a historical figure and the movie's story of his squashed rebellion against Rome - including the crucifixion of 6000 survivors - is largely rooted in truth.

The movie can best be described as epic. On a grand scale, the Roman empire is brought to life, with its corrupt aristocracy and its simple lower class. The epic battle scene which forms the climax of the movie features 1000s of extras, and although it is sometimes hard to tell who is on which side, the effect is magnificent and grandiose. Despite the action scenes, the movie is surprisingly introspective at times. Unlike modern efforts such as Gladiator, Spartacus is not an action movie as such, and fans of contemporary action movies not surprisingly find it disappointing. Spartacus' struggles are just as much emotional as they are physical. But to me this is a strength and not a weakness: the shortcoming of most modern action movies is not present here because the characterization is superb.

Even though the movie is not gory (although it is bloody at times), the adult themes make it unsuitable for children. For instance, successful gladiators are given women to have their way with them. And on numerous occasions, although nudity is not shown it is strongly implied and barely concealed. The implication of bisexuality (in a scene not present in the original) and promiscuity is also strongly evident as part of the corruption in Rome. But it also touches Spartacus. In a rather daring move for the 1960s, Spartacus and his woman Varinia conceive a child out of wedlock, which is presented as natural and good. Spartacus' fight for freedom apparently includes sexual freedom. Its hardly surprising that these two fall in love in a rather sappy love-at-first-sight Hollywood romance, where they don't even know each other as yet. Ultimately it is not only Rome that chases gold, girls and glory without morals, but Spartacus himself is not really much different.

But it is not only the moral ambivalence of this movie that disturbs me, but also its underlying political themes. How is Rome presented? As totally corrupt, with no redeeming qualities. "If a criminal has what you want, you do business with him." How are the slaves presented? As noble and good. "We're brothers." The army of slaves proceeds in a carnival like atmosphere, and the producers present lots of images of joyful children and exuberant elderly as part of their number, to arouse sympathy for their cause. But isn't this rather a cliché? It is, but that's the whole point. Aristocratic Rome is presented as evil, and the oppressed lower class need to be liberated from her corrupt rule. The rich are all evil, the poor are all good. Sounds familiar? It's a defence of the brotherhood of communism. Ultimately the movie endorses peasant revolt as a legitimate option, and advocates rebelling against authority. Rather than rendering to Caesar what is Caesars, it encourages open rebellion, in order to usher in a new political system of brotherhood and freedom from repression. Sound too far-fetched? Here's the clincher: Howard Fast, author of the novel on which this movie was based, was a devout and committed member of the Communist Party of the USA, and for many years his works were black-listed. The story of Spartacus may be rooted in history, but Howard Fast has reinterpreted it as a defence of his own political communist ideals. Rome represents Western Capitalism, and the slaves represent the oppressed peasant proletariat. Spartacus' defence of liberty, equality and fraternity is in fact anachronistic.

So sure this is an epic movie. At the time of its production in 1960, Spartacus was the most expensive movie ever made. With a cast of star actors, especially the compelling performances of Kirk Douglas as Spartacus, Laurence Olivier as Crassus (the influential Roman senator), Peter Ustinov as Batiatius (the bumbling and greedy owner of a gladiator school), and Charles Laughton as Gracchus (the corrupt and scheming Roman senator), it's no wonder it won four academy awards. But the fact that Spartacus is an epic movie does not disguise the fact that it is not deep. Any deeper themes that the movie does have to offer are communist and hedonistic, and this ideology mars the story. This may be a movie that rivals the grandeur and scale of Ben Hur, but thematically, it doesn't come close.

Even so, it's still worth a look. Even if one cannot share the cause of Sparticus and political ambitions it embodies, one has to admire the spirit in which Spartacus fights for his cause: it is a losing battle, and yet with dignity and fervour he fights for what he believes is right - a quality to be coveted. And it's ironic that if you can overlook the weaknesses of its depth, the strength of this movie lies in its superficial story. It has comedy, tragedy, triumph, romance, action, intrigue, and an epic scale. As entertainment, it's an enduring epic that still can be enjoyed today.

3 Stars For 3 Outstanding Performances...
Kubrick replaced Tony Mann on directing duties for this brave, but lumbering costume epic which is ultimately propped up by three beautiful performances. Peter Ustinov(won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his work here), Charles Laughton(should have been similarly nominated)& Laurence Olivier all do incredible work under the guidance of a very young Kubrick & all deliver what comes very close to their best work. Their presence is notable chiefly for the fact that without them, SPARTACUS would never have been the extraordinary spectacle it surely is. Kirk Douglas gives a brooding(& lifeless)performance in the title role, ultimately undermining any sequence not containing the three aforementioned thespians. Jean Simmons, as the love interest, is similarly uninteresting & while undeniably beautiful, fails to evoke for the viewer the love & devotion she receives from Douglas & ultimately Olivier. Pre CGI, it comes armed with some beautifully choreographed & violent battle sequences, but for those looking for an earlier version of Ridley Scott's GLADIATOR, this one may come off a little old-fashioned. It is worth noting(& you'll learn this from the wonderfully insightful 1992 Ustinov interview[his impersonation of Laughton is a riot]contained in the bonus material)that Ustinov rewrote all the scenes he plays with Laughton. It should come as no surprise to the discerning viewer, they are easily the best moments in the film.....

Divine Right of Kings
Sparticus represented more than a gladiator-slave uprising. Sparticus represented the Italian's people dissatisfaction with the Roman Senate and the general corruption and impotence within the Senate.

Citizens once had a voice with the Senate and the Senate listened keeping the republic free. Now, the Senate caved to the demands of the dictators and military commanders and installed for the first time an Emperor giving him six legends too suppress the slave uprising.

In the end the slave and citizen uprising could not resist the Roman legions. Many of the people joining Sparticus were discontent citizens of Rome and individuals from countries that did not like Rome. Originally, the republic which was composed of strong free men. The military started the slow strangulation of the republic by replacing it with an empire. Julius Caesar was introduced as the shadow of the wings of power. Crassus was depicted as the total dictator who put oppressive demands on Rome and the Senate as the body that had lost its power. The Senate historically would have debated the issues and objected to outrageous demands. Instead, the Senate allowed the Emperor to rule Rome and the Emperor established the laws and source of the law and executed the law. The Emperor had power too repeal old laws and establish new laws, in place of the old ones. The punishments for violation of the law could be death and probably a Roman death on the cross demonstrating the Emperors absolute power. The Citizen did what they were told and they did not act without permission. Secret police reported any activity that could bring punishment on the citizen. The laws were supposedly designed to bring security. As the Emperor distrusted and feared the people this only accelerated the downfall of Rome.

The notion of divine right of kings was established. Taxes imposed on the people support the huge military appetite generated as Rome conquered many European countries. The government would become an autocracy and the Emperor the supreme commander.

Sparticus hoped to flee Rome, negotiated with pirates too build ships using gold taken during conquests that would take them from the tip of Italy away to a promise land. Instead, the pirates betrayed Sparticus and did not build the ships allowing the Roman legends to trap Sparticus from the South pushing him towards Rome and forcing a confrontation in the fields close to Rome.

Sparticus was defeated, his men cruxified along the way to Rome, when captured his men coined the phrase "I am Sparticus" when asked who was Sparticus. Sparticus wife would become a member of Crassus Heirloom yet the Senator would arrange for her escape and continue with his own suicide and Sparticus son would remain free.

Good movie, bad transfer
It should be noted that the reviews on this page refer to two different versions of the Spartacus DVD. This review refers to the Universal single disc edition, not the Criterion two-disc release.

While both versions of the film are the same, this version is devastated by a bad transer: both sound and picture quality are seriously lacking - even as far as a blue edge to blacks, including the widescreen matting, and blue fades in parts of the film. The sound is poorly balanced - voices are too quiet, music too loud. I was contantly turning the volume up and down throughout. So much for "fully restored."

If you are interested in quality and really like this movie I would skip this version and go for the Criterion release, which many other people own and have approved. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

MITCHUM IS MARLOWE
Director Richard Rush presented us a valentine with this incredible film, the third version made from the the 1940 Raymond Chandler novel. At least seven actors have portrayed Philip Marlowe. Robert Mitchum, played the part twice. The first time, in this film, he was nothing short of brilliant; just world-weary, battered, meloncholy, and tough enough to spark this tale into a full flame. His voice-over narrative hit perfect pitch; all gravel, too many smokes, and cheap booze. Mitchum, himself the veteran of several Noir classics, played the gumshoe as comfortable as one's favorite overcoat; a perfect fit. He shuffled lazy-lidded yet irascible and alert, as ready for a sap behind the ear, as he was to be the recipient of the sexual energy radiated off of Charlotte Rampling as Helen, the femme. She, likewise, postured perfectly in the Noir 1940's clothes and hairstyles. John Alonzo, fresh from shooting CHINATOWN, presented us with an LA bathed in just the right mix of golden light and shadow. Jerry Goldsmith delivered another spectacular score, overlapping jazz, blues, and swing, underscoring the action and dialogue masterfully. John Ireland, also a veteran of classic Noir, Anthony Zerbe, and Harry Dean Stanton gave tremendous support with their roles. There was even a couple of glimpses of Sly Stallone ( pre-ROCKY ) as a viscious punk. Some of the critics felt that this lush color film had to try too hard for that Noir feel. I disagree. This movie is a modern Noir classic, even in living color.

Movie Transcends the Material
The photography is perfect, the score is magnificent. Robert Mitchum was made to play a middle aged Philip Marlowe, and his voice over has all the weariness and angst the most die hard noir fan could ask for. The mid-30's sets are impeccable. So what is there to complain about? I think the culprit is Raymond Chandler.

One of the most quotable of the hard-boiled writers, his writing sang but his plots were so convoluted, the reader needs a scorecard to keep track of the story. Marlowe is hired by ex-con Moose Malloy to find his elusive love Velma. Until the bloody finale, that was the last time I was clear about the action.

I commend all the actors for delivering fine performances, particularly Sylvia Myles who played the hopeless alcoholic, Mrs. Florian. She was piercingly pathetic as a nice girl who couldn't quite believe she was a middle-aged drunk. Robert Mitchum allowed merciless lighting that occasionally made him look like a guy who has had one too many face-lifts.

This film version of "Farewell My Lovely" is probably as good as it gets. I recommend "Out of the Past" for Mitchum and noir fans.
-sweetmolly-Amazon Reviewer

The sets look really cheap.
'Farewell, My Lovely' is a likable detective film, but the sets look really cheap and fake. I didn't get the feeling I was back in Los Angeles in the 1930s; I felt like I was looking at a set that was trying to look like Los Angeles in the 30s. Robert Mitchum is alright, but he is a little too old.

"New" Old Time Detective Thriller
To many of the reviews I've read rave on about Ms. Rampling, and while she is good in her small role, this is a Robert Mitchum Movie, and he is very good in it.....

Actually, if it was B&W you'd look at it like an old Bogie film like "The Big Sleep",or any one of a dozen classic detective flix.....

Anyway, I happen to get my hands on one of the rare DVD's and it was in great shape. But it's the story...this is one of those films you get to watch 5 times before you actually follow everything that's going on......

I truly enjoyed it, and you will too.

the spirit is dead on
purists might debate whether the deviancies from the novel are to positive or detrimental effect, but Mitchum captures Marlowe in a casual and powerful way. the entire Chandler spirit is kept faithfully intact, creatively filled out by excellent lighting & cinemetography, keeping the viewer involved in the neo-noir attitude as if the film was actually made in 1941.

the anne riordan character is replaced by a newspaper hawker who is a little out of place and unexplained, but perhaps charlotte rampling was all the femme fatale they could afford so...better just hire some young kid to float the story.

jack o'halloran is truly believable as moose malloy, and sylvester stallone performs some of his finest work. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Elvis' best SAFE dramatic role.
When I say "safe", I mean where Elvis does not killed in the end like in "Love Me Tender", and "Flaming Star." This something that's much better and I prefer a whole lot. Elvis has not one but three female costars: Hope Lange, Tuesday Weld, and Millie Perkins. I don't know about you but he gives an equal amount of attention to every one of them except near the end when he focuses more on Hope Lange. I love the songs which are: "Wild In The Country", "I Slipped, I Stumbled, I Fell", "In My Way", and "Husky Dusky Day". My favorite line is when Elvis as Glenn Tyler says "This routine of yours could stagger a billygoat." That's one of his best lines. All Elvis fans should see this once in their lifetime. It's a must!

Wild In The Country
Wild In The Country would offer Elvis his last serious role in a film by a significant director (Philip Dunne). Elvis portrays Glenn Tyler, a southern boy from a rural, poverty-stricken background, who has just been released from juvenile hall. Central to the character of Glenn is that the brooding young man is at a crossroads in his life, and he must choose the path most suitable for him. His choices are represented by three women. Noreen (Tuesday Weld) is Glenn's cousin who urges him to stay with his own kind. Noreen offers passion and good times, but such a carefree existence allows little thought for the future. Betty Lee (Millie Perkins), who is Glenn's childhood sweetheart selflessly places Glenn's future above her own needs, urging him to leave town and attend college. She is prepared to lose him that he may have an education and a secure future. Hope Lange costars as Irene Sperry, the court-appointed psychiatrist assigned to Glenn's case, who recognizes in him the raw talent of a budding writer. She also encourages Glenn to attend college but causes scandal when she falls in love with him. Glenn ends up following Betty Lee's advice and asking her to wait for him.

With a strong supporting cast including a young Tuesday Weld who was only 17 years old during the film's production. She was one of the hottest and wildest starlets in Hollywood and already had romances with two of of her costars in the film - Elvis and Veteran Actor John Ireland.

Produced for Twentieth Century Fox by Jerry Wald. Released June 22, 1961. Color.

Of Banana Oil and Bathtubs With Dry Ice In Them
This movie starts with Glenn Tyler (Elvis) trying to kill his brother Hank in the barn while their father looks on as casually as if this was an everyday occurrence. His brother throws a pitchfork at him, and Glenn breaks a milkstool over Hank's head, injuring him... There is a hearing after this fit of violence and Glenn is put under the care of his uncle who runs an elixir business. This uncle has a brasen daughter, Noreen, who has a baby, and he is determined to get Noreen and Glenn hitched up. Noreen is perpetually tight from the elixir, the uncle spends his nights at the bowling alleys and poker games, and Glenn divides his time among work, his girlfriend Betty Lee, and visits to Mrs Irene Sperry the psychiatrist. Irene finds out that Glenn has always loved writing but stopped because people laughed at his dreams of being a writer. So she asks him to write down the story of what happened at Hi-Tension Grove a few nights before (Glenn had had an argument/near fight with Cliff Macy, a rich young guy) and he does as she asks. She is amazed at his talent and wants to show it to a professor friend of hers who might be able to get Glenn a scholarship at a college . But he won't let her. He gets upset at the very idea of letting anyone else see it, and goes home to spend an evening being wild and crazy and drinking elixir with Noreen. They go to Irene's house (this one of the best scenes in the movie)... Glenn is drunk and so is Noreen, and he's yelling to Mrs Sperry to give his story back. He turns on the hose and rattles out all kinds of nonsense while he "hoses down the heat" - but really it's the porch and the front windows. Irene and her housemaid Sara watch through the door, and Irene is amused at him until he turns away calling out, ''Ok, oh well, you don't give a damn about me anyway,'' and Noreen, who's been swaying and chattering right along with Glenn, kisses him. Irene suddenly knows that she does care. The next day, Irene takes him his story back. After that little confrontation he decides to rewrite it and type it up like she asked and let her show it to her friend at the college. He goes along with her and on the way back they get caught in a violent rainstorm, so they stop at a motel and get rooms until the rain stops... then occurrs the other sweet little scene in the movie, when Glenn tells Irene he's in love with her. After they get home, he tries to call her three times, but she refuses to talk to him. She loves him deeply too, but doesn't want him to know or see. She agrees to marry Cliff Macy's father, who has been begging her to marry him for a long time now so he can divorce his wife. That evening Irene is expecting Mr Macy to come and celebrate the engagement, but Glenn gets to her house first. He talks with her, tries to find out whether she loves him, but she refuses to tell him that she does. Glenn takes her by the shoulders and begs her to answer him - and Mr Macy walks in. Seeing them together he begins to get ruffled and demands to know whether the rumours about Glenn and Irene spending a night together in a hotel were true. Glenn tells him the truth (that it is a lie), but Mr Macy won't believe him. He makes the mistake of telling Glenn that Irene has agreed to be his wife. Glenn looks daggers at Irene, and as he walks out he calls to Mr Macy, ''If I find your son and he comes home in a box, don't say I didn't warn you. Mrs Sperry, I'm never going to see you again.'' And he walks out. Irene runs to the porch, but Glenn has gone. She starts crying and tells Mr Macy that she does love Glenn. Meanwhile Glenn goes back to Noreen, and asks her to run away with him. On their trip out, Glenn stops at Hi-Tension Grove, violently knocks down Cliff and leaves before finding out that he has killed him. Not ten minutes pass before the police arrest him for manslaughter. At the hearing the next day, Mr Macy does all he can to cut down Glenn, determined to see him dead. Irene shows up and testifies that no matter what Glenn may have said, he was innocent because he didn't mean to kill Cliff. No one believes her - after all, they were in a small town, and slander spreads fast. After Mr Macy lies and condradicts Irene's statement that Cliff had a bad heart and that it was surely the real cause of his death, Irene leaves the courtroom. It is a dramatic moment. Just before going out, she turns back and meets Glenn's eyes. He is gazing at her, and he looks as though about to cry. He still loves her. She turns and leaves. When she gets home and takes care of a few little things, she shuts herself in the garage and turns on the car, intending to kill herself. Back in the courtroom, Mr Macy is finally admitting that Irene and Glenn were right and that Cliff's death was an accident when word comes that Irene has attempted suicide. Glenn jumps up and runs all the way to her house, where he drops down by the couch where the doctor is trying to revive her, takes her hands and wills her to live again, promising that he will take care of her, that nothing bad will ever happen to her again. The movie closes with Glenn going off to college, but we know that he will come back and that he will marry Irene whom he loves.

This is one of the best Elvis movies except for a few things. I felt that the difficulties between Mr and Mrs Macy should have been detailed a little more - you never quite understand what exactly was wrong between them that he wanted to divorce her. The other fault is that many times characters who kept appearing were never built up so that you could understand what was going on with them. Mr Macy's son Cliff was a primary example of this.

Also the two songs he sang during the film didn't ''go''. ''I Slipped, I Stumbled, I Fell'' is a cute little tune but didn't seem to fit; he also sings a song to Noreen which also just seemed out of place. I don't know what that was called. The only songs which really belonged, in my opinion, was the title song that he sang during the credits, and the little thing he and Irene were singing on the way home from the college.

This movie had a lot of truly good moments and I think that with a few improvements it really could have been impressive, with all the intrigue and spicy subplots. It was also good to see Elvis playing a character who was somebody with other aspirations than music or performance. You just need to give this movie a chance.That's all, folks.

My review on Elvis movie " Wild In The Country "
"Wild In The Country" is certainly the number one best movie of Elvis, eventhough it seems to be a forgotten one. Actress Hope Lange (the role of Irene Sperry) had great chemistry with Elvis. I'm not an Elvis fan, but I do think he had done an excellent job being the character Glenn Tyler...END

A True Elvis Gem That Must Be Recognized
Elvis can act, and sing and love!!! This movie, based very loosly on the JD Salamenca novel Lost In The Country, is about Glen who is put on probation after a run in with his drunk borhter(and a previous charge of car theft). He is to move in with his Uncle Rolfe and cousin Nory and work in Uncle Rolfe's Snake-Oil Medicine factory and he must meet with social worker Irene Sperry. He still finds time to spend time with girlfriend BettyLee but is warned to leave her alone, by her father. Even from the beginnig Glen is a sour, angry young man and only finds time to soften up to BettyLee and later Ms. Sperry who he considers an enemy who's trying to find out if he's "touched in the head". When he can no longer carry on with BettyLee he has a fling with his cousin Nory(who has an illegitimate baby) whom he butts heads with at first. Uncle Rolfe, in a way, encourages this but then seems outraged(when it really happens) causing Glen to lash out and run away to work at a car garage. Right now the only women he can turn to is Ms. Sperry who finds a hidden writing talent in Glen and asks him to write in a journal and present it to him. ONe day she takes him to a prestigious University and encourages his writing talent. ON the way back they stop over in a motel during a storm and of course they attempt to make love only to have Irene come to her senses. While there a young man(Glen's enemy) reads the motel register and realizes the two are there. The young man's father is the town lawyer who is married and carrying on with Ms. Sperry. When he tells his father(whom he can't stand), the man confronts Irene who confesses she is in love with Glen. She tries to discourage Glen, who feels the same way, when she explains her husband felt the same way but he was not ready for marriage and it led to his accidental death. Unfortunately, Glen is at the house when Irene is confronted by her lawyer lover and Glen then claims that the young man will die for this and the boy does after being hit by Glen. Glen is put on trial but Ms. Sperry arrives saying the deceased had a heart problem(she overheard this from the boy's father) but the father vehemently denies it. Irene is ruined and attempts suicide. Glen has been exonerated(after the boy's father realizes he cannot hide the heart condition and hurt Irene) and is released and tells her he will always be there. Glen then goes to college but still says he will be back for her. I can believe it! This is a rare opportunity to see an angry and sensitive Elvis who can act and he does very little singing. It's a shame his movie career didn't continue on this course. Hope Lange is excellent but she seems to play "the other women" alot, but always harmless. It's the first time she plays a rather weak one, especially when she tries to kill herself. This is a wonderful movie ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Action-packed film is entertaining and satisfying
55 Days at peking surprised me. Though not having the best of titles, I thought this was going to be a romance centered around the Boxer Rebellion. Instead, the film is more along the lines of Zulu, featuring constant large scale sieges and fast-paced action.

55 Days is not perfect by any means. The political talks drag a bit and at 2 and a half hours the film goes on a bit longer than it really needs to. The use of American actors as Chinese characters is also quite distracting and occasionally produces some unintentional laughter.

Still, the film is entertaining and absorbing. Charlton Heston, Ava Gardner, and David Niven all deliver good performance. The battle scenes are the film's most memorable aspects and they are very well made, especially for its time. The film was obviously made at a large budget so the film, in technical terms, is superior to a lot of similar action films of its time. Those looking for a companion piece to Zulu might find 55 Days worth watching.

A Well-Made But Biased & Politically-Dated Film
When I first saw this film as a child, I was offended by it, being an Asian-American of Filipino/Chinese descent. However, seeing it now, with the understanding that this film was made during the height of the Cold War & the beginnings of the War in Vietnam, I can understand why it was made (though I still don't agree with it's political point of view!)

First, for general viewers who just want to see a well made, big-budget war picture with hints of romance, then this movie does deliver on that level. Charleton Heston is excellent as a flawed, temperamental loner & professional soldier who falls for Eva Gardner, a "fallen woman" of Russian nobility, while the foreign "legations" in Peking (what we would today call "embassies") are under attack by the Boxer Rebels (I Ho Chuan Society) during the rebellion of 1900 in China. David Niven is likeable as the British ambassador, even though he does come off as a bit pompous. The sets & costumes are well-done (especially when you consider that this film, set during the last days of the Ching Dynasty in China, was actually shot in Spain!), & the battle sequences are realistically staged. (For martial-arts buffs, there's even a martial-arts demonstration during the birthday of the English Queen!) So, if all you're looking for is a fast-paced war picture with great costumes & macho action performances, then, on that level only, this film delivers.

If you're a history buff, however, then this film definately is not for you! For one thing, all of the major European characters, (whose point of view this movie favors) are fictional characters. The only real-life historical figures are the ruling Manchus (played by caucasian actors in "Asian-face!") & the Japanese Colonel Goro Shiba. (He & the other Japanese are played by real Asian actors. I guess during the Cold War, the Japanese were our allies against "the Red Menace", thus worthy of respect, while the Chinese, who were Communists, were not worthy of respect when portrayed on film. But then, this movie also features the Russians in a positive light, so go figure!) There is also a scene where the German minister is killed on the street by a mob of crazed Boxers, but in real life, the real German minister was shot by a Chinese officer (one man!) who was sympathetic to the Boxer cause. This film also carefully omits the subsequent rape & sacking of Peking after the defeat of the Boxers, though focusing heavily on the Boxer's depredations against Christians & foreigners. (True history is balanced, not one-sided.) Lastly, according to this film, the British & Americans were in charge of the relief efforts during the siege. Actually, the Germans, under von Waldersee, were the real leaders of the International Relief Force sent out to defeat the Boxers & rescue the besieged legations.

Finally, for Asian-americans & viewers interested in serious political debate, this film is also a no no! The most obviously offensive aspect of this movie is the white actors playing Chinese (though again, this was made in 1963), but the other offensive aspect is that this film favors the colonialists' point of view! (The basic point of 55 Days is, colonialism is good & whenever natives fight back, they deserve to be supressed! It's the same kind of thinking that got us involved in Vietnam.) This movie was made during the beginnings of our involvement in Southeast Asian politics & it's obvious that this "historical" drama is really a pro-Vietnam propaganda film disguised as an epic action-movie!

Okay, the "Boxers" (or I Ho Society) were not saints. They did murder a lot of innocent people in their anger over the semi-colonialism imposed by the West & Japan on China during the 19th Century. But this film shows only one point of view. (A bad story-telling style for a supposedly "realistic" war picture.) However, for viewers who want to get a balanced point of view in one film about the Boxer Rebellion, well, good luck! Chinese movies on the subject tend to do the exact extreme political opposite of 55 Days (which is just as bad!) And remember, though there are historical inaccuracies in 55 Days, Chinese movies (or more accurately, Hong Kong movies) can be just as inaccurate about their own culture! Check out any of the '70's Shaw Brothers kung-fu films if you don't believe me!

So in closing, personally, I would recommend watching this film, but only if you understand it's (many) flaws. For a truly balanced perspective on the subject, after watching 55 Days At Peking, check out The Boxer Rebellion/Bloody Avengers, a Shaw Brothers kung-fu flick about the Boxer Rebellion which exaggerates the Chinese p.o.v. at least as much (if not more) as 55 Days exaggerates the European/Japanese p.o.v. The real-truth lies right in-between these two films. Be sure you get the letter-boxed version of 55 Days, because the pan & scan really cuts out some important details (more so than other films.)

OK action film marred by some faults
"55 Days at Peking" is a decent action film for a war genre fan or maybe some one who wants to see a different time period in a film. The film is pretty decent as far as its genre goes, but there were some problems in the storyline that made me give it no higher than three stars.

The first problem I had with this film was the inclusion of the mandatory American hero. It seems quite often whenever some thing is set in a foreign land and involves foreign - and is made in America - there HAS to be an American lead. Most of the other nationalities play a mostly minor role save for David Niven's character, who feels like a historic individual. I'm not saying the Americans weren't at Peking, but Charleton Heston's character feels a tad too cliche.

The second problem I had was the love story. It takes up a good part of the film and slows it down...in fact it very nearly made me lose all interest in this movie. Doesn't really do much to the story and leaves some holes open. Even when Ava Gardner's character meets an unfortunate circumstance, I couldn't feel sorry for her. I didn't care too much since the whole thing felt like a typical forced movie romance.

Finally, there are some historical inaccuracies. The battle didn't quite happen as the movie portrays it. These mistakes are all fairly minor, I suppose, and some might just flat out ignore it since the battle (and war, really) isn't well known.

On the whole, it wasn't that bad. There are some great battle scenes including a charge up a ramp behind a wheeled defense, firing shots through sliding windows, and the climactic assault with a huge artillery tower - this last part is my personal favorite, and for what it's worth I thought it was a pretty cool scene.

If you're a fan of to-the-last-man movies like the (superior) "Zulu" then you'll probably like this movie. Yes, some might not have compassion for the defenders since them being rescued meant an end to China's real independance, but I guess you really can't like the Boxers for trying to annihilate a group that includes women and children. Even if the Imperialists were morally bad guys, I can't hold compassion to the Boxers for their terrorist tactics. But enough of this...if you like this type of film, rent this and check it out.

Exciting epic produced on the grand old scale
"55 days at Peking", has certainly in the years since it's release in 1963 come in for it's share of flack over its romantisizing of history, fictional characters and depiction of Chinese nationals. In reality however I feel you must look at this film first and foremost as the first class piece of entertainment based on historical events it was intended to be. I certainly appreciate the great effort and attention to detail that was lavished on this stunning recreation of the events surrounding the Boxer Rebellion of 1900 in Imperial China.

As an ardent student of chinese history in general I can see that the focus is upon the foreigners that were present in China at that time and that the Chinese point of view is rarely explored in detail. However what must be appreciated in this Samual Bronston production is the vivid recreation of Imperial China, the earnest performances by the leads, exquisite costumes, the excellent action scenes, and sublime musical score by the famed Dimitri Tiomkins which all add up to an engrossing two and a half hours of viewing. Charlton Heston as Major Matt Lewis the tempremental soldier for hire, David Niven as the upright British Ambassador Sir. Arthur Robertson and especially the ever beautiful Ava Gardner as the "scandalous" Russian Baroness Natalie Ivanoff all lend a commanding presence in their roles. Ava Gardner as the "woman of ill repute" who falls for Heston's no nonsense Major during the seige of the foreign legations during the rebellion and ends up paying for her devotion with her life has I feel never been better. Ava proves her often underestimated talent here as she develops from shallow society lady out for a good time, into a human being who learns the value of self sacrifice for something you believe in. The wonderful Victorian costumes which suit her so well also emphasize what a great beauty she was in her movie heyday. The main criticism of this film has always been directed at the depiction of Chinese characters by caucasian actors. I feel that there is little to get offended by here as in particular the depiction of the Dowager Empress Tzu-Hsi is actually done in a much more favourable light than how the woman actually was in real life. I feel Flora Robson lends a commanding presence as the Dowager Empress and her Chinese makeup, far from being offensive is fascinating and superbly done. Robert Helpmann also shines in his sinister role of Prince Tuan, the empress's chief advisor and evil genius. They are actors playing roles just like any other performer that portray a character not of his or her own nationality and they should be rightly seen as just that.

"55 Days at Peking", while certainly not historically accurate contains an exciting fictional story woven into historical fact. This does not necessarily make it a bad drama or production and indeed here we are treated to a great story full of action, romance and a vivid retelling of a dramatic story from a "human level" as was probably witnessed by those that lived through it. The depiction of the rise of the boxers into a violent nationalist movement, the actual rebellion and siege of the foreign legations in Peking resulting in much bloodshed and destruction , the vivid and beautiful recreation of life in the decadent Ching court under the Grand Dowager Empress, are all beautifully played out in a eye popping and engrossing drama. Samuel Bronston who was responsible for some great early 1960's epics such as "El Cid", and especially the classic "The Fall of the Roman Empire" here excels himself in recreating the times in 19th Century China. The sets are sumptous with Peking being magically brought to life on sets created in Spain.Rarely nowadays do yuo see such an allout effort in mounting a top class production. The Ching court as depicted here, while not up to later "The Last Emperor", standards is still wonderful and really portrays the beauty of court life that hid so much that was wrong with the ruling system in China at the time. Rarely have more vivid depictions of the lives of ordinary Chinese been portrayed and the rebellion sequences are second to none in their raw energy, savage depiction of the loss of life and the destruction caused.

"55 Days at Peking", is not perfect by any means but I feel it has been unfairly condemmed by the supposed political correctness movement. I really enjoy historical dramas, even of the romanticised kind and Charlton Heston and Ava Gardner really maintain your interest through the long running time with their excellent work in this film. Long before computer generated special effects this film sees one of the great sets built for a film during the 1960's and for that alone it is worth seeing apart from all its other good qualities. Enjoy a journey back to grand old film making of the old school when Charlton Heston and Ava Gardner do battle against the boxers in "55 Days at Peking".

Excellent only for critical analysis
This film has only one redeeming quality- it provides an excellent opportunity to discuss bias, historical perspective, director's artistic liscence, and distortion of historical events. I viewed this film knowing that the Chinese, poorly portrayed by Americans or British, were being presented from a completely demeaning perspective that simultaneously plays the Americans as the savior heros. I plan to use this in my 7th grade social studies class to demonstrate exactly how a series of events as complex and consequential as the Boxer Rebellion can be recreated so completely and utterly wrong. Watch this as you would a Disney film like Mulan, knowing that it will only get the gist of something, and not provide any reliable characters or history. ... 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)

Elvis' best SAFE dramatic role.
When I say "safe", I mean where Elvis does not killed in the end like in "Love Me Tender", and "Flaming Star." This something that's much better and I prefer a whole lot. Elvis has not one but three female costars: Hope Lange, Tuesday Weld, and Millie Perkins. I don't know about you but he gives an equal amount of attention to every one of them except near the end when he focuses more on Hope Lange. I love the songs which are: "Wild In The Country", "I Slipped, I Stumbled, I Fell", "In My Way", and "Husky Dusky Day". My favorite line is when Elvis as Glenn Tyler says "This routine of yours could stagger a billygoat." That's one of his best lines. All Elvis fans should see this once in their lifetime. It's a must!

Wild In The Country
Wild In The Country would offer Elvis his last serious role in a film by a significant director (Philip Dunne). Elvis portrays Glenn Tyler, a southern boy from a rural, poverty-stricken background, who has just been released from juvenile hall. Central to the character of Glenn is that the brooding young man is at a crossroads in his life, and he must choose the path most suitable for him. His choices are represented by three women. Noreen (Tuesday Weld) is Glenn's cousin who urges him to stay with his own kind. Noreen offers passion and good times, but such a carefree existence allows little thought for the future. Betty Lee (Millie Perkins), who is Glenn's childhood sweetheart selflessly places Glenn's future above her own needs, urging him to leave town and attend college. She is prepared to lose him that he may have an education and a secure future. Hope Lange costars as Irene Sperry, the court-appointed psychiatrist assigned to Glenn's case, who recognizes in him the raw talent of a budding writer. She also encourages Glenn to attend college but causes scandal when she falls in love with him. Glenn ends up following Betty Lee's advice and asking her to wait for him.

With a strong supporting cast including a young Tuesday Weld who was only 17 years old during the film's production. She was one of the hottest and wildest starlets in Hollywood and already had romances with two of of her costars in the film - Elvis and Veteran Actor John Ireland.

Produced for Twentieth Century Fox by Jerry Wald. Released June 22, 1961. Color.

Of Banana Oil and Bathtubs With Dry Ice In Them
This movie starts with Glenn Tyler (Elvis) trying to kill his brother Hank in the barn while their father looks on as casually as if this was an everyday occurrence. His brother throws a pitchfork at him, and Glenn breaks a milkstool over Hank's head, injuring him... There is a hearing after this fit of violence and Glenn is put under the care of his uncle who runs an elixir business. This uncle has a brasen daughter, Noreen, who has a baby, and he is determined to get Noreen and Glenn hitched up. Noreen is perpetually tight from the elixir, the uncle spends his nights at the bowling alleys and poker games, and Glenn divides his time among work, his girlfriend Betty Lee, and visits to Mrs Irene Sperry the psychiatrist. Irene finds out that Glenn has always loved writing but stopped because people laughed at his dreams of being a writer. So she asks him to write down the story of what happened at Hi-Tension Grove a few nights before (Glenn had had an argument/near fight with Cliff Macy, a rich young guy) and he does as she asks. She is amazed at his talent and wants to show it to a professor friend of hers who might be able to get Glenn a scholarship at a college . But he won't let her. He gets upset at the very idea of letting anyone else see it, and goes home to spend an evening being wild and crazy and drinking elixir with Noreen. They go to Irene's house (this one of the best scenes in the movie)... Glenn is drunk and so is Noreen, and he's yelling to Mrs Sperry to give his story back. He turns on the hose and rattles out all kinds of nonsense while he "hoses down the heat" - but really it's the porch and the front windows. Irene and her housemaid Sara watch through the door, and Irene is amused at him until he turns away calling out, ''Ok, oh well, you don't give a damn about me anyway,'' and Noreen, who's been swaying and chattering right along with Glenn, kisses him. Irene suddenly knows that she does care. The next day, Irene takes him his story back. After that little confrontation he decides to rewrite it and type it up like she asked and let her show it to her friend at the college. He goes along with her and on the way back they get caught in a violent rainstorm, so they stop at a motel and get rooms until the rain stops... then occurrs the other sweet little scene in the movie, when Glenn tells Irene he's in love with her. After they get home, he tries to call her three times, but she refuses to talk to him. She loves him deeply too, but doesn't want him to know or see. She agrees to marry Cliff Macy's father, who has been begging her to marry him for a long time now so he can divorce his wife. That evening Irene is expecting Mr Macy to come and celebrate the engagement, but Glenn gets to her house first. He talks with her, tries to find out whether she loves him, but she refuses to tell him that she does. Glenn takes her by the shoulders and begs her to answer him - and Mr Macy walks in. Seeing them together he begins to get ruffled and demands to know whether the rumours about Glenn and Irene spending a night together in a hotel were true. Glenn tells him the truth (that it is a lie), but Mr Macy won't believe him. He makes the mistake of telling Glenn that Irene has agreed to be his wife. Glenn looks daggers at Irene, and as he walks out he calls to Mr Macy, ''If I find your son and he comes home in a box, don't say I didn't warn you. Mrs Sperry, I'm never going to see you again.'' And he walks out. Irene runs to the porch, but Glenn has gone. She starts crying and tells Mr Macy that she does love Glenn. Meanwhile Glenn goes back to Noreen, and asks her to run away with him. On their trip out, Glenn stops at Hi-Tension Grove, violently knocks down Cliff and leaves before finding out that he has killed him. Not ten minutes pass before the police arrest him for manslaughter. At the hearing the next day, Mr Macy does all he can to cut down Glenn, determined to see him dead. Irene shows up and testifies that no matter what Glenn may have said, he was innocent because he didn't mean to kill Cliff. No one believes her - after all, they were in a small town, and slander spreads fast. After Mr Macy lies and condradicts Irene's statement that Cliff had a bad heart and that it was surely the real cause of his death, Irene leaves the courtroom. It is a dramatic moment. Just before going out, she turns back and meets Glenn's eyes. He is gazing at her, and he looks as though about to cry. He still loves her. She turns and leaves. When she gets home and takes care of a few little things, she shuts herself in the garage and turns on the car, intending to kill herself. Back in the courtroom, Mr Macy is finally admitting that Irene and Glenn were right and that Cliff's death was an accident when word comes that Irene has attempted suicide. Glenn jumps up and runs all the way to her house, where he drops down by the couch where the doctor is trying to revive her, takes her hands and wills her to live again, promising that he will take care of her, that nothing bad will ever happen to her again. The movie closes with Glenn going off to college, but we know that he will come back and that he will marry Irene whom he loves.

This is one of the best Elvis movies except for a few things. I felt that the difficulties between Mr and Mrs Macy should have been detailed a little more - you never quite understand what exactly was wrong between them that he wanted to divorce her. The other fault is that many times characters who kept appearing were never built up so that you could understand what was going on with them. Mr Macy's son Cliff was a primary example of this.

Also the two songs he sang during the film didn't ''go''. ''I Slipped, I Stumbled, I Fell'' is a cute little tune but didn't seem to fit; he also sings a song to Noreen which also just seemed out of place. I don't know what that was called. The only songs which really belonged, in my opinion, was the title song that he sang during the credits, and the little thing he and Irene were singing on the way home from the college.

This movie had a lot of truly good moments and I think that with a few improvements it really could have been impressive, with all the intrigue and spicy subplots. It was also good to see Elvis playing a character who was somebody with other aspirations than music or performance. You just need to give this movie a chance.That's all, folks.

My review on Elvis movie " Wild In The Country "
"Wild In The Country" is certainly the number one best movie of Elvis, eventhough it seems to be a forgotten one. Actress Hope Lange (the role of Irene Sperry) had great chemistry with Elvis. I'm not an Elvis fan, but I do think he had done an excellent job being the character Glenn Tyler...END

A True Elvis Gem That Must Be Recognized
Elvis can act, and sing and love!!! This movie, based very loosly on the JD Salamenca novel Lost In The Country, is about Glen who is put on probation after a run in with his drunk borhter(and a previous charge of car theft). He is to move in with his Uncle Rolfe and cousin Nory and work in Uncle Rolfe's Snake-Oil Medicine factory and he must meet with social worker Irene Sperry. He still finds time to spend time with girlfriend BettyLee but is warned to leave her alone, by her father. Even from the beginnig Glen is a sour, angry young man and only finds time to soften up to BettyLee and later Ms. Sperry who he considers an enemy who's trying to find out if he's "touched in the head". When he can no longer carry on with BettyLee he has a fling with his cousin Nory(who has an illegitimate baby) whom he butts heads with at first. Uncle Rolfe, in a way, encourages this but then seems outraged(when it really happens) causing Glen to lash out and run away to work at a car garage. Right now the only women he can turn to is Ms. Sperry who finds a hidden writing talent in Glen and asks him to write in a journal and present it to him. ONe day she takes him to a prestigious University and encourages his writing talent. ON the way back they stop over in a motel during a storm and of course they attempt to make love only to have Irene come to her senses. While there a young man(Glen's enemy) reads the motel register and realizes the two are there. The young man's father is the town lawyer who is married and carrying on with Ms. Sperry. When he tells his father(whom he can't stand), the man confronts Irene who confesses she is in love with Glen. She tries to discourage Glen, who feels the same way, when she explains her husband felt the same way but he was not ready for marriage and it led to his accidental death. Unfortunately, Glen is at the house when Irene is confronted by her lawyer lover and Glen then claims that the young man will die for this and the boy does after being hit by Glen. Glen is put on trial but Ms. Sperry arrives saying the deceased had a heart problem(she overheard this from the boy's father) but the father vehemently denies it. Irene is ruined and attempts suicide. Glen has been exonerated(after the boy's father realizes he cannot hide the heart condition and hurt Irene) and is released and tells her he will always be there. Glen then goes to college but still says he will be back for her. I can believe it! This is a rare opportunity to see an angry and sensitive Elvis who can act and he does very little singing. It's a shame his movie career didn't continue on this course. Hope Lange is excellent but she seems to play "the other women" alot, but always harmless. It's the first time she plays a rather weak one, especially when she tries to kill herself. This is a wonderful movie ... Read more

Reviews (19)

In Spite of Flaws, This Political Noir Is Still Powerful
There are certain subjects that films in general and Hollywood in particular never handled very well--and chief among them are politics. But even some fifty years after it first hit theatre screens, ALL THE KING'S MEN still has plenty of power. Filmed in a "noir" style and based on the famous novel which was in turn based loosely on the rise and fall of Louisiana's Huey P. Long, the film offers the story of Willie Stark, a small-town lawyer who is nominated for govenor by a political party seeking to defeat their opponet by dividing the rural vote. When Willie gets wise to the plot he turns on his false benefactors and rockets to political power--but once in power the honest small-town-joe becomes even more corrupt than those who sought to manipulate him for their own gain.

Broderick Crawford justly earned an Oscar for his performance as Willie Stark, whose ego and thirst for power grows to horrific proportions--and whose corruption gradually taints even the most honorable people around him. The supporting cast of John Ireland, Joanne Dru, Anne Seymour, and Walter Burke (to name but a few) is also quite good. But the real knockout here is actress Mercedes McCambridge as Willie Stark's hard-edged assistant and sometimes lover; it is an astonishing performance which, in spite of its supporting status, remains locked in mind long after the film ends, a role for which McCambridge won an Oscar as Best Supporting Actress.

The script doesn't really do full justice to Warren's novel, the film is a bit slow to start, and the story itself feels a bit dry in the telling--but the performances and numerous memorable scenes carry it through to tremendous effect. ALL THE KING'S MEN is so explicit in its portrait of how corrupt politicians manipulate the public that it should be required viewing for every one of voting age. Recommended.

The political rise and fall of Willie Stark
"All the King's Men" turns Robert Penn Warren's Pulitzer Prize winning novel into the role of a lifetime for Oscar winning Best Actor Broderick Crawford. The story is inspired, for lack of a better word, by the real life and times of Huey P. Long, the infamous Louisiana politician who seemed intent on adapting fascism to American politics. Director Robert Rossen also wrote the adaptation of the celebrated novel, and ultimately it is Rossen who deserves the credit for the film's power. There is an intensity to the film, beginning with the torchlight processions, campaign barbecues and banners for Stark that we see behind the opening credits. When Stark is finally revealed to us in a rapid-fire sequence showing him at a football stadium, speaking to a crowd at the fair, steamrolling legislators, posing for photographs with his family, there is a vitality that presents the political figure of Stark as an utterly American political figure. The only problem with this film, at least for me, is that the transformation of Willie Stark from the hick lawyer with a sincere concern for the plight of the downtrodden into a drunken, egomaniacal dictator once he has tasted power. The change is too sudden, just like the assassin's bullet that cuts Stark down at the end, so that instead of becoming a tragic figure (a good man gone wrong), we are left wondering who is the real Stark and forced to conclude it is the original naive do-gooder that was the sham. However, once we jettison the character's roots, there is no arguing that this is not a compelling political narrative and the fact that the true story of Huey P. Long again proves that fact is stranger than fiction should not really enter into the equation.

Ordinary
The book is infinitely better. Robert Penn Warren wrote a deep and subtle story about the American dream, morals and desires of early 20th century America. The movie keeps the plot and thats about it. It's well acted but there isn't much here. Won the Oscar for best picture in a weak year.

Never again as good. Brodrick Crawford is another of that
select group of actors who peak early in their career. In his case it is 1949, he won an Oscar, & never again got close. Eventually Crawford moved to the small screen where we,of a certain age, remember him on "Highway Patrol". But his best was better than most. His character, in All the King's Men, is Willie Stark, an idealistic, honest, populist politician bucking the system. He is also ambitious & seeing his opportunity, seizes it. His greed, lust for power & ego run amok & turn him into the very thing he had fought against only worse. He corrodes everything & everybody he touches & comes to a fitting end a 'la Huey Long, the man on which the film & presumably the book were loosely based. Highly recommended for all who like this style of political noir or junkies.

What a disappointment.
What can I say -- I found this film to be so incredibly trite, so simple were its morals and weak its characterization. John Ireland is a lump at the center of the film, Mercedes McCambridge's character arc is severely underdeveloped. As for Willy, we never see his true motivations for an instant, and this is most maddening. I have read a small portion of Warren's book, and it so so vastly superior to the piece of Hollywood pap it's ridiculous. It's hard to imagine a book that is considered the greatest political novel in American history is represented by this connect-the-dots fare. ... Read more

Reviews (26)

Superb Epic of Ancient Rome and its decline
"The Fall Of The Roman Empire" is one of the very best of the 1960's lavish epics detailing various historical periods. Filled with eye popping historically accurate costumes, spellbinding sets (The Roman Forum was the largest set built up till that time) heavy doses of corruption and intrigue and believable performances combined with intelligent writing, this film has it all and indeed is a winner all the way.

The film makes a real attempt not to stray too far from historical fact and focuses on the beginnings of the fall of Rome after 150 years of dominating the known world. The story opens with the last troubled period of the reign of Marcus Aurelius the benevolent philosopher Emperor who spent most of his reign reluctantly fighting on the frontiers of the empire against invading barbarians, through to the succession of his son the corrupt and insane Emperor Commodus. Woven into the fictional dialogue and personal situations is a great deal of historical detail which is authentic and illustrates the research and care that went into the preparation of this production.

Movie making during the early 1960's was a time rich in many historical epics and what distinguishes "The Fall Of The Roman Empire" is its wonderful performances set against this sprawling historical canvas of the decay of the mighty power of Rome. First and foremost the late Alec Guinness shines in a superb performance as Marcus Aurelius. Being a student of Roman History I was amazed at how closely he actually is made to look like the emperor and his performance is one of the towering achievements of the film. He is at times a strong leader, a trifle world weary and concerned about his place in history. It is one of Guinness's finest performances. The main focus of the story is the love affair between Lucilla (Sophia Loren, never more beautiful than here) and the upright Livius (Stephen Boyd) and their continued conflict with the new Emperor Commodus (Christopher Plummer). While Lucilla is the heroine of the piece here in actual history she was a seasoned intriger who was executed by her brother Commodus two years into his reign for plotting his death. This historical inaccuracy aside all three are excellent in their roles, in particular Plummer who really steals the scenes he is in as the corrupt, power mad Emperor and is far and way the best performer so far to play Commodus (the more recent "Gladiator" included). He is everything one has come to expect from a Roman ruler, mad, vicious, lavish in appearances and manner. It really is an attention grabbing performance and paved the way for his very different but equally famous role of the following year in "The Sound Of Music". Seasoned performers like James Mason, Anthony Quayle and Omar Sharif (pre "Dr. Zhivago") round out the excellent cast.

"Roman Empire" benefits from some of the very best visuals lavished on a film at this time. First and foremost the recreation of the Roman Forum would have to go down as one of the truly great sets in motion picture history. Long before computers did all the work this set was actually built to life size and is amazingly accurate in its layout and design. The battle scenes that take place on the empire's frontier near modern day Vienna are exciting and well staged and are some of the best of their kind ever undertaken. The film benefits from all the extensive location shooting that took place including the battle scenes supposedly taking place in Persia that were actually shot in Spain. Ably directed by Anthony Mann who had a similiar epic in the classic "El Cid" he keeps the action moving along at a good pace and allows the romantic subplot to weave into the story at appropiate times. Combined with Dimitri Tiomkin's sublime musical score it is a beautiful production to sit through and even its long running time (Almost 3hours) doesn't detract from it.

For lovers of Hollywood epic productions and students of Roman history "The Fall Of The Roman Empire" is an excellent piece of entertainment from back in the grand old days of film making when no expense was considered too much to achieve a truly great effect on screen. Certainly this film is one of the best of its kind and I highly recommend it as an exciting and colourful insight into the grandeur that was Rome.

Fall of the Roman Empire (1964)
Fans of the blockbuster hit GLADIATOR will find this film somewhat familiar as it deals with the same factual characters and events. Sophia Loren and Stephen Boyd provide attractive window-dressing as the starcrossed lovers, but the real stars are Alec Guiness, James Mason and especially Christopher Plummer whose portrayal of the evil emperor Commodous rivals the Oscar caliber work of Joaquin Phoenix in the more recent epic. Lush 70mm photography on massive sets should make this an exceptional title to add to your classics library on DVD.

The Biggest Film Set in Film History-Ever (until recently).
Re Aleaton3's comments on this film not being historically accurate and the size of the sets used. The Roman Forum set built for this film at Las Matas in Spain (just outside Madrid) was THE BIGGEST OUTDOORS or EXTERIOR FILM SET (as opposed to an INDOORS or INTERIOR FILM SET) in FILM HISTORY up until 2003 when TROY apparently claimed the title (TROY having been filmed in 2003). Refer to every edition of the Guinness Book of Records from 1965 up to 2003 to verify this. It was unique in that it was 3 dimensional (i.e. the buildings WERE 4 SIDED and HAD ROOFS-THERE WERE NO FRONTAL FACADES WITH JUST SOME SCAFFOLDING AT THE BACK AS IN NORMAL SETS. I DON'T THINK THE BUILDINGS HAD ANY INTERIORS. THE SET WAS ALSO VERY ACCURATE ARCHITECTURALLY) and THIS SET WAS DEMOLISHED SOON AFTER FILMING. I know this for sure because I visited this exact location in 1977 and was advised of this (apparently producer SAMUEL BRONSTON didn't want the magnificence of his set being used for any lesser, cheaper productions although the few remaing parts of the set that had not already been demolished were used soon after in "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum"-see the absolute last title card at the end of that particular film). Incidentally this exact same site ONE YEAR EARLIER had been the location for THE CITY OF PEKING in the same producer's "55 DAYS AT PEKING". That particular set was also demolished soon after filming. As for the historical inaccuracies it is true that emporor MARCUS AURELIUS never OFFICIALLY nominated anyone other than his son COMMODUS as his heir and that COMMODUS DID NOT DIE IN A DUEL TO THE DEATH BUT WAS STRANGLED BY A WRESTLER AFTER BEING DRUGGED. Also THE AUCTIONING-OFF of THE ROMAN EMPIRE at the end of this film DID NOT TAKE PLACE IMMEDIATELY AFTER COMMODUS DIED BUT SEVERAL MONTHS LATER! However the scriptwriters used the "'INVENT AND DESTROY" method of storytelling so beloved to Hollywood. In this theory history cannot absolutely say that there was no character such as LIVIUS (STEPHEN BOYD) or MAXIMUS (RUSSELL CROWE), that emperor MARCUS AURELIUS (ALEC GUINNESS or RICHARD HARRIS) did not secretly annoint him as his heir or that he was not intimately involved with LUCILLA (SOPHIA LOREN or CONNIE NIELSEN)) the daughter of MARCUS AURELIUS (unbeknownst to the scholars and historians of that time). Having INVENTED A PLAUSIBLE THEORY IT MUST BE DESTROYED BY THE FILM''S END SO THAT HISTORY REMAINS REALTIVELY UNDISTURBED. So LIVIUS (this film) or MAXIMUS (GLADIATOR) never actually disturbs history by becoming caesar. Unfortunately either LIVIUS or MAXIMUS killing COMMODUS (CHRISTOPHER PLUMMER or JOAQUIN PHOENIX) in a duel to the death in the Roman Forum or the Colisseum DOES CONTRADICT HISTORY DIRECTLY and EXCEEDS THE LIMITS of the "INVENT AND DESTROY" THEORY. But THIS SEQUENCE IN EACH FILM DOES MAKE GREAT CINEMA and LOOKS VERY SPECTACULAR which is what these types of films are all about.. So for the sake of ENTERTAINING AND OVERWHELMING A MASS AUDIENCE (rather than an audience of historians only ) with VERY SPECTACULAR, ENTERTAINING and HIGHLY DRAMATIC STORIES I think the OCCASIONAL LAPSE in ABSOLUTE HISTORICAL ACCURACY and the OCCASIONAL INTERWEAVING of FICTIONAL CHARACTERS INTO HISTORY is ACCEPTABLE. Most people would not have any idea about ancient roman history had they not seen this film, GLADIATOR or indeed BEN HUR (history contains no refernce whatsoever to anyone called JUDAH BEN HUR either). An exactly historically accurate movie would probably be very boring and interesting only to history professors. The important thing here is that the spriit and atmosphere of the historical period is captured and conveyed to the audience and that the story itself is interesting enough to a mass audience in the first place so as to justify the enormous expenses involved (these productions being so costly). And on these criteria both The FALL of the ROMAN EMPIRE and GLADIATOR (and indeed BEN HUR) more than succeed. If the same extremely high quality of these productions (story-wise) can be maintained then more productions of this sort will be made (given the excellence of MOST computer-generated special effects nowadays the technical excellence of these previous productions should be equalled if not surpassed).

History vs Hollywood
The screenwriter of "Gladiator" claims not to have seen "The Fall of the Roman Empire" before writing the Ridley Scott film. That's odd since both films are bookended exactly the same way. Both open with Emperor Marcus Aurelius deciding that his son Commodus should not be emperor (a decision that leads to his murder). Both end with the fight between Commodus and the army commander within the shields of the Pretorian Guards. As a matter of fact, neither of these events are historically accurate.

Marcus Aurelius (according the Edward Gibbon and other historians) dealt the Empire a long-term blow when he broke with tradition by choosing his only surviving son, Commodus, to be his successor, rather than following the tradition of chosing the best man for the job and officially adopting him. To the consternation of his legions, Aurelius never chose a military commander over his own son. When you decide to abandon actual history at the very beginning of your story, the rest falls apart.

Secondly, Commodus was murdered by his concubine (who drugged his wine) and a wrestler (who strangled him) in his palace. In fact, it took a few days for everyone in Rome to come to finally believe that he was actually dead. HE WAS NOT KILLED in a single-handed combat with the commander of the army (either Stephen Boyd or Russell Crowe).

Third, there is no historical evidence that a group of barbarians were burned alive in the Roman forum, as this 1964 film depects. The screenwriter seems to have simply lost his grip on any sort of reality and went totally "Hollywood."

Samuel Bronson (the producer) spared no expence to actually build an exact replica of the Roman Forum (rather than do it digitally as in "Gladiator"), so the scenes shot on this set are truly spectacular. The set (built in Spain) was said to have stood intact for some years, even after Samuel Bronson Productions went bacnkrupt (over this very film). I have no idea if it's still standing.

Christopher Plummer is too old to play the actual Commodus, who was only a teenager when he ascended the throne. However, the script actually does justice to the spirit of the historical character of Commodus, and Plummer brings the man to vibrant life. Both Stephen Boyd (as the army commander) and Loren (as Commodus' sister) seem wooden and fail to establish any on- screen chemestry to their love-stared characters, although Loren's legendary beauty is well worth the price of admission.

Alec Guiness, James Mason, Anthony Quayle and Mel Ferrer all do an excellent job with their roles, although Omar Sharif has little to do since his scripted character is only one-dimensional.

Because of its over-all production values, and an appropriate and moving musical score, this becomes a satisfying, eye-popping, "they don't make them like this anymore" epic. It must be seen in the Widescreen format to do it justice.

Widescreen fans please note...
...you can obtain a fairly high quality widescreen DVD edition of this film from Amazon France's marketplace sellers. You can choose to watch in English, the only drawback being that the accompanying French subtitles can't be erased. However, when you see the price, even with postage, you won't want to complain! ... Read more

Reviews (11)

MITCHUM IS MARLOWE
Director Richard Rush presented us a valentine with this incredible film, the third version made from the the 1940 Raymond Chandler novel. At least seven actors have portrayed Philip Marlowe. Robert Mitchum, played the part twice. The first time, in this film, he was nothing short of brilliant; just world-weary, battered, meloncholy, and tough enough to spark this tale into a full flame. His voice-over narrative hit perfect pitch; all gravel, too many smokes, and cheap booze. Mitchum, himself the veteran of several Noir classics, played the gumshoe as comfortable as one's favorite overcoat; a perfect fit. He shuffled lazy-lidded yet irascible and alert, as ready for a sap behind the ear, as he was to be the recipient of the sexual energy radiated off of Charlotte Rampling as Helen, the femme. She, likewise, postured perfectly in the Noir 1940's clothes and hairstyles. John Alonzo, fresh from shooting CHINATOWN, presented us with an LA bathed in just the right mix of golden light and shadow. Jerry Goldsmith delivered another spectacular score, overlapping jazz, blues, and swing, underscoring the action and dialogue masterfully. John Ireland, also a veteran of classic Noir, Anthony Zerbe, and Harry Dean Stanton gave tremendous support with their roles. There was even a couple of glimpses of Sly Stallone ( pre-ROCKY ) as a viscious punk. Some of the critics felt that this lush color film had to try too hard for that Noir feel. I disagree. This movie is a modern Noir classic, even in living color.

Movie Transcends the Material
The photography is perfect, the score is magnificent. Robert Mitchum was made to play a middle aged Philip Marlowe, and his voice over has all the weariness and angst the most die hard noir fan could ask for. The mid-30's sets are impeccable. So what is there to complain about? I think the culprit is Raymond Chandler.

One of the most quotable of the hard-boiled writers, his writing sang but his plots were so convoluted, the reader needs a scorecard to keep track of the story. Marlowe is hired by ex-con Moose Malloy to find his elusive love Velma. Until the bloody finale, that was the last time I was clear about the action.

I commend all the actors for delivering fine performances, particularly Sylvia Myles who played the hopeless alcoholic, Mrs. Florian. She was piercingly pathetic as a nice girl who couldn't quite believe she was a middle-aged drunk. Robert Mitchum allowed merciless lighting that occasionally made him look like a guy who has had one too many face-lifts.

This film version of "Farewell My Lovely" is probably as good as it gets. I recommend "Out of the Past" for Mitchum and noir fans.
-sweetmolly-Amazon Reviewer

The sets look really cheap.
'Farewell, My Lovely' is a likable detective film, but the sets look really cheap and fake. I didn't get the feeling I was back in Los Angeles in the 1930s; I felt like I was looking at a set that was trying to look like Los Angeles in the 30s. Robert Mitchum is alright, but he is a little too old.

"New" Old Time Detective Thriller
To many of the reviews I've read rave on about Ms. Rampling, and while she is good in her small role, this is a Robert Mitchum Movie, and he is very good in it.....

Actually, if it was B&W you'd look at it like an old Bogie film like "The Big Sleep",or any one of a dozen classic detective flix.....

Anyway, I happen to get my hands on one of the rare DVD's and it was in great shape. But it's the story...this is one of those films you get to watch 5 times before you actually follow everything that's going on......

I truly enjoyed it, and you will too.

the spirit is dead on
purists might debate whether the deviancies from the novel are to positive or detrimental effect, but Mitchum captures Marlowe in a casual and powerful way. the entire Chandler spirit is kept faithfully intact, creatively filled out by excellent lighting & cinemetography, keeping the viewer involved in the neo-noir attitude as if the film was actually made in 1941.

the anne riordan character is replaced by a newspaper hawker who is a little out of place and unexplained, but perhaps charlotte rampling was all the femme fatale they could afford so...better just hire some young kid to float the story.

jack o'halloran is truly believable as moose malloy, and sylvester stallone performs some of his finest work. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The second and last of Anthony Mann's historical epics is a smart, handsome spectacle of the decadence, corruption, and intrigue that tears apart the greatest empire the world has seen. The sprawling story spreads itself thin over a number of characters and stories. At the center are handsome but stiff Stephen Boyd as Livius, the loyal soldier and symbolic son of the aging emperor (Alec Guinness), and Christopher Plummer as Commodus, the corrupt heir to the throne--boyhood friends turned enemies when the latter accedes to the throne and sells out the values of his father for greed and hedonistic pleasures. The three-hour running time is filled out with the tales of Sophia Loren (as the beautiful Lucilla in love with Livius but coveted by greedy Commodus) and a gallery of heroes and villains that includes James Mason, Mel Ferrer, Anthony Quayle, John Ireland, Omar Sharif, and Eric Porter. The film is highlighted with spectacular scenes (a grandiose funeral fit for an emperor, brutal battles in the provinces as the barbarians threaten the empire, and a climactic duel to decide the destiny of Rome), which Mann weaves into the shadowy intrigue of the halls of power. Like his previous epic El Cid, The Fall of the Roman Empire remains one of the best of the 1960s epics: well written (and largely historically accurate) with strong performances and a consistently elegant style, but it lacks a central core and the magnetic hero of its superior predecessor. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (26)

Superb Epic of Ancient Rome and its decline
"The Fall Of The Roman Empire" is one of the very best of the 1960's lavish epics detailing various historical periods. Filled with eye popping historically accurate costumes, spellbinding sets (The Roman Forum was the largest set built up till that time) heavy doses of corruption and intrigue and believable performances combined with intelligent writing, this film has it all and indeed is a winner all the way.

The film makes a real attempt not to stray too far from historical fact and focuses on the beginnings of the fall of Rome after 150 years of dominating the known world. The story opens with the last troubled period of the reign of Marcus Aurelius the benevolent philosopher Emperor who spent most of his reign reluctantly fighting on the frontiers of the empire against invading barbarians, through to the succession of his son the corrupt and insane Emperor Commodus. Woven into the fictional dialogue and personal situations is a great deal of historical detail which is authentic and illustrates the research and care that went into the preparation of this production.

Movie making during the early 1960's was a time rich in many historical epics and what distinguishes "The Fall Of The Roman Empire" is its wonderful performances set against this sprawling historical canvas of the decay of the mighty power of Rome. First and foremost the late Alec Guinness shines in a superb performance as Marcus Aurelius. Being a student of Roman History I was amazed at how closely he actually is made to look like the emperor and his performance is one of the towering achievements of the film. He is at times a strong leader, a trifle world weary and concerned about his place in history. It is one of Guinness's finest performances. The main focus of the story is the love affair between Lucilla (Sophia Loren, never more beautiful than here) and the upright Livius (Stephen Boyd) and their continued conflict with the new Emperor Commodus (Christopher Plummer). While Lucilla is the heroine of the piece here in actual history she was a seasoned intriger who was executed by her brother Commodus two years into his reign for plotting his death. This historical inaccuracy aside all three are excellent in their roles, in particular Plummer who really steals the scenes he is in as the corrupt, power mad Emperor and is far and way the best performer so far to play Commodus (the more recent "Gladiator" included). He is everything one has come to expect from a Roman ruler, mad, vicious, lavish in appearances and manner. It really is an attention grabbing performance and paved the way for his very different but equally famous role of the following year in "The Sound Of Music". Seasoned performers like James Mason, Anthony Quayle and Omar Sharif (pre "Dr. Zhivago") round out the excellent cast.

"Roman Empire" benefits from some of the very best visuals lavished on a film at this time. First and foremost the recreation of the Roman Forum would have to go down as one of the truly great sets in motion picture history. Long before computers did all the work this set was actually built to life size and is amazingly accurate in its layout and design. The battle scenes that take place on the empire's frontier near modern day Vienna are exciting and well staged and are some of the best of their kind ever undertaken. The film benefits from all the extensive location shooting that took place including the battle scenes supposedly taking place in Persia that were actually shot in Spain. Ably directed by Anthony Mann who had a similiar epic in the classic "El Cid" he keeps the action moving along at a good pace and allows the romantic subplot to weave into the story at appropiate times. Combined with Dimitri Tiomkin's sublime musical score it is a beautiful production to sit through and even its long running time (Almost 3hours) doesn't detract from it.

For lovers of Hollywood epic productions and students of Roman history "The Fall Of The Roman Empire" is an excellent piece of entertainment from back in the grand old days of film making when no expense was considered too much to achieve a truly great effect on screen. Certainly this film is one of the best of its kind and I highly recommend it as an exciting and colourful insight into the grandeur that was Rome.

Fall of the Roman Empire (1964)
Fans of the blockbuster hit GLADIATOR will find this film somewhat familiar as it deals with the same factual characters and events. Sophia Loren and Stephen Boyd provide attractive window-dressing as the starcrossed lovers, but the real stars are Alec Guiness, James Mason and especially Christopher Plummer whose portrayal of the evil emperor Commodous rivals the Oscar caliber work of Joaquin Phoenix in the more recent epic. Lush 70mm photography on massive sets should make this an exceptional title to add to your classics library on DVD.

The Biggest Film Set in Film History-Ever (until recently).
Re Aleaton3's comments on this film not being historically accurate and the size of the sets used. The Roman Forum set built for this film at Las Matas in Spain (just outside Madrid) was THE BIGGEST OUTDOORS or EXTERIOR FILM SET (as opposed to an INDOORS or INTERIOR FILM SET) in FILM HISTORY up until 2003 when TROY apparently claimed the title (TROY having been filmed in 2003). Refer to every edition of the Guinness Book of Records from 1965 up to 2003 to verify this. It was unique in that it was 3 dimensional (i.e. the buildings WERE 4 SIDED and HAD ROOFS-THERE WERE NO FRONTAL FACADES WITH JUST SOME SCAFFOLDING AT THE BACK AS IN NORMAL SETS. I DON'T THINK THE BUILDINGS HAD ANY INTERIORS. THE SET WAS ALSO VERY ACCURATE ARCHITECTURALLY) and THIS SET WAS DEMOLISHED SOON AFTER FILMING. I know this for sure because I visited this exact location in 1977 and was advised of this (apparently producer SAMUEL BRONSTON didn't want the magnificence of his set being used for any lesser, cheaper productions although the few remaing parts of the set that had not already been demolished were used soon after in "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum"-see the absolute last title card at the end of that particular film). Incidentally this exact same site ONE YEAR EARLIER had been the location for THE CITY OF PEKING in the same producer's "55 DAYS AT PEKING". That particular set was also demolished soon after filming. As for the historical inaccuracies it is true that emporor MARCUS AURELIUS never OFFICIALLY nominated anyone other than his son COMMODUS as his heir and that COMMODUS DID NOT DIE IN A DUEL TO THE DEATH BUT WAS STRANGLED BY A WRESTLER AFTER BEING DRUGGED. Also THE AUCTIONING-OFF of THE ROMAN EMPIRE at the end of this film DID NOT TAKE PLACE IMMEDIATELY AFTER COMMODUS DIED BUT SEVERAL MONTHS LATER! However the scriptwriters used the "'INVENT AND DESTROY" method of storytelling so beloved to Hollywood. In this theory history cannot absolutely say that there was no character such as LIVIUS (STEPHEN BOYD) or MAXIMUS (RUSSELL CROWE), that emperor MARCUS AURELIUS (ALEC GUINNESS or RICHARD HARRIS) did not secretly annoint him as his heir or that he was not intimately involved with LUCILLA (SOPHIA LOREN or CONNIE NIELSEN)) the daughter of MARCUS AURELIUS (unbeknownst to the scholars and historians of that time). Having INVENTED A PLAUSIBLE THEORY IT MUST BE DESTROYED BY THE FILM''S END SO THAT HISTORY REMAINS REALTIVELY UNDISTURBED. So LIVIUS (this film) or MAXIMUS (GLADIATOR) never actually disturbs history by becoming caesar. Unfortunately either LIVIUS or MAXIMUS killing COMMODUS (CHRISTOPHER PLUMMER or JOAQUIN PHOENIX) in a duel to the death in the Roman Forum or the Colisseum DOES CONTRADICT HISTORY DIRECTLY and EXCEEDS THE LIMITS of the "INVENT AND DESTROY" THEORY. But THIS SEQUENCE IN EACH FILM DOES MAKE GREAT CINEMA and LOOKS VERY SPECTACULAR which is what these types of films are all about.. So for the sake of ENTERTAINING AND OVERWHELMING A MASS AUDIENCE (rather than an audience of historians only ) with VERY SPECTACULAR, ENTERTAINING and HIGHLY DRAMATIC STORIES I think the OCCASIONAL LAPSE in ABSOLUTE HISTORICAL ACCURACY and the OCCASIONAL INTERWEAVING of FICTIONAL CHARACTERS INTO HISTORY is ACCEPTABLE. Most people would not have any idea about ancient roman history had they not seen this film, GLADIATOR or indeed BEN HUR (history contains no refernce whatsoever to anyone called JUDAH BEN HUR either). An exactly historically accurate movie would probably be very boring and interesting only to history professors. The important thing here is that the spriit and atmosphere of the historical period is captured and conveyed to the audience and that the story itself is interesting enough to a mass audience in the first place so as to justify the enormous expenses involved (these productions being so costly). And on these criteria both The FALL of the ROMAN EMPIRE and GLADIATOR (and indeed BEN HUR) more than succeed. If the same extremely high quality of these productions (story-wise) can be maintained then more productions of this sort will be made (given the excellence of MOST computer-generated special effects nowadays the technical excellence of these previous productions should be equalled if not surpassed).

History vs Hollywood
The screenwriter of "Gladiator" claims not to have seen "The Fall of the Roman Empire" before writing the Ridley Scott film. That's odd since both films are bookended exactly the same way. Both open with Emperor Marcus Aurelius deciding that his son Commodus should not be emperor (a decision that leads to his murder). Both end with the fight between Commodus and the army commander within the shields of the Pretorian Guards. As a matter of fact, neither of these events are historically accurate.

Marcus Aurelius (according the Edward Gibbon and other historians) dealt the Empire a long-term blow when he broke with tradition by choosing his only surviving son, Commodus, to be his successor, rather than following the tradition of chosing the best man for the job and officially adopting him. To the consternation of his legions, Aurelius never chose a military commander over his own son. When you decide to abandon actual history at the very beginning of your story, the rest falls apart.

Secondly, Commodus was murdered by his concubine (who drugged his wine) and a wrestler (who strangled him) in his palace. In fact, it took a few days for everyone in Rome to come to finally believe that he was actually dead. HE WAS NOT KILLED in a single-handed combat with the commander of the army (either Stephen Boyd or Russell Crowe).

Third, there is no historical evidence that a group of barbarians were burned alive in the Roman forum, as this 1964 film depects. The screenwriter seems to have simply lost his grip on any sort of reality and went totally "Hollywood."

Samuel Bronson (the producer) spared no expence to actually build an exact replica of the Roman Forum (rather than do it digitally as in "Gladiator"), so the scenes shot on this set are truly spectacular. The set (built in Spain) was said to have stood intact for some years, even after Samuel Bronson Productions went bacnkrupt (over this very film). I have no idea if it's still standing.

Christopher Plummer is too old to play the actual Commodus, who was only a teenager when he ascended the throne. However, the script actually does justice to the spirit of the historical character of Commodus, and Plummer brings the man to vibrant life. Both Stephen Boyd (as the army commander) and Loren (as Commodus' sister) seem wooden and fail to establish any on- screen chemestry to their love-stared characters, although Loren's legendary beauty is well worth the price of admission.

Alec Guiness, James Mason, Anthony Quayle and Mel Ferrer all do an excellent job with their roles, although Omar Sharif has little to do since his scripted character is only one-dimensional.

Because of its over-all production values, and an appropriate and moving musical score, this becomes a satisfying, eye-popping, "they don't make them like this anymore" epic. It must be seen in the Widescreen format to do it justice.

Widescreen fans please note...
...you can obtain a fairly high quality widescreen DVD edition of this film from Amazon France's marketplace sellers. You can choose to watch in English, the only drawback being that the accompanying French subtitles can't be erased. However, when you see the price, even with postage, you won't want to complain! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Novelist Leon Uris wrote the script for this Western directed by John Sturges (The Magnificent Seven) and based on the life and times of Wyatt Earp (Burt Lancaster) and his sickly companion, Doc Holliday (Kirk Douglas). The action inevitably leads to the legendary battle between the two heroes and the villainous Clanton gang, but the film is also very much about the conflicts each man faces with women, with one another, and with their own destinies. Lancaster is terrific as the downbeat Earp, and Douglas has one of his best roles as the consumptive Holliday. The thoughtfulness of the tale is matched by Sturges's captivating way with the dramatic duel. All in all, the film appeals both as a solid action piece and as a fascinating, two-character study. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (18)

A great Western
Despite its title, this movie does not center around the gunfight at the OK corral. Instead, this is a sort of life of Wyatt Earp, and includes much information about his life in Dodge City as well as Tombstone. One of the most interesting aspects of the film is Earp's developing relationship with Doc Holladay, which is perhaps never treated so well as in this movie.

Burt Lancaster, who plays Wyatt Earp, does an exceptional job. And Kirk Douglas, as always, is also very good. Still, I just can't picture these men well dressed, impeccably groomed, and always wearing light colors. I give this movie four stars for the simple reason that I can never think of Doc Holladay again without picturing Val Kilmer. For me at least, the definitive movie about Wyatt and Doc will continue to be the recently made "Tombstone." I enjoy this movie immensely, but it just doesn't have the raw power that the later film does.

"Boot Hill...Boot Hill...So cold...so still"
One of the best retellings of the historical gunfight to ever make
it to the silver screen. Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas are in top
form as the legendary gunmen Wyatt Earp and Doc Holiday.Both on the
opposite sides of law by design the two men develop respectful but
cautious friendship in a time where a man's life depended on how he
was with a gun.

This is by no means the "Tombstone" version of the '90's with it's
with it's glorified hightech shooting angles nor the over sensitive
"My darling Clementine"(Both Classics in their own respect) This is
however a spirited techicolor wonder of a film best noted for its
splended pace, great cinematography and a grand cast of familiar
faces including the always lovely Rhonda Fleming and Jo Van Fleet
along with faithful bad guys Lee Van Cleef, Jack Elam and a young
Dennis Hopper. Also in the cast Forest De Kelly,Kenneth Tobey and
John Ireland. And the best sung theme song since "Do not for sake
me" from High Noon and "El Dorado" from El Dorado.

The DVD version is superior in sight with it's respected scope of
2.35:1 Enhanced and sound is what you expect for mono. I was way
disappointed with no trailer added. Shame on you Paramount!

Better than OK
Much like its predecessor "My Darling Clementine", this film uses the names of real people for its characters - the Earps, Clantons, Doc Holliday - but has virtually nothing to do with historial reality. It's a marvelous film nonetheless and entirely different in its feel and approach from "Clementine." "Gunfight" focuses on the friendship between occasional marshall Wyatt Earp and occasional gunman John Holliday (Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas), and if anything underplays the intense bond between the two men in real life. Screenwriter Leon Uris telescopes several years of events into a few months to fit the movie, and director John Sturges was never better at the pacing and staging of his story. For my money this is Kirk Douglas' greatest performance; the combination of menace and degraded dignity he gives the TB-ridden Holliday is something to see. Just as great as the performances and production work is Dimitri Tiomkin's score. It's so powerful it seems almost like another character; the same effect he achieved in "Red River" for Howard Hawks.

A Classic
I always loved the pairing of Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas because of their impeccable work together.

While lacking in the grandeur of recent remakes of the tale, the movie certainly does ably tell the story leading up to the titled gunfight--as well as the friendship between Earp and Holliday. Unlike Tombstone, Wyatt's brothers have a relatively peripheral role in the movie. Note: Morgan Earp is played by DeForrest Kelley, who went on to play Dr. Leonard McCoy in TV's Star Trek.

Lancaster is excellent in his portrayal of the straight-as-an-arrow Wyatt, and Douglass is his equal as the smug Doc Holliday. I love Douglas's line (when he volunteers to be Wyatt's deputy to track down some bank robbers): "Well, I am handy with a gun, but those best able to attest to my skill are no longer around to do so."

The movie deserves a place in any western fan's DVD collection.

A showcase for Lancaster and Douglas
Basically, a vehicle to showcase the talents of Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas, but an appropriate one. Though there are many characters, this is hardly an ensemble cast, with Burt and Kirk prominent in virtually every foot of film. Rhonda Fleming provides a bit of window dressing in a wonderful but brief role as Wyatt's love interest.

More of a classic western than "My Darling Clementine", an earlier movie about Wyatt and Doc at the OK Corral, but this version is more episodic in nature, though equally fictional. Don't look for nuance in the characters. The bad guys are bad, the good guys good but not flawless.

Gunfights, gambling, galloping horses, bar room ladies... If you love westerns, you'll love this one. ... Read more

Reviews (41)

THE cattle-drive movie
Having weighed-in on _The Culpepper Cattle Company_, I have to genuflect at the altar of THE cattle-drive movie-- _Red River_.

This film pre-dates _The Searchers_ by about eight years. The lead character, Tom Dunson, is a sort of prototype for Ethan Edwards. This is John Wayne without sentiment or schmaltz, until the final scene which differs from the story on which the film is based, and which jars a bit.

That being said, _Red River_ still stands as the definitive cattle-drive movie. Wayne/Dunson builds an empire but then must head the herd north on a drive that simply _has_ to get through-- despite conflicts with nature, rustlers, Indians, and between Dunson and his men, including his adopted son, Matthew Garth.

Wayne is cast against his own stereotype as Dunson and comes across as a hard and unlikeable character. Walter Brennan as his sidekick, Groot, nearly steals the show just as he did (again) in Hawk's _Rio Bravo_. Montgomery Clift does a passable job as Matthew Garth, but is outclassed by John Ireland as Cherry Valance, the gunfighter turned cowhand.

The rest of the cast is outstanding. You need only look at the cast list to appreciate the fine ensemble company that Howard Hawks put together for this movie. This is also on of Dimitri Tiomkin's finest musical scores.

Finally, I agree with Maltin on this point: beware edited and abridged copies of this film. Anything less than a 133 minute running time should not be bothered with.

"Take `em to Missouri, Matt!"

A Flawed Western
For an hour and 20 minutes or so, Red River is a great western (even with such embarrassing moments such as Wayne killing the Indian and discovering the bracelet he had given his girl, the stuttering cowboy who is killed in the stampede, etc.). It boasts a stunning Dimitri Tiomkin score, terrific B&W photography by Russell Harlan, a wonderful performance from Montgomery Clift, a powerful (if typically one-note) performance from John Wayne ... and then Joanne Dru enters the story and it basically falls apart from this point on. She is so completely incompetent that she manages to almost sink the film! Her dialogue is, admittedly, terrible (Hawks bragged that he wrote most of it!), but her line readings are so terrible that it just makes the awkward dialogue even more awkward. The ending is absurd, a complete build-up to a deadly collision and it ends up a rather weak fist-fight. Perhaps, had Wayne's performance included emotional shadings, the ending might have worked, but since he is so one-note hard and uncompromising throughout, not for one moment do I believe the final sequence. In the original Borden Chase novel, the character dies at the end. It should have happened here, also (same major flaw in Wayne's The Searchers, too). On top of which, the John Ireland character is built up as a major challenge to Montgomery Clift, but this is simply dropped halfway through. Indeed, the Ireland character is allowed to fizzle out. The auteur theory is what keeps critics from analysing this film from a more objective viewpoint. But it is very watchable and its strengths certainly outnumber its weaknesses.

Black and white sensation!
John Wayne's Red River is one of the most exciting and classical westerns of our century. So, if somebody hates black and white, screw them, it's their problem. Don't even review the product, genius! Alongside The Searchers, this is one of the Duke's landmark films. Also, John Wayne was our ultimate hero, prevailing in every gunfight and every story. His acting AND his strength certainly prevail here. Also filled with action packed gunfights and suspenseful scenes. The ending is fine.
The DVD transfer is nothing special, and somewhat grainy at times. MGM DVDS are not known to be the best DVD makers on the market. To shape up this classic western, expect a Criterion Collection re release and enjoy!

An American Treasure
In the rich history of American film, this piece of work by Howard Hawks makes the short list. It has been used as a template for any filmmaker wishing to make a Western, and further, it is one of those rare pieces of culture by which a society defines itself. If you needed to demonstrate to a foreigner what the American character is all about, you could show them this movie.

As a Western, it certainly has it all: cowboys killing Indians, men leaving women for the call of the trail, gunfights, stampedes, love, betrayal, and finally redemption. It is also gorgeously filmed, beautifully written, and well acted throughout. And finally, it stars John Wayne, an actor that towers over today's crop of male actors like an oak over weeping willows.

This film also stars Montgomery Clift as the surrogate son that eventually challenges Wayne for control of the drive. In terms of acting styles, Clift and Wayne were about as different as two actors could be: Wayne seemed always to act on instinct and charisma, while Clift was one of the young Turks through the 40's and 50's, a proponent of a new style of acting - the method developed by Lee Strasburg (one can easily imagine Wayne giving his crooked sarcastic grin over the very idea of a "school" where young people learn acting). Yet, casting these two together works. By all reports, the two hated each other at the beginning of the production, but had developed an actor's respect for one another by the end of filming. Wayne, after watching Clift in one of his scenes, was quoted as saying something like "damn, that little queer sure can act."

John Wayne, for his part, goes toe-to-toe with the new school of internal acting and more than holds his own. His portrayal of a powerful, unbending man who slowly descends into bitterness and hate is a real treat to watch. His performance was, to use a phrase Wayne would have hated, multi-layered and very, very skillful.

Other performances to watch: the ever-faithful Walter Brennan, one of the greatest character actors of all time, is perfect as Wayne's partner/friend. It is in watching Brennan's reaction to Wayne's increasing dementia that we see how far off track he's gone. John Ireland also is a standout as Cherry Valance, the pistoleer, who is full of casual grace and menace. As if all the above wasn't enough, the great Harry Carey is onboard briefly as Mr. Melville, radiating authority.

Every film lover should own this film and watch it at least once annually.

Every American should treasure it as a source of national pride.

One note: this is one film that simply demands a better DVD treatment. The picture and sound isn't bad, but it isn't widescreen, and there are absolutely no special features. C'mon, Criterion Collections, where are you? --Mykal

Mutiny on the plains
Howard Hawks' 1948 RED RIVER is an ambitious, sprawling, epic western. It's on a number of top-100 lists, and it belongs there.
The movie tells the story of cattle rancher Tom Dunson and the first drive along the fabled Chisholm Trail. It's based on Borden Chase's "The Chisholm Trail"
The movie hits the ground running. Within the first five minutes there's a romantic leave taking, an indian attack and a burning wagon train. The romantic parting of Dunson (John Wayne) and his intended is a key incident in the development of this bitter and hard-driven character. Dunson and Groot Nadine (Walter Brennan), who left the wagon train with Dunson, are joined by a survivor of the massacre, Matt Garth - who, fourteen years later, will become the quick-drawing Montgomery Clift. The shocked boy is leading a cow, Dunson and Groot have a surviving bull, and with this bovine first couple they make for the open land south of the Red River.
Fast forward 14 years and Dunson has 10,000 head of cattle and a depressed, post-Civil War southern economy that can't afford to buy them. They must drive them to Missouri and sell them to the more prosperous northerners or face ruin. During that drive Dunson descends to near insanity and Matt ascends as a moderating influence and, apparently, becomes the only one who can successfully lead the men and cattle to market. Without giving too much away, something happens on the drive that will drastically change Dunson's and Matt's relationship and jeopardize both of their lives.
It's pretty heavy stuff, and John Wayne is rock solid great as the troubled Dunson. This is one of the greatest roles in the career of a sometimes under-rated actor. Montgomery Clift is fine in his screen debut.
Walter Brennan's Groot is a marvel. That guy was such a good actor. Like all good sidekicks, and Brennan was the best, Groot is part court jester and part moral barometer. It helps that he plays most of the movie without his upper teeth in, too. Brennan was always better when his mouth was half empty.
There are some images that will stick with you for a while. Thousands of cattle crossing the Red River, a midnight stampede with a couple of hair-raising rescues. And there's a neat little bit with an angry John Wayne striding down a long street crowded with cattle - Wayne doesn't break stride, of course, and the cattle move out of his way like a longhorn Red Sea parting for an angry Moses.
For the most part the script is well written, and there's enough amusing scenes (usually including Brennan) to keep the whole thing from collapsing under it's own weight.
For instance, when Dunson and Matt are deciding who's to go along on the drive, Dunson excludes Groot (bum leg.) Groot mutters to himself like a live-action Popeye while Dunson and Matt continue their conversation. A distracted and exasperated Dunson finally says:
Dunson: What are you saying? I can't understand you. Where's your store teeth Matt bought you?
Groot: They're in my pocket.
Dunson: Well, why don't you use them?
Groot: 'Cause they whistle. I use them for eating.

Then there's the Joanne Dru character, Tess Millay. It doesn't help that her first appearance occurs in the third scene. One hour and forty-one minutes into the 2:20 movie, by my clock. My guess is the scriptwriters didn't want to clutter up the action with a romantic subplot until absolutely necessary. Fair enough, but it means that Millay's and Matt's romance has to be telescoped severely. Basically they meet, fall in love, and part in a day. It stretches an audience some. Worse, Dru as an actress simply wasn't right for the part.
One of her character traits, as written, is to talk and keep on talking when something worries or frightens her. She does this to negligible effect. It's a role that seemed to have been custom written for Jean Arthur, who always could blabber on to good effect, who could always drop her voice down to a husky purr or have it emit an abrupt squeak for maximum dramatic effect. Unfortunately Arthur was nearly fifty when this movie was made, so I guess casting her as a romantic lead opposite the young Clift would have, uh, added an strange and unwelcome dimension to the movie. Dru, in one of her earliest roles, just doesn't have the chops to carry off the role convincingly. All things considered, I think this piece of miscasting is more Hawks' fault that anyone elses. Anyway, I shaved a point off because of it.
I don't normally notice bad transfers, but there are a few dark night scenes in RED RIVER that look like someone lit a Fourth of July sparkler. And, less forgivable, my new factory-sealed-from-a-reputable-national-outlet retailer did NOT contain the advertised four page booklet. Finally, I've played the movie twice so far, and each time the start up menu screen doesn't appear until AFTER the movie is over. ... Read more

Reviews (26)

Director William Castle finally makes an actual thriller!
Once upon a time two teenage girls, Kit (Sarah Lane) and Libby (Andi Garrett), spent the evening making prank phone calls to random numbers. Then they called up Steve Marak (John Ireland) and told him "I saw what you did and I know who you are," but the two girls did not know that the man had just murdered his wife. Of course, the man wanted to find the two "witnesses" and kill them, but just to make things interesting, his neighbor Amy Nelson (played in predictable over-the-top fashion by Joan Crawford), really does know about the murder. However, she has other plans for her neighbor besides sending him to prison.

Actually, "I Saw What You Did" might be the best film ever directed by William Castle, king of the exploitation film ("House on Haunted Hill," "The Tingler"), even though it is atypical of his work. Of course Castle did set up "Shock Sections" for panicky audience members for this film, but the actual movie is a tense and entertaining thriller. Unfortunately the extras on this DVD are pretty sparse, although it does include Castle's promotional clip along with the theatrical trailer and a miniature reproduction of the poster.

The QUEEN of Camp!
Another clinker from the 1960's vault of Joan Crawford films. & of course, Joan being a true star really gives it her all in this truly bad low-budget film about 2 silly teenagers who make a prank call to the wrong guy (John Ireland).

Her brief appearance steals the show & as usual is a riot. The subplot involes Joan playing the desperate, manipulating, man-hungry middle aged next door neighbor who is obsessed w/ snagging John Ireland even after she finds out he's a killer! The scenes w/ her & John Ireland together where she can barely surpress her jealous rage over his dead ex-girlfriend had me chuckling to myself. Dressed in what looks like a cocktail dress & a mini-chandellier around her neck, she looks & sounds as if perhaps there really was alcohol in those drinks she was making.

The climax comes when she confronts one of the teen-aged girls grabbing her by the hair, calling her a "tramp" & ripping her to shreds screaming "GET OUTTA HERE!..." over & over again. I laughed my head off. The rest of the film has some suspenseful moments thanks to the menacing John Ireland, but the corny soundtrack music takes what little scariness this film had going for it away. At times it sounded like background music on an episode of "The Flintstones". I'm sure this may have been scary stuff for pre-teens in the 60's but today its just another hilariously campy Joan Crawford movie.

& i'm giving this film ***** simply because it completely fulfilled my need for camp--Joan Crawford style.

A Deliciously Over-The-Top Joan Crawford! A Good DVD, Too!
William Castle (the movie "gimmick-meister") brought to the screen in July of 1965 a film entitled "I Saw What You Did", starring an aging Joan Crawford (who was 61). This was one of Joan's last pictures, and she proves here she still had what it takes (albeit, in this film, in a somewhat humorous and over-the-top fashion).

The premise of this movie is a clever one -- two teenaged girls begin playing a telephone "game", where they call people at random out of the phone book and inform them "I saw what you did ... and I know who you are!"

This "game" takes a realistic twist when (as fate would have it) one of the "victims" of the girls' prank turns out to have committed a murder just minutes before the call. A dangerous game indeed.

The two young girls are played by Andi Garrett and Sarah Lane. They aren't exactly in Miss Crawford's class, acting-wise, but I liked both of them in this movie very much. They just seemed to have a "real" quality to them that came through on screen. Interestingly, this was Andi Garrett's *only* film appearance ever. And Sarah Lane appeared in just one other film besides this one (which was a made-for-TV movie).

Anchor Bay and Universal give us this black-and-white film on DVD in a good-looking Widescreen presentation (1.78:1), with a robust-enough Mono soundtrack. The transfer here is not "Anamorphic", but it looks like one nonetheless, displaying a very clear picture with little in the way of any video distractions.

Not many, but a few, Bonus Features occupy space on this one-disc DVD edition. There's the Original Trailer for the film, plus a "Teaser Trailer", which features Director William Castle's "World Premiere Announcement" for this little chiller/thriller.

Also on the disc are some text-only "Talent Bios" (for Crawford and Castle). The Bio section for Miss Crawford is very nice, too -- featuring a multitude of text screens covering her vast career. Many vintage photos of the actress are also included on the bio text screens.

A one-page (two-sided) insert comes in this Keepcased package. This is one of the nicer single-page DVD enclosures, being made from a thicker cardboard than most flimsier paper inserts. A listing of the movie's 20 "Chapters" is on one side; while a reproduction of an original lobby card (or poster) for the film is shown on the other side of the insert.

"I Saw What You Did" certainly isn't the best or scariest flick you'll ever see. But it has a certain atmospheric "charm" to it that definitely places it within the "worth a look" category.

Had some potential, but doesn't fufill it
I think this movie had potential to be a good little thriller, but the mood gets spoiled too often by the teeny-booper music. Yes, we get it, the movie's about misbehaving teenagers. You don't need to bust out the American Bandstand music every time they appear on screen.

That may seem like a minor quibble, but I found the inappropriate music did have an effect on the suspense, which got dialed up pretty high in certain scenes. Just when I thought things were coming to a close, there was another little twist, and danger reared its ugly head once again. The happy ending was kind of predictable, but the path to get there was often full of surprises.

I watched the movie first and foremost as a Joan Crawford fan, although I understood going into it that she had a small part and overacted it, at that. (I never saw anyone fall to the floor in such an elaborate fashion.) It's a shame that they'll release films like this on DVD, but not more of Crawford's earlier, better work. However, I ended up finding the film as a whole a somewhat enjoyable, B-grade suspense flick.

Castle (kinda) Does It Again!
Having seen most of William Castle's films, the only few problems i had with "I Saw What You Did" mainly go to a few technicals. By 1965, you would think that Castle would have filmed this in color. That was one problem. Another, the soundtrack. I can understand that the beginning of some horror films can be rather up-beat with the premise of setting the audience up for a twist that ultimately takes us for a ride. The soundtrack for this film doesn't let up, and actually sounds like music for a "Beach Party" film. With that aside, everyone knows that Castle did his best with what he knew. The acting is at times corny, but it was intended that way for the sake of getting the best reaction from the audience when some scenes were 'off the cuff'. The shower scene at the beginning is where i have the most praise. Castle's ability to give us a small bloodbath (remember "Homicidal"?) MADE me buy the dvd for that one scene. Other than that, Joan Crawford's role was good, and Castle's re-use of some of the actor's from his previous films was ok. The extra's were a nice bonus, tho a doccumentary with some of the actor's would have been interesting to watch. ... Read more

Reviews (16)

"Nobody Dies," Best World War II Movie, Poorest DVD Quality
I have watched this film trillions of times, and I own many VHS and Beta copies of it. I first saw it as a kid in the 1950's, and it is truly haunting. The dialogue, acting, tension buildup, realism, psychology, and photography/camera work are nothing short of superb. It is a film way ahead of its time, true to its genre, and probably the best/most realistic film to come out of WWII. Many of the ethnic/cultural stereotypes are quite good, even considering the absence of African-American roles, probably fairly accurate for the time. The depiction of war seems very genuine. Does anyone know what Dana Andrews meant when he said "4 ways from the jack?" What a shame that the DVD version by Madacy is so poor. There are video/digital dropouts, terrible sound, missing frames. The VHS and BETA versions are of better quality overall. There is no evidence of ANY Dolby Digital sound.

I hope someone will recognize the true artistry of this film and issue it in a better DVD version.

I would also recommend "The Best Years of Our Lives", although I don't know if it is out on DVD yet.

Anyway, I rate this film as a "Must See/Own!"

Still one of the best World War II films
I too have seen A walk In The Sun countless times since I first saw it on television when I was a kid in the mid 1950's. I still believe that it is one of the best war films ever made. Yes, I also have seen Saving Private Ryan many times and love it as well.

In many ways, these films have a lot in common. They both exemplify the tenseness and horror of war. While SPR is more graphic, A Walk In The Sun succeeds with superb camera work and more subtlety.

The acting in A Walk In The Sun is excellent and I practically memorized all of the humorous dialogue between Pvts Rivera (Richard Conte) and Freedman (George Tyne). These two were a quintesential element of the film.

This film was excellently directed by Lewis Milestone and should not be missed.

Not a restored version
It is apparent that the copyright has expired on this movie, as a number of DVD houses are offering various versions. This transfer is moderately scratchy and occasionally fuzzy, and obviously slightly cropped.

It is too bad the studio hasn't seen fit to issue a restored version (and copyright the restoration). Unfortunately, judging by the offerings here on Amazon, there is no studio version available.

Outstanding Movie
Only rated 4 stars because this classic has not been restored, 5 stars for content! One of the best WWII genre movies. Directed by Lewis Milestone (All Quiet on the Western Front, Pork Chop Hill etc.) GET THIS COPY! Other manufacturer's version contain numerous drop outs/flaws. Although unrestored, the DVD quality is a decent reproduction and viewable, HIFI sound is clear. Highly recommended for those interested in the US Infantry GI's perspective in WWII! Excellent leadership study as you watch the command of the platoon adapt to combat situations!

Decent movie, excellent quality for its age
Ignoring the ignorance of other reviewers stating the quality is not Dolby Digital sound or perfect digital video quality (DUH! It was made in the 1940s!), this is actually a fairly decent film. It captures effectively the non-battle aspects of war, and delves into the personality of soldiers. Even though it is sanitized in terms of few deaths and mild language, it is a good view for children and adults alike learning about WWII. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Watch Out Where Those Huskies Go...
Oh no! That nefarious mastermind satan is at it again. In his neverending quest for world domination, he's decided to go after our beloved cheerleaders! Four of them were on their way to the big Huskies game when suddenly, their car was run off the road! One of satan's helpers just happened to drive by and pick them up. This evil man was none other than Billy (Jack "Angry Red Planet" Kruschen), the school janitor / peeping-Tom pervert! He took these poor girls, and their morally upstanding instructor, to a deserted location. Once there, Billy tried to do naughty things to Patti, while Debbie, Sharon, and Chris stood petrified in trances! Thankfully, a jealous satan intervened, knocking Billy out. Whew! Our brave pom-pom commandoes then ran into a bum (John Carradine) who also turned out to be one of the devil's deciples! They ended up at the home of sheriff BL Bubb (John Ireland) and his wife (Yvonne DeCarlo). Sadly, Mr. and Mrs. Bubb were in on the whole thing! In fact, the entire town was nothing more than a coven of mephistophelian hillbillies! They locked up our brave heroines, preparing them for midnight sacrifice. Of course, they needed a "pure maiden" or virgin for this blackest of rituals, so our cheerleaders were saved! Then, Patti had a little surprise for the Bubbs and company, as she turned out to be the dark lord's chosen one. She quickly used her powers to kill the shady sheriff and to establish herself as queen of all satanic cheerleaders. This is a true story...

One for all, and all for one.
Yep, just one review and all in one! Here, we follow 4 proud cheerleading ...(Patti, Debbie, Chris, and Sharon) from their practice at Benedict High and to the first game of the season. But, they are delayed in the meantime. Along with their coach, the cheerleaders are kidnapped by a Satanic cult after getting in a car accident on the way to the game. Why do Satanists want cheerleaders? To use the "unsoiled maiden" in black mass, of course. A virgin? In this movie? *chuckle* Anyway, the cult has a surprise of their own when Patti brings her Master into the picture.

Campy but not as entertaining as other Satan flicks
I actually bought this by accident, intending to buy the "Satan movie with teenage girls" that I remembered seeing on TV two decades ago. I had never seen this film before.

It actually isn't bad, from a bad is good perspective. Some of the acting is just so overwrought it is hysterical. The script is very funny at times, probably unintentionally so. (When the writers tried to be clever, it was obvious.) Yvonne DeCarlo is in it as a high priestess, and it's fun to hear Lily Munster's voice chanting satanic phrases, replete with lots of sound effects as she pleads to Satan to kill the cheerleaders.

If you like looking at young women in skimpy outfits, you'll enjoy the first half hour during which many of them are in bikinis. And you may enjoy when one of the cheerleaders mates with Satan (well, you don't actually see Satan, but that's what you're supposed to believe) on an altar.

While this certainly cannot compete with "Plan 9 From Outer Space" in terms of being the worst film of all time, it does have a number of glaring errors as well, particularly edits which do not make sense.
The worst thing about this movie, however, is that it has too much extraneous junk in it, and only one of the cheerleaders has any connection with Satan. It actually takes a while to even understand why the film is called "Satan's Cheerleaders."

DVD quality is mediocre at best. The mono Dolby Digital sound is almost always intelligible. The picture is okay but there are the occasional black circles and other picture flaws. The only extras are two trailers, one for this film and one for a film called "Ruby." I've never seen "Ruby" but it looks like an attempt to recreate "The Exorcist." The trailer is hysterical but my guess is that the best two minutes of the film were used for the trailer.

I love those 70's B rated movies !!
This movie was fun in a lot of ways,and also somewhat corny too,as you might expect.But take it for what it is....a 70's B movie! Anybody who buys this movie knows they're not going to see an academy award winner,but that's what makes it fun.It doesn't take itself seriously.It has everything you want, a little nudity,great 70's music,4 hot looking cheerleaders with nothing on their minds except....well,you know.Have fun with it and enjoy.

Oh Please!!!
I just want to say this movie is a piece of ... like a 70's b movie which is really really bad, oh and beware of the cover, these people dont even know anything about satan apparently, if you notice the pentegrams they ware are the stars pointed upwards which is the sign of christ haha they would have to have the star being upside down to represent satan so that is a good example to show u that this movie is a waste and has nothing to do with proper satanism, if you want to see a good satanistic scary movie see the devil's rain or the devil's prey. ... Read more

Reviews (16)

"Nobody Dies," Best World War II Movie, Poorest DVD Quality
I have watched this film trillions of times, and I own many VHS and Beta copies of it. I first saw it as a kid in the 1950's, and it is truly haunting. The dialogue, acting, tension buildup, realism, psychology, and photography/camera work are nothing short of superb. It is a film way ahead of its time, true to its genre, and probably the best/most realistic film to come out of WWII. Many of the ethnic/cultural stereotypes are quite good, even considering the absence of African-American roles, probably fairly accurate for the time. The depiction of war seems very genuine. Does anyone know what Dana Andrews meant when he said "4 ways from the jack?" What a shame that the DVD version by Madacy is so poor. There are video/digital dropouts, terrible sound, missing frames. The VHS and BETA versions are of better quality overall. There is no evidence of ANY Dolby Digital sound.

I hope someone will recognize the true artistry of this film and issue it in a better DVD version.

I would also recommend "The Best Years of Our Lives", although I don't know if it is out on DVD yet.

Anyway, I rate this film as a "Must See/Own!"

Still one of the best World War II films
I too have seen A walk In The Sun countless times since I first saw it on television when I was a kid in the mid 1950's. I still believe that it is one of the best war films ever made. Yes, I also have seen Saving Private Ryan many times and love it as well.

In many ways, these films have a lot in common. They both exemplify the tenseness and horror of war. While SPR is more graphic, A Walk In The Sun succeeds with superb camera work and more subtlety.

The acting in A Walk In The Sun is excellent and I practically memorized all of the humorous dialogue between Pvts Rivera (Richard Conte) and Freedman (George Tyne). These two were a quintesential element of the film.

This film was excellently directed by Lewis Milestone and should not be missed.

Not a restored version
It is apparent that the copyright has expired on this movie, as a number of DVD houses are offering various versions. This transfer is moderately scratchy and occasionally fuzzy, and obviously slightly cropped.

It is too bad the studio hasn't seen fit to issue a restored version (and copyright the restoration). Unfortunately, judging by the offerings here on Amazon, there is no studio version available.

Outstanding Movie
Only rated 4 stars because this classic has not been restored, 5 stars for content! One of the best WWII genre movies. Directed by Lewis Milestone (All Quiet on the Western Front, Pork Chop Hill etc.) GET THIS COPY! Other manufacturer's version contain numerous drop outs/flaws. Although unrestored, the DVD quality is a decent reproduction and viewable, HIFI sound is clear. Highly recommended for those interested in the US Infantry GI's perspective in WWII! Excellent leadership study as you watch the command of the platoon adapt to combat situations!

Decent movie, excellent quality for its age
Ignoring the ignorance of other reviewers stating the quality is not Dolby Digital sound or perfect digital video quality (DUH! It was made in the 1940s!), this is actually a fairly decent film. It captures effectively the non-battle aspects of war, and delves into the personality of soldiers. Even though it is sanitized in terms of few deaths and mild language, it is a good view for children and adults alike learning about WWII. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

Sundown: the Vampire in Retreat
Robert Van Helsing (Bruce Campbell) is an incompetent descendant of Count Dracula, exploring the small town of Purgatory in search of his infamous ancestor. But Purgatory is inhabited by reclusive vampires who prefer to take it easy and lounge around in sunglasses and sun cream - a protection against the sun's deadly rays. There is no sign of the Count.

David Harrison (Jim Metzler) is an expert in the production of synthetic blood, hired to assist in a project that will ensure the vampires of Purgatory no longer need to kill for food. He is nevertheless unaware that Purgatory is populated by the undead, thinking his work as part of an official experiment.

Things go wrong, though. The equipment suddenly ceases to work and the evil Shane (Maxwell Caulfield), the project's original creator, turns up to investigate. He falls in love with Harrison's beautiful wife and, meanwhile, some of the toothy townspeople decide that the traditional ways of obtaining blood are preferable.

A war inevitably breaks out, resulting in vampire against human, vampire against vampire. Good versus evil.

SUNDOWN is directed by Anthony Hickox of WAXWORK, WAXWORK 2: LOST IN TIME, and HELLRAISER 3: HELL ON EARTH fame. It is a low budget, off-beat film that is perhaps not to everyone's taste. Somewhere in between comedy and horror, SUNDOWN has nevertheless gained cult status, similar to other films in this subgenre like THE LOST BOYS, FRIGHT NIGHT, INNOCENT BLOOD, TALES FROM THE CRYPT: BORDELLO OF BLOOD, and A RETURN TO SALEM'S LOT.

The Cast is well chosen: Maxwell THE SUPERNATURALS Caulfield, Dana TWIN PEAKS Ashbrook, Bruce EVIL DEAD Campbell, and David KUNG FU Carradine, who plays Jozek Mardulak aka Count Dracula. M. Emmet Walsh delivers a hilarious performance as Mort Brisby, an ageing vampire/gas station attendant, but SUNDOWN inevitably belongs to Campbell.

Point of interest: Hickox's WAXWORK starred Dana Ashbrook, and his sequel WAXWORK 2: LOST IN TIME starred Caulfield, Campbell, and Carradine.

Sundown, The Vampire In Retreat Review
A great "horror" flick that falls somewhere between The Exorcist and Scooby Doo On Zombie Island. Not only does this classic need to return on video, but a special edition DVD is definitely called for. Ranking high on the all-time greatest vampire movie list, it is in a class with Near Dark and Lost Boys.

bruce campbell fans can skip this
This is for Bruce Campbell fans: If you're looking to buy this because the coolest B movie star ever is in it, don't bother. The movie is dumb, not the kind of dumb that's kitchy and good. I mean just dumb. Bruce is in it yes, but his character makes no sense. In fact, this movie just makes no sense. Put evil dead back in you dvd player, or hold out for Bubba Ho Tep, or reread his book. But don't bother with this. I give it two stars only because Bruce is in it.

Vampire Comedy for Diehard Fans
This comedy is so goofy you can't help but like it. The town is inhabited entirely by vampires and they are trying to use a new plasma producing device to supply their need for blood. The machine isn't working properly so the designer comes to town with his family in tow to see what the problem is. We quickly learn there are two factions of vampires, those that want to live in peace with humans and those who want to make them their next meal. Tongue firmly planted in cheek, we wind our way to the final conflict between the good and evil vampires. If you liked movies like "Dracula, Dead and Loving It" this one should be right up your alley.

Collision for Western and Horror
Sudown is an interesting little film from Anthony Hickox who has directed such films as Waxwork and Hellraiser 3. This little gem is quite good because it has many things going on. It has focus on the family relationships after they arrive at Purgatory, Van Helsing's inept grandchild (Bruce Campbell) and war with two kinds of vampires. Cast was great. David Carradine showed charm in the role of the leading vampire. Bruce Campbell was hilarious as usual. John Ireland was similiar villain as David Warner in the Waxwork. Nice movie for evening in little town. ... Read more