Amazon.com

This strange and charming documentary by Al Pacino, in which he also stars, is an exploration of several topics: Shakespeare and his hump-backed villain, the impulse to act, the way actors work--and Pacino's single-minded effort to make the Bard accessible to all audiences and not just the effete few. Over the course of the film, Pacino alternately discusses the role and the text; roams Manhattan, talking about Shakespeare with everyone from scholars to people on the street; and re-creates scenes from the play in a production staged at the Cloisters, an evocative castle-like museum on the north end of Manhattan. He assembles a cast that includes Kevin Spacey, Winona Ryder, Estelle Parsons, and Alec Baldwin to perform the scenes, and he slips back and forth between text and discussion of the play in a way that makes Shakespeare comprehensible and fascinating to viewers who know or care nothing about his writing. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (37)

Lost and Found
I have to admit I was skeptical of watching Al Pacino try his hand at ANY Shakespeare, much less Richard III, which isn't the easiest play to put on in the first place. But by the end I actually quite enjoyed the whole production, even if I wouldn't call it a masterpiece.

I'd recommend this film to anybody who enjoys the Bard, live at Stratford or even if it's some over-the-top movie version--and particularly for high school students who are still a little too dense to totally 'get' Shakespeare. It's informative for the uninitiated, and as a documentary, it works reasonably well, and moves at a brisk enough pace so you're not bored stiff.

Add to that some particularly insightful words from Derek Jacobi, and Sir John Gielgud (amongst others), it's well worth a rental, and doesn't embarrass any of the actors who were smart enough to take part in this.

And as a reminder to the bloke who trashed this in favour of Ian McKellen's excellent turn as Richard III, this wasn't meant to compete, but instead to enlighten the masses. Who to be quite honest, COULD understand Shakespeare if they put their minds to it, but most don't.

They're usually forced to in grade nine at best.

Amazing for an indepth look
I saw this movie in 1996 while in college on a "movie night" with other actors in my field of study. We were simply electrified by Pacino's depth and power that he put into the understanding of this amazing Shakespeare character. I have performed in Richard III, and believe me, i wished that i had this film to look at during that time to help me with some difficult scenes! I found Pacino to be extremely human, bendable, and thought-provoking; it's a definate must for the Shakespeare lover, and will expand your mind if you love Pacino! At least rent it!

Engaging!
I came across this movie on one of the movie channels on dish and, being a teacher of literature, got completely sucked in. I loved how the actors explore the characters of the play and the various plot sequences, then the audience is treated to the final outcome. Though the scenes are acted out at different locations throughout London, rather than on-stage, and one might say that it detracts from the film's credibility, the locations are well thought out and appropriate to the scene.

I can't wait to use this film as a teaching tool.

Mildly entertaining but also pretty deliberately dumbed down
I like Al Pacino in many movies, especially, of course, Godfather 2. I've seen him on the stage & enjoyed his performances in O'Neill & Mamet.

But to me Shakespeare is not his forte. In this film which I find to be mostly an exercise in actorly self-indulgence, he comes off sounding like Mel Brooks both as narrator & especially in character.

I also find the intent rather condescending & for the most part irrelevant. The gap between English & American actors doing Shakespeare has to do with Language & History. I didn't hear much commentary on these issues. Mostly the film sounds like a treatise for making Shakespeare palatable to grade schoolers.

Pacino's best film ... where's the DVD?
Although Richard III is one of Shakespeare's most violent and Gothic plays, Pacino's loving and intelligent exploration of the classic tragedy - and the legendary bard who penned it - emerges as one of Pacino's most compelling and inspiring films. A movie that makes me proud to be an Italian-American studying for his Ph.D. in British literature. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Francis Ford Coppola took some of the deep background from the life of Mafia chief Vito Corleone--the patriarch of Mario Puzo's bestselling novel The Godfather--and built around it a stunning sequel to his Oscar-winning, 1972 hit film. Robert De Niro plays Vito as a young Sicilian immigrant in turn-of-the-century New York City's Little Italy. Coppola weaves in and out of the story of Vito's transformation into a powerful crime figure, contrasting that evolution against efforts by son Michael Corleone to spread the family's business into pre-Castro Cuba. As memorable as the first film is, The Godfather II is an amazingly intricate, symmetrical tragedy that touches upon several chapters of 20th-century history and makes a strong case that our destinies are written long before we're born. This was De Niro's first introduction to a lot of filmgoers, and he makes an enormous impression. But even with him and a number of truly brilliant actors (including maestro Lee Strasberg), this is ultimately Pacino's film and a masterful performance. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (82)

I know it was you Fredo
Director Francis Ford Coppola does the impossible with this film. He creates an original piece better than its wonderful predecessor! After the phenomenal success of the GODFATHER, Coppola didn't have the studio watching every move he made like a hawk, and the results are a better, more diverse film. He lifted a concept he was saving for another movie, one where a father's story and his son's story are intermingled, comparing them both at the same age. Robert DeNiro won an Oscar for his mostly silent portrayal of the soft-spoken Italian, Vito Corleone, played by Marlon Brando in the first film. This was the first time in history that two people were both given an Oscar for portraying the same character. Running parallel with Vito's story is the continuing saga of Michael Corleone, Al Pacino returning to play the crime boss. His Michael has grown into a man bent on his own fate, battling hubris like a Shakespeare character. The production design and music are once again wonderful, Vito's past is a gorgeous pastiche of immigrants at the turn of the previous century, while Michael now rules an empire that extended into the sleazy world of gambling. Coppola uses some of the same tricks as the first film (If it ain't broke...). The result is a three-hour plus tragedy that is sure to make a hit with you. The first 2 films together make for interesting viewing. On occasion, they have even been needlessly presented chronologically. Followed by an unfortunate third film.

The apex of American film making
To call The Godfather 2 a sequal would be a travesty and an unfair conclusion on what a stunning achievement the film was. Not only is it the greatest sequal of all time (the only one to receive the best film oscar, at the expense of the brilliant Chinatown) but perhaps the greatest movie of all time.

It's an even more towering achievement than it's predecessor with Coppola now telling in parallel the rise of Vito Corleone from a seemingly harmless kid fleeing Sicily at the turn of the century to a fully fledged Mafia Don(now De Niro)in his twenties, contrasted with his son Michael carrying on the Sicilian legacy in 1950s New York.

The intricacy of the flashback sequences is suitably stunning as is the flawless design of both time periods, especially that of 1910s New York. The costume design and focus on detail are simply immaculate with De Niro delivering an electrifying portrayal of the young Vito(speaking Italian for much of his part) as he becomes a player with a gun wrapped under a towel and hoarsely imitates Brando at one stage "I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse."

Both won Oscars for their portrayal of Vito but i believe it is De Niro who excels more, not relying on the heavy makeup Brando was employed with for the first film but again proving his versatility of being a method actor and a natural gift of playing gangsters. However, it is often argued that Panino tops De Niro's peformance. He delivers a masterfully cold and distant performance as Michael, carrying on the family business after his father's death (much to his brother Fredo's disapproval).

He moves scrupulously and speaks with rivetting conviction as he attempts to protect his family from the corruption and threat of the era. While being corrupt himself, Michael is also a caring family figure, doing all he can to end this power struggle for the sake of protecting his children. At one stage his wife Kay Adams(Diane Keaton) threatens to take his children away from him but Pacino makes his feelings clear "You know that could never be possible. You know i would do anything in my power to stop that from happening."

The supporting cast are also great, with maestro Lee Strasberg, Robert Duvall also picking up Oscar nominations. At 3 hours and 20 minutes the movie doesn't seem overlong at all. It's an emotional powerful study in family loyalty, betrayal, corruption and greed and the apex of American filmaking. Movies don't come more accomplished or perfect than The Godfather 2. An oustanding piece of showmanship and one of the most important forms of art in any medium.

Even better than the first!
I watched this version first and I've always liked this movie more than the first because it ties up loose ends and it gives you a better understanding of who the family is, where they came from, the origin of the Corleone name (The family name is Andolini, the town he comes from is Corleone.), etc. I wished Richard Castellano was in this one (He wouldn't because of a contract dispute.). His replacements were classic. Michael V. Gazzo & Lee Strasberg give outstanding performances in their roles. This is an epic tale never to be forgotten.

A VERY AMAZING SEQUEL TO A VERY AMAZING MOVIE
THE STORY CONTINUES AS MICHAEL CORLEONE [AL PACINO] CONTINUES HIS DECEASED FATHER'S BUSINESS. THIS SEQUEL SUCCEEDS IN BEING WHAT MANY OTHER SEQUELS COULD NEVER BE, A GOOD MOVIE, MATTER OF FACT, AN OUTSTANDING MOVIE. ALONG WITH ITS PREDECESSOR, THIS IS ONE OF THE GREATEST MOVIES OF ALL TIME. THIS SEQUEL IS VERY AMAZING, AND I RECCOMEND ALL GANGSTER MOVIE BUFFS GET THIS AND ITS PREDECESSOR ON TAPE OR DVD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. LIKE THE 1ST MOVIE, THIS WON SEVERAL OSCARS, INCLUDING BEST PICTURE.

great character study, great acting
I love this movie even more than Part I, because I love the way you can see Michael's character disintegrating over the course of the story. You watch him strip away all human connections in order to protect the "family." He finally asks his mother "Can you lose your family?" She doesn't understand the question, but of course Michael has lost his family, as well as his own soul. The paradox in this--killing your family in order to protect the "family"--is wonderful.
As in Part I, Diane Keaton is kind of a weak link--just not a credible Mafia wife. De Niro gives one of the greatest performances ever--channeling Brando. I also love the young versions of Don Corleone's sidekicks when they first go into business doing things like stealing rugs. And Robert Duvall has had to work very hard ever since to equal this performance.
The only disappointment is that we don't get to see Sonny (James Caan), since he was killed in Part I. His role was so wonderful that it's a pity Coppola couldn't work him into the flashbacks of Part II, except in the brief final scene. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Generally acknowledged as a bona fide classic, this Francis Ford Coppola film is one of those rare experiences that feels perfectly right from beginning to end--almost as if everyone involved had been born to participate in it. Based on Mario Puzo's bestselling novel about a Mafia dynasty, Coppola's Godfather extracted and enhanced the most universal themes of immigrant experience in America: the plotting-out of hopes and dreams for one's successors, the raising of children to carry on the good work, etc. In the midst of generational strife during the Vietnam years, the film somehow struck a chord with a nation fascinated by the metamorphosis of a rebellious son (Al Pacino) into the keeper of his father's dream. Marlon Brando played against Puzo's own conception of patriarch Vito Corleone, and time has certainly proven the actor correct. The rest of the cast, particularly James Caan, John Cazale, and Robert Duvall as the rest of Vito's male brood--all coping with how to take the mantle of responsibility from their father--is seamless and wonderful. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (179)

I'll Write A Review You Can't Refuse
Francis Ford Coppola does something with this movie many filmmakers are unable to do. Coppola makes us feel as if we're part of the"FAMILY". We feel as if were behind the scenes watching the Corleone's up's and down's. A one of a kind screenplay written by Mario Puzo and Coppola,and as we all should know by now,the film the based on Puzo's novel. Truly desevering of the Oscars in won. Brando's performance in this movie,is in my opinion,the best of his career. And the same goes with the rest of the cast:Al Pacino,Diane Keaton,James Caan,Robert Duvall,and Talia Shire. Everyone in this movie delivers a powerhouse performances. Many unforgettable lines and characters that will stay with us forever. Terrific music score by Nino Rota,beautiful camerawork by Gordon Willis,and top notch directing Coppola. Truly one of the greatest films ever made! If there's anyone who hasn't seen this movie,you have no idea what your missing. A must for anyone's video collection.

The Greatest Movie of All Time.
A movie of such size, influence, and power as "The Godfather" isn't simply a movie. It's a life-altering experience. Francis Ford Coppola, barely into his thirties, would team up with author Mario Puzo to create the greatest period gangster epic whose influence remains incalculable. It all begins with the performances. Take a look at the opening scene, in which the undertaker Bonasera comes to Vito (Marlon Brando) for "justice" following the brutal assault of his daughter. That scene is brilliantly played and wonderfully directed, and Brando's portrayal as the Don is nothing short of perfect. The public perception of a Don of this magnitude is someone who is loud, brash, and emotional. Not this one. Brando's Vito is calm, soft spoken, and rarely raises his voice, which makes his character even more intimidating. But while Brando shines in this film, the heart of the movie (and indeed the entire trilogy) belongs to the then-newcomer Al Pacino, who playes Vito's youngest son, Michael. Michael's transformation from a mild-mannered college grad to a ruthless Mafia thug is one of the greatest performances you will see. James Caan as the hotheaded Sonny, John Cazale as the dim Fredo, the suave Robert DuVall as attorney Tom Hagen, and Talia Shire as the troubled newlywed Connie all shine in their supporting roles. Reviewing a movie like "The Godfather" is a bit overwhelming, as it has already been studied by other, more experienced film geeks. But if there's one movie you see in your lifetime, it has to be this verified, straight-up classic. Give three hours of your life to this movie, and what it will give in return will reward you richly.

LOUSY TRANSFER OF A CLASSIC
I can only add my voice to the many who were disappointed by the DVD transfer. How can you mess up one of the best movies of the last half century? Looks very grainy in some indoor scenes...in fact, some scenes looked like they were filmed with an old, cheap video camera. That said, the story, acting, editing and music are just about perfect. The only thing that rings false is the carelessness the family exhibits after Don Corleone's attack. They act a bit like amateurs. This begs for a DO-OVER (maybe they're waiting for another anniversary year to roll around to release a definitive edition). I refuse to buy the box set as it includes the inferior Part 3. Hopefully, when they release Part 2, they pay more attention to the quality of the transfer.

"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."
I never saw the movie before because I have no interest in "the Mob", New York, or gang politics. It took Brando's death, plus all the great reviews here and the #1 ranking at IMDB to prompt me to get this movie to add to 400 movies I have. The only thing I knew about it going in was there was a horse head in a bed, and Brando mumbled and played with a cat.

The movie has a long list of big name actors including Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan and Robert Duvall, and was directed by Francis Ford Coppola. It seems to be filmed rather darkly with muted colors, though many posts here complain about the transfer.

I had big expectations for this movie, but at the one-hour mark I was so bored I turned it off. Later I started over with the commentary, which was a bit more interesting. I took a nap in the middle, then came back to finish this 3-hour exercise in tedium.

Mostly OK acting. Good photography. Famous theme. I liked 2 lines of dialog, but that's about it.

Okay, but not great. Poor DVD Transfer.
I have just viewed this movie for the first time, and for the life of me, I don't know what all the hype has been about. The acting is at most, mediocre (with some roles just downright poorly acted). The plot seems to come and go throughout the movie, and the violence is by today's standards very cheesy. I also kept wondering how Marlon Brando's character became so tied to this movie, as his role seemed very minor.

I give it three stars because, I'm sure when this movie was originally released, it was "Epic", but it just hasn't stood the test of time. Some of the scenes are well acted, but are overshadowed by lack of plot and some particularly bad acting as well.

Aside from the movie itself, Francis Ford Coppola should be embarrassed about the quality of this DVD transfer. It has several flaws (scratches, flickering, low lighting, etc.) and really looks bad on a large screen television. Perhaps he should let George Lucas have a go at a Special Edition version of his movie to "clean it up" and bring it up to date (Whatsa Heesa Deesa Meesa?) - of course I'm joking. ... Read more

Description

Sexual thriller with Al Pacino as a young cop who must go undercover as a gay 'cruiser' in New York City. There's a homicidal homophobe on the streets, brutally killing gay men, and it's up to Pacino to stop him. Shot on location in several gay bars of the era. ... Read more

Reviews (39)

Huh? What happened?
It is really bizarre watch one of the Corleones playing a leather daddy - but that's just what Pacino does (has he ever played any other part in all the films he's made?). But what is more bizarre is that this film was ever green lighted. It is based on a book that had to have been better than the tripe here. I've seen this movie several times; each time hoping that I will actually be able to figure out "who done it". Friedkin, who is typically an excellent director, leaves the ending open for question (in my opinion) and as such confuses the viewer. I have read that Friedkin did this on purpose, but I don't know why. When I want to watch a mystery film, I expect to have some resolution at the end. This films doesn't provide me with that satisfaction.

Further, this is a VERY violent and repugnant film, depicting a small segment of the gay community, but the casual viewer isn't aware of that fact. It's a dark, depressing, and angry film that seems to not know what it wants to say or how to say it.

A Great-Thinking Person's Thriller
Cruising showcases one of Al Pacino's greatest performances as a rookie police officer who is sent undercover to investigate a series of gay murders.

I have watched this William Friedkin-directed film several times and always walk away with a different interpretation as to the events that I had just witnessed: Is the Pacino character straight or gay? Does the Pacino character actually engage in any gay sex acts while undercover - or does he fake it (we never actually see him do anything). Does the Pacino character become a killer at the end of the film - or did someone else kill Pacino's next door neighbor, Ted? And was that Pacino going to a gay club at the end of the film, or was that a flashback?

The Pacino character undergoes a complex, emotional catharsis - but it is always unclear to me if it was for the better - or for the worse.

This is Friedkin's third best film. His best were The Exorcist, To Live and Die In L.A. - with The French Connection coming in fourth.

Sadly, Friedkin - once a great artist - has forgotten how to make films anymore (ever see Jade?). But at least we have those four great ones to remind future directors of how to craft a film.

Underated film
I first heard about cruising when I was watching a documentary on Al Pacino and I couldn't belive that I had never heard of it. The film looked very Dark and I couldn't wait to see it. I waited six whole months to see when eventually I spent twelve pounds to watch it on filmfour. I taped it so I could watch it again. I was stunned at how much people didn't like the film. The film was a very interesting study of the gay underworld and Pacino's performance as a gay undercover cop was great. Although it does have some unexplained parts. Like the part where the naked cop is slapping Pacino and a killer suspect. I've watched the film many times and I still can't work out the ending. The only thing I can think of is that Pacino is the killer.
Overall it was a great film with a few confusing moments.

Cruisin
I really liked this movie.My brother has it on vhs. I have all of Al Pacino's DVD's and would like to own this movie as well. Please release this one on DVD-I do not buy VHS. As each movie comes out on DVD of Al's-I buy it. I wait until it comes out on DVD.Please release it!

Thanks. I am a big fan of AL PACINO!

It's not supposed to be a documentary.
It's hard to tell what William Friedkin is driving at in this grim tour of New York City's leathers bars. Al Pacino plays a detective who infiltrates this fringe of the homosexual world to flush out a killer, and whose own sexual identity becomes blurred in the process. It starts out strong but ultimately is too confusing and clichéd to be called "good." ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Tony Manero (John Travolta) in Saturday Night Fever and Dirk Diggler (Mark Wahlberg) in Boogie Nights have one major thing in common: They both have posters of Al Pacino as Serpico on their bedroom walls. As the real-life NYPD detective whose integrity cost him virtually everything (and almost cost him his life), Pacino became one of the icons of gritty, realistic 1970s filmmaking. Released in 1973, between the first two Godfather movies, this is the true story of Frank Serpico, a long-haired, idealistic, iconoclastic cop who reluctantly goes undercover to investigate dirty colleagues who are on the take. This is one of the definitive Pacino performances, along with his role as Michael Corleone in the Godfather saga, and Sonny the bungling bank robber in Dog Day Afternoon (which reunited him with his Serpico director, Sidney Lumet)--and Pacino was nominated for a best actor Oscar for all of them (although he wouldn't actually win until 1992's Scent of a Woman). --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (36)

One Good Cop
Al Pacino became a star thanks to his role as Michael Corleone in The Godfather. The film that cemented Mr. Pacino as one of the best actors of his generation was Serpico. Based on the Peter Maas book of the same name, Serpico is the true story of a New York undercover cop who seems to be the only honest cop on the force. Due to his honest nature, the other cops are leery of him and refuse to accept him as a real cop. To that end, he moves from precinct to precinct in search of a friendly work environment, but wherever he goes, he finds the same old situation. Serpico then goes to the higher-ups in the department, but they too have no use for his accusations. Finally, he goes public with his accusations and that triggers an investigation into the dealings of police officers. Serpico becomes a marked man and is nearly intentionally killed by another cop who while Serpico is on an undercover operation. Mr. Pacino brings a realistic approach to the role and you feel sympathy for Serpico. He is not a great man, he has his faults, but he believes in what he does and he takes a stand for his belief that policeman should serve the public and not illegally benefit from their position of power.

Very compelling story.
The story of Frank Serpico, an honest Nyc cop, is one of the most compelling police movies ever made. Al Pacino gives the character a lot of class and cool. Serpico is an easy-going guy with very clear morals about what's right and what's wrong. As he moves from precinct to precinct in dire hope of finding an honest place to work, all he finds are more and more corrupt cops...and it seems to be driving him insane both morally, and insane because the cops aren't comfortable with cops who don't take money. The film does a great job of displaying how the corruption is corrosive and unjust to the people of our country...but esp. interesting is that this wonderfully directed Sidney Lumet film is really very much like a suspense adventure chase...but at a much slower speed in which you can watch as things crumble and go to pot. Pacino plays the role in an understated manner...perhaps due to his knowledge of the real Frank Serpico, or maybe a creative choice. Either way, it's not his usual boisterous way...no crooked looks, no playful grins, etc. You'll forget Pacino is in this character. That Academy is worthless for not handing out an Oscar for this or Scarface or for Godfather I or II...or Dog Day Afternoon or Glengarry Glen Ross.

Nothing to wonderful
I did'nt like this one to much. Al Pacino's character is ok. There where only a few parts in the movie, where he really did an amazing job. The story plot did'nt make sence, it kept jumping around, Pacino looked like a horrible Charlies Manson, look-a-like. Don't waste your time.

Slow but Compelling in its Own Way
It isn't a particularly good movie. The pacing is all wrong and none of the characters beside Serpico ever get a chance to be clearly drawn. His personal life isn't very clearly explicated. That said, Pacino does a great job portraying a complicated and iconoclastic man of immense integrity and courage. Serpico is a great role model for young men in any era. He shows you can be yourself, be cool and have integrity, guts and morals.

Pacino in one of their best!
I've always said in my personal meetings with coleagues and friends that Pacino is much more than an actor ; he's a nature force .
But back to Serpico. This movie not only remains as cult movie and one of the most`powerful works of this tireless film maker as Sidney Lumet was in that age. Serpico meant a breakthrough with the ancient patterns of good citizen and virtuosi cop.
Serpico is a simple inmigrant citizen who lives in a little department ; he brings in his mind the ancestral illusions for being part of the american dream . His inner sense of justice is not influenced for any other kind of ideology . In this sense he's naif ; suddenly he's inmersed in a double face world; the eternal game of make the things appear right ; though they are rotten really .
His search for the sense of justice prevails and becomes nowadays, in a kind of romantic knight ; but he , besides the prize he must pay for his behavior , goes ahead no matter what. Don't forget that in times of hipocrisy ; any sincerity is associated with cynism.
This film is part of the amazing sextet together with Twelve angry men, The pawnbroker , The offence , Network and Equus ; that in my opinion express the most remarkable works of that extraordinary film maker. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

This sprawling epic of bloodshed and excess, Brian De Palma's update of the classic 1932 crime drama by Howard Hawks, sparked controversy over its outrageous violence when released in 1983. Scarface is a wretched, fascinating car wreck of a movie, starring Al Pacino as a Cuban refugee who rises to the top of Miami's cocaine-driven underworld, only to fall hard into his own deadly trap of addiction and inevitable assassination. Scripted by Oliver Stone and running nearly three hours, it's the kind of film that can simultaneously disgust and amaze you (critic Pauline Kael wrote "this may be the only action picture that turns into an allegory of impotence"), with vivid supporting roles for Steven Bauer, Michelle Pfeiffer, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, and Robert Loggia. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (539)

His Name Is Tony...
Actor Al Pacino gives a powerhouse performance in 1983's SCARFACE. Paciino plays Tony Montana, a Cuban refugee hoodlum, who quickly rises to the top of Miami's cocaine industry. On his way to the top, Tony uses any means at his disposal to get there, no matter who he hurts or betrays in the process. Pacino takes hold of the character and never lets you forget that he is "Scarface". The supporting cast is wonderful too. It features Steven Bauer, as Tony's right hand man, "Manny" Ray. Michelle Pfeiffer is Tony's girl, Elvira, and Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, in a role early in her acting career, plays Gina, Tony's sister.

The hard-edged script for the film is written by Oliver Stone, who holds nothing back, as usual Directed by Brian De Palma, the movie doesn't flinch at all to tell its story. The film remains a favorite of mine and will leave you with quite a lasting impression. A "remake" of 1932's SCARFACE, in name only, the film is nearly flawless.

The "Collector's Edition" contains a feature length retrospective documentary, that is so well done, you almost forget that there is no commentary track. It is very comprehensive and covers all aspects of the film and its place in cinema history. There's also a number of deleted scenes and outtakes that were nice to see. These fine extras add up to one heck of a DVD for one of the best gangster movies ever made. SCARFACE should not be missed and comes highly recommended.

Nothing Succeeds Like Excess
Given the high-power talent behind the camera (Brian DePalma), in front of it (Al Pacino), and at the typewriter (Oliver Stone), SCARFACE should have quite a lot going for it. It does indeed, although I can't quite call this a GODFATHER-type masterpiece for certain reasons.

Ostensibly, this is a reworking of Howard Hawks' classic 1932 gangster pic about Al Capone. This time, the setting is Miami circa 1980, the contraband in question is cocaine, and the lead character, Pacino's Tony Montana, is a Cuban-born criminal who just came off the Mariel boat lift with 125,000 others that Castro let go, twenty percent of whom were known criminals. Pacino gets in on the ground floor with a local drug boss (Robert Loggia) and soon works his way to the top, doing just about everything to tick someone off--associates, enemies, cops, his wife (Michelle Pfeiffer), his sister (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio), and the Colombian drug kingpins he has to do business with.

But in his cocaine-fueled journey to achieve the so-called American Dream, he neglects to follow two rules taught to him by Loggia: (1) Don't underestimate the other guy's greed; and (2) Don't get high on your own supply. He finally crosses the line in the end by alienating a Colombian drug boss (Paul Shenar) so much that Shenar sends assassins to Pacino's Miami villa. The result is a horrific and bloody shootout in which most of the assassins are rubbed out, and so is Pacino.

Without a doubt, SCARFACE continues to generate wildly divergent opinions, both pro and con. I for one had some trouble trying to stomach Pacino's Cuban accent at first, but then his ultra-charistmatic performance kicked into high gear, four-letter words and all. The film is very true to its essentials of showing how a certain segment of the Cuban boat people, a very SMALL segment, tried to latch onto the American Dream by trafficking in illegal narcotics and thus earning millions. Probably the most interesting thing about SCARFACE is the political view that Stone espouses in his screenplay: he seems to espouse a very Reaganesque view of the world of the 1980s (virulent anti-Communism; anti-Castro), but in truth he is severely critical of those very same policies that motivated Castro to send the worst of his worst onto American soil and thus accelerate this nation's drug problem.

SCARFACE does have its faults. It requires a lot of patience to sit through with a running time approaching 170 minutes, and I am not all that sure there is enough in there to sustain it for that kind of length. The film continues to be controversial in some quarters for its extreme (as opposed to merely excessive) violence; the chainsaw scene in an apartment, the hanging from a helicopter, and the ultra-gory shootout at the end rank as some of the most violent scenes ever shown on film. Only four other films in history challenge it in this respect: THE WILD BUNCH, SOLDIER BLUE, TAXI DRIVER, and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. Finally, this film set a record for the greatest number of times the "F" word, or variations of it, are used; I lost count at two hundred. This IS a bit much, although it probably fits the reality of the situation it depicts.

On the other hand, DePalma, whose 1976 film CARRIE remains one of the touchstone suspense/horror films of all times, does make quite a lot out of Stone's wild and crazy screenplay--though surprisingly, for the violent scenes, he doesn't use slow-motion or montage that much, which would have earned him favorable comparisons with the legendary Sam Peckinpah. Just as solid is the camera work of John Alonzo, who worked on CHINATOWN and BLACK SUNDAY, among others. Giorgio Moroder's score is pretty good, though I do admit it gets a little cheesy after a while. And Pacino's performance is also high-caliber; just get used to his Cuban accent, and it works very well.

This film comes highly recommended, but with this warning: It is definitely NOT for younger audiences, it is rated 'R' for a lot of good reasons.

Best Movie Ever!!!!!!!!!
This is the greatest movie that was ever created! I could not beleive how great this movie was when I saw it. Not only the movie was great but great actors like Al Pacino. If you have any money don't spend it on anything else than this movie!

WOULD YOU KISS ME IF I WEAR THE HAT!?
This is one of the greatest movies of all time and the AFI top 100 movies of all time refuses to acknowledge it. Al Pacino deserved an oscar for his portrayal of Tony Montana, the movie deserved an oscar for something yet this movie is constantly overlooked by all critics, but the cult following that it has amassed is by far more telling of it's popularity than sheer box office numbers. ask anyone on the street and they'll tell you Scarface is one of the best movies ever made, and if they don't think so they haven't seen it. So sit back, crack some hennessy and alize, light up a cigar, and enjoy one of the best movies ever made!

Classic Gangster Flick
No matter what anybody says, this has to be one of the ten best gangster movies ever made, if not in the top three. If you are a fan of this genre, Scarface is a gourmet banquet of acting, action, dialogue and intensity. And if you don't enjoy this, all I can say is I'm sorry that you're missing out. The only reason I don't give this movie 5 stars is that I don't know what to make of Giorgio Moroder's cheesy sythn soundtrack and disco tunes. If you think in the context of the movie, that 80's Cuban drug dealers might like listening to really bad disco music ("...Rush, rush to the yeyo") then this music works in the confines of the Babylon nightclub along with the bad hair, clothes, Belzer's lousy comedy and the mime. But these songs, if they had to stand on their own outside the movie, would be totally ignored. I wonder if Deborah Harry ( then at the height of fame with her band Blondie) knew when she laid down the vocals for Moroder's muzak that this song was designed as junk to suit the movie or if she thought this might boost her singing career. If you account for the disco muzak as necessary "set dressing" for the Babylon it still doesn't excuse Moroder's cheesy synth soundtrack. How much better this movie could have been if it was scored by an accomplished orchestral composer such as Morricone or Williams. If you want more proof of Moroder's shortcomings check out the soundtrack of Metropolis. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Sixteen years after Francis Ford Coppola won his second Oscar for The Godfather II (his first was for the 1972 Godfather), the director and star Al Pacino attempted to revive the concept one more time. Despite an elaborate plot that involves Michael Corleone seeking redemption through the Vatican while simultaneously preparing his nephew (Andy Garcia) to take over the Corleone family, the film fails to take shape as a truly meaningful experience in the way the preceding movies do. Still, Pacino is very moving as an elder Michael, filled with regret and trying hard to make amends with his wife (Diane Keaton) and grown children (one of whom is played, and not all that well, by the director's daughter, Sofia Coppola). --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (104)

A movie that should not have been attempted
"The Godfather", and its sequel, are quite possibly the greatest films made after the golden age of movies. It's all the more disappointing, then, that "Godfather Part 3" is a turgid, impotent movie that is always trying to set up a big finale, but never concludes anything convincingly. The cinematography lives up to the Godfather pedigree, but that's where the similarity ends. Coppola is clearly trying to revive feelings for Michael Corleone, his now-estranged wife Kay, and introduce newer characters like Sonny Corleone's bastard son (acted superbly by Andy Garcia) and the family's lawyer (George Hamilton). But years after Michael's overboard vendettas in "Godfather 2", the story has too much catching up to do to draw the viewer in. Coppola uses a heavy-handed technique to bring the audience along. The film often recalls previous scenes: the opener is a social gathering... there's a bloody "hit" that wipes out assorted gangsters... there's kitchen plotting... there's an Italian festival as a backdrop for murder. The look is there, but the feel isn't. Equally distressing is the casting. Hamilton's tanned, lounge lizard oiliness make him more of a corporate than "criminal" lawyer. Garcia should have acted the part of Michael's son. Sofia Coppola is sadly wooden, and I suspect she's not just acting the part of a bored princess. Michael's son is totally useless, as are the myriad characters flitting in and out of this film. We get a pope, a priest (unconvincing as Tom Hagen's son), a shifty cardinal, two beefcake bodyguards, a cowardly financier, an assassin who's not very good, and Father Guido Sarducci. Michael's old hitman Al Neri looks a bit paunchy as he fingers the chocolates that conceal his pistol... and what the heck is Brigitte Fonda doing in this story? In the first two films, every character mattered to the plot; there wasn't a dead character ('scuse the pun) in either story. Arguably, the first "Godfather" was a complete entity that needed no sequel. Coppola gambled and came up a winner with Part 2, but it's a tall order to repeat that formula in Part 3. When I fire up the "Godfather" films, I have no trouble forgetting that Number Three was ever made.

Great way to end the classic epic
i Don't understand why everyone are hating on ''the Godfather III'' after all it was nominated for a best picture in 1990 (Goodfellas should have won that year)true it's was not as brilliant as the first film mostly because there was too much recylcling going , but overall Godfather III was a good film .

Lay Off Sophia!
Sophia Copola has been bashed too much, and it's undeserved. While she had no experience, she had a certain sweetness about her. She's also much prettier than Wynona Ryder- YEAH, YOU HEARD ME! Coppola had a certain innocence about her. After all, she was never convicted of stealing.

The bigger problem is with Robert Duvall's absence as the lawyer Tom Hagan. Without his charasmatic presence, the film is seriously lacking. But the film does have its moments.

Good Movie, but ruined the Trilogy
Godfather 3 was a movie saved by one person, Al Pacino. His powerful acting in the first two Godfather films was without a doubt visable in the third. But this movie was destroyed by horrible acting. Andy Garcia portrays Micheal's (Al Pacino) nephew from his dead brother, Sonny. Andy plays Vinnie, a youthful hoodlum looking for power and respect. This movie got Andy Garcia famous, even though it was obvious he was just trying to copy Marlon Brando and Al Pacino's prefomance's in the last two Godfathers, and he did a horrible job and tore down the legacy of Godfather with every scene he was in.

But it wasn't just Andy Gracia who tore apart this movie, oh no. He had some help. Sofia Coppola plays Mary Corleone, Micheal's daughter. You could tell she had no idea what was going on. It was like Francis Ford, the director, just told her to say random things without even giving her a script. Marlon Brando, may he now rest in peace, was probably disgusted with this movie before he died.

To make this movie even worse, they decided to have a dramactic ending scene with Mary shot by a some random person sent to kill Micheal. This scene ends with Al Pacino screaming his lungs out, and the whole time I was sitting there saying, "That guy did you a favor by killing off that unholy death angle sent from the deep dark bowels of heck." The final scene, was indeed, a sad one, but with the acting skills in this movie, I don't blame Micheal for dying. I do have to admit, there are no words to describe the death scene of Micheal Corleone, because that marked the end of the Godfater lagacy, hopefully, forever. But don't get me wrong, I still love the Godfather trilogy, and always will. It just needs to end, here and now.

If you ever plan to watch this movie, tape a knife under your couch, just in case you feel like killing yourself after seeing the horrible acting presented by the infamous Andy Garcia and Sofia Coppola, The Destroyers of the Godfather Trilogy.

soso
godfather III was entertaining, in that we got to see what happened to some of the characters we loved (or hated) from the first two movies. this alone is reason enough to rent it (not buy!). however, godfather III should NOT have been made. the moral of the story is fulfilled with the last scene from godfather II, where michael is sitting alone, old and graying, face lined from a stressful life. after watching "II" i felt that the corleone tale indeed had nowhere left to go. anything after that would be harmful to the artistic acheivement of the first two movies. mario puzo said that his godfather books were really stories of family. michael the all-american marine, from the beginning of "I," and michael the morally bankrupt head of a crime family at the end of "II," should be seen with what has happened to his family along the way. THAT is what the godfather story means. godfather III isn't useless. again, it's fun to see what has happened to those interesting characters from the first two movies. but i wouldn't trade all three hours of director's cut "III" for that last scene in "II"! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Garry Marshall (Pretty Woman) directs the screen adaptation of Terence McNally's play Frankie and Johnny at the Clair de Lune, the story of a short-order cook (Al Pacino) who drives a waitress (Michelle Pfeiffer) crazy with his adamant courtship and mixed messages. The film is okay and not much more than that, the major stumbling block being Marshall's failure to scrub away enough star veneer on Pacino and Pfeiffer to accept them as minimum-wage drones with nowhere to go but toward each other. Fortunately, Marshall's feel for the texture offered by supporting players--Hector Elizondo as a café owner, Nathan Lane as Pfeiffer's inevitably gay neighbor-buddy, Kate Nelligan as another lonely waitress--keeps things interesting enough. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (35)

"We're expecting another call from you any minute"
Surprisingly subtle love story from director Garry Marshall. I think it tanked in theaters for the same reason I didn't see it until it went to video--I wasn't ready to accept Michelle Pfeiffer as a greasy-spoon waitress (or Al Pacino as a short-order cook). But I forgot that they can both act, and they do a wonderful job here. Nathan Lane is hilarious in a supporting role; he provides what might be the single funniest line that movie year.

Best Romantic Movie Ever Made!
This movie is one of the best!! You have to own it. If you are a hopeless romantic, then you MUST have it!!!! Not a movie for the kiddies. Just you and with someone you love or want to love...

I wish I could live in that Universe.
The dialogs are a dream come true.

I heard some people were upset that Michelle Pfeiffer was cast as Frankie. Apparently the actress who played that character on stage was Kathy Bates and came to be regarded by many as definitive in that role. I'm sure she was terrific, and I loved her in "Dolores Claiborne", but as much as I sympathize with those who claim that it's all part of Hollywood's conspiracy to make ordinary women feel dissatisfied with their "real", ordinary bodies and faces, Michelle Pfeiffer - gorgeous as she is - is a sensitive, real performer, not a Barbie doll in any way, and though I couldn't be more different from her physically, I find it very easy to relate to her thanks to her talent.

The movie is a gem, though every time I watch anything with Al Pacino in it I'm always counting the seconds for the "scream scene". I'm not sure I ever watched a movie in which he starred, that he didn't scream his head off at some point, and this one's no exception. One love scene is basically spoiled by it, although die hard fans can always make the case that the script was asking for it. No minor problems like this one can spoil the movie as a whole though, that's what's important.

A true love story
The way it really is. two people who aren't anything special at all. And they find one another and make it work despite everything else. because they have to. because they need something in their lives and this is the best thing coming around. Nice.

Beautiful Love Story!
I saw this in 1991 when I was in middle school and I instantly fell in love with the movie. This film introduced me to romantic comedies and though I am not a fan of most films of this genre this one has a lot of heart and soul.

Al Pacino took a break from his usual cop/crook roles to play Johnny, a sweet ex-con with a bruised heart. He's a kindred spirit looking for someone else to share his lonely life with. Michelle Pheiffer is the same kindred spirit except Frankie has been so bruised she can not get back. Frankie and Johnny go through twists and turns before Frankie agrees to go out on a date. The more Frankie sees into Johnny's world she realizes he's the one person who can help her move past her former relationship with a man who beat her. This actually scares Frankie even more and she does her best to fight Johnny's advances but ultimately cannot fight her own heart.

This movie is the perfect date movie all rolled into one. It would have been a great family movie except for the thrown in sex scene between Johnny and Cora. I didn't agree with that because it didn't belong in a wholesome movie like this. The set up of the diner was refreshing and it was good to see a film where everyone was struggling for paychecks and not living in mansions and driving fancy cars. I am not from New York but I got a true sense of New York life after seeing this movie. The director ( Garry Marshall) had just come off of his super hit with Pretty Woman and proved he still had the touch of gold when it came to romantic movies.

The cast was wonderful. I enjoyed Al Pacino's innocent betrayal of Johnny and he brought in a lot of himself into the character. Michelle Pfeiffer was good as well. I just wished Frankie hadn't have been so grumpy because it was hard for me to warm up to her at first. But I realized Frankie was the way she was because of the hardships in her life. This is a movie for anyone to enjoy: young, middle-aged, senior, black, white, asian. It's one of those movies that doesn't provide any culture gaps or society gaps. It's just a nice love story where anyone can relate.

Everyone has had to struggle with emotions or money and everyone has fallen in love some time or another. This film combines all those elements into a breathtaking movie. If that's not enough for you to see it, check it out for the supporting characters. Nathan Lane is a hoot. Everyone should see this film at least once. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Al Pacino cuts a noble figure in this very enjoyable drama by director Brian De Palma (Scarface), based on a pair of books by Edwin Torres. Pacino plays a Puerto Rican ex-con trying hard to go straight, but his loyalty to his lowlife attorney (a virtually unrecognizable Sean Penn) and enemies on the street make that choice difficult. Penelope Ann Miller plays, somewhat unlikely, a stripper who has a romance with Pacino's character. The film finds De Palma tempering his more outlandish moves (think of Body Double or Snake Eyes) just as he did with the popular Untouchables and Mission: Impossible. But while Carlito's Way was not commercially successful and never rises to the level of greatness, it is a genuinely compelling movie graced with a fine performance by Pacino and a surprising one from Penn. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (92)

Realistic, Gritty Crime Tale
In one of his best performances ever, Al Pacino is the engine that keeps "Carlito's Way" moving from beginning to end. Recently-released from prison, Carlos Brigante (played marvelously by Pacino) is a former Puerto Rican drug lord who ruled New York City's drug world during the 1960's and 1970's. Assisted by his lawyer (Sean Penn) Pacino is determined to stay out of the trade that landed him in prison in the first place. However, as usual trouble always lurks in every corner.

Deciding to buy and operate a Latin nightclub from an owner who is seriously in debt (played by the famous Argentine comedian Jorge Porcel, who had a cult following throughout Latin America due to his sexually-charged comedy skit show "A La Cama Con Porcel; he is know as the Latin-version of "Benny Hill"). Yet as old faces reemerge onto the scene, newer faces have also started to take a foothold in Brigante's former empire, especially Benny Blanco (played by the ever-wonderful John Leguizamo).

Directed by Brian de Palma ("Carrie"), this is one of the most realistic, and historic accurate pictures of life in New York City's urban jungle during the late 1970's/early 1980's. Penelope Ann Miller ("Adventures in Babysitting" is great as Brigante's love interest, and Luis Guzman always is a scene-stealer playing Pacino's right-hand man.

The DVD version contains production notes, cast biographies, and the original theatrical trailer and the sound and picture quality are excellent. Pacino (a Bronx native) masters a perfect Puerto Rican accent in the same way he mastered his Cuban-emigre accent in "Scarface". "Carlito's Way" is guaranteed to keep you entertained due to thrilling performances by the entire cast, amazing cinematography, great directing, and most importantly, incredible realism. Destined to become a modern urban classic.

scarface with a twist
When the guys that brought you Scarface team up again what bad
things can happen.Brian De Palma and Al Pacino two of the biggest
stars on their film duties in Hollywood today.This movie really
has the 80's,disco feel scarface as but as the De Palma plot turn
and twists seen in Snake Eyes,Body Double,and Raising Cain so it'
s all very entertaining.Along with another De Palma regular Sean
Penn(Casualties Of War) plays the coke addicted wacko lawyer to
absolute perfection.This film not as violent as Scarface as more
plot twists which makes it almost more entertaining with a great
cast including John Leguizamo and Penelope Ann Miller Carlito's
Way is one of Pacino's,Penn's,and De Palma's best films ever so
if you like a mixture of The Usual Suspects and Scarface give
Carlito's Way a watch it's great.

What is so Wonderful about this movie?
This is not that great of a movie. I dont know why people are making such a big deal out of this movie. I saw it, I tryed to understand it, I just thought it wasnt one of Pacino's best....sorry

Pacino and Penn give great performances
almost a sequal to scarface..Carlito Brigante is Tony Montana after doing 15 yrs and having a change of heart...I cant beleive there wasnt some thinking on those lines from the actor and director of both movies...Sean Penn nearly steals this movie as David Kleinfeld Carlitos lawyer is more crooked than the crooks he defends..and Luis Guzmán as Pachanga shows why hes one of the best character actors working today...

The best film of Brian de Palma
The facts derivated from the story put us before a man who wants to get away his destiny , but (in a mgnificent shakesperian mood), nobody can escape from his past.
There's no doubt that this film has multiple virtues. Sean Penn grew up like actor al least two thousands steps. His role is so well made like the sinister lawyer without a drop of scruples, and this is the fate's arm that literally takes to Tony Montana and throws to hell.
In my personal view, I think Sean Penn deserved an Academy award by this role.
It's a sinister view about the redemption given by Montana since he leaves the jail.
Pacino gives one of his more relevant roles all along his career.
He gives us that crude sensation of walking in the edge of the knife through all the film. Will it be necessary to say that in this film like in others, Pacino is much more than an actor, he is a nature's force and elevates the standard performance of every one of his partners?.
Watch for instance one of my favorite beauties of the cinema: Penelope Ann Miller. Her role is so well made that this film literally gave to David Lynch the final decission for including her in Mulholland's drive.
There are several unforgettable sequences in the film. The first of these belongs to that claustrophobic situation in which we find Carlitos, when he decides to rescue the money of his beloved friend. In his honor code, Carlitos can not give a "no" like answer. And that's the road to his perdition.
The other anthology scene is that made in the hospital when he visits to the lawyer by last time. The slow camera describes all the movements of the false police who revenges to his father and we can see how the bullets are released by Carlitos just before.
The final shots camera in the chase when Carlitos has planned everything and runs with the clock dictating its final minutes. The angles of camera and the tension produced in the train station for me is above his tribute to Potemkin in "The untouchables".
Carlitos way is a cult movie. But also you can consider like the shakespeare spirit made present in what I would design together with Road to Perdition , the most original "film noir" movies in the last fifteen years. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Like moths to a flame, great actors gravitate to the singular genius of playwright-screenwriter David Mamet, who updated his Pulitzer Prize-winning play for this all-star screen adaptation. The material is not inherently cinematic, so the movie's greatest asset is Mamet's peerless dialogue and the assembly of a once-in-a-lifetime cast led by Al Pacino, Jack Lemmon, and Alec Baldwin (the last in a role Mamet created especially for the film). Often regarded as a critique of the Reagan administration's impact on the American economy, the play and film focus on a competitive group of real estate salesmen who've gone from feast to famine in a market gone cold. When an executive "motivator" (Alec Baldwin) demands a sales contest among the agents in the cramped office, the stakes are critically high: any agent who fails to meet his quota of sales "leads" (i.e., potential buyers) will lose his job. This intense ultimatum is a boon for the office superstar (Pacino), but a once-successful salesman (Lemmon) now finds himself clinging nervously to faded glory. Political and personal rivalries erupt under pressure when the other agents (Alan Arkin, Ed Harris) suspect the office manager (Kevin Spacey) of foul play. This cauldron of anxiety, tension, and sheer desperation provides fertile soil for Mamet's scathingly rich dialogue, which is like rocket fuel for some of the greatest actors of our time. Pacino won an Oscar nomination for his volatile performance, but it's Lemmon who's the standout, doing some of the best work of his distinguished career. Director James Foley shapes Mamet's play into a stylish, intensely focused film that will stand for decades as a testament to its brilliant writer and cast. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (191)

Docked two stars for shoddy DVD treatment
First of all, let me go on the record as saying that Glengarry Glen Ross is one of my all-time favorite films. The acting is nothing short of astounding. Each actor (particularly Jack Lemmon) is at the top of their form. This is an actor's movie. There's no special effects, chase scenes, superfluous love story subplot, or pat ending. It should be obvious to anyone watching this film that it is based on a play -- specifically, David Mamet's Pulitzer-prize winning play of the same name. Mamet also wrote the screenplay, which is full of the fiery brilliance he always brings to the table. This is not a film for the timid. The language is raw and crude. The film takes no prisoners and I love it.

The film takes place in a real estate office, where cutthroat salesman do "cold calling," basically selling land by telemarketing. It's a brutal business (we've all been on the other end of that phone call and usually end up hanging up on the salesman), and the people these guys work for are brutal as well.

Case in point: during an early, crucial scene, Blake (played brilliantly by Alec Baldwin) tells the gathered crew that the top prize for highest sales is a Cadillac. The second prize is a set of steak knives and the third prize -- "you're fired." The speech is a sadistic, humiliating version of a pep talk, all macho brags and venomous insults. He dangles the new contacts, or "leads," in the faces of the salesmen. "They're for closers," he tells them. These guys would kill for the good leads, and Blake knows it. The scene was written especially fo the film and Baldwin eats it up. It's easily the best thing I've seen him do.

Jack Lemmon plays Sheldon Levene, the office's oldest employee. He used to be the best one around (they call him "The Machine"), but he's been on a bad streak lately and desperately needs his luck to change. His daughter's in the hospital and is unable to pay her medical bills. Al Pacino plays Ricky Roma, the current hotshot. His way of befriending a potential client in a bar and gaining his trust is odd, but effective (his opening monologue is totally insane, but thoroughly entertaining). Kevin Spacey is the office manager who will not bend the rules for anyone, much to the rage of the office. Ed Harris and Alan Arkin round out the rest of the salesmen. Harris plays Dave Moss, who has the world's biggest chip on his shoulder. Arkin is George Aaronow, who desperately needs to land a good sale. Most of his role consists of reacting to Harris and Pacino, but he's very good.

The day after Baldwin's talk, the salesman come to work to find the office robbed. The new leads are missing. Probably an inside job. It could have been anyone. Everyone is questioned by the police and everyone is insulted that they are considered suspects. Ricky is mad because the robbery may have screwed up his latest sale, putting his ownership of the Cadillac in jeopardy. Also, last night's client comes looking for him -- he has second thoughts. The way Ricky tries desperately to blow off his client while still playing the salesman is creepy and brilliant. Lemmon is amazing as Levene -- I've never seen desperation played so well.

Having said all that, I, along with the rest of the GGR fans, have been waiting years for this film to arrive on DVD. Especially since it's been promised as a "two-disc special edition." What a disappointing package it turned out to be.

Well, let's be fair. First of all, the film. It looks great. It sounds great. They did a great job with the film itself. But don't promise a loaded special edition and then give us something as lame as this. The only commentary track on the widescreen version is director James Foley. He only speaks during three scenes. The other commentary tracks are only available on the full-frame version (on disc two) and are not scene-specific.

The extras include "Magic Time," a tribute to the late Jack Lemmon, which is well-meaning but could have been a lot better. It does, however, end with a clip from Lemmon's appearance on "Inside the Actor's Studio," which is sweet. There is also "Always be Closing," another slapdash mini-documentary that features directors, playwrights, actors (including GGR's Alan Arkin and Alec Baldwin) discussing the role of the salesman in plays and films, as well as actual salespeople themselves. Sound interesting? It's not. It lacks any kind of cohesive thread. It appears to have been produced by a first-year film student. There's no structure to it. It looks unfinished.

There's also a clip from Kevin Spacey's appearance on "Inside the Actor's Studio" where an audience member acts out a scene from GGR with Spacey. I'll admit, I enjoyed that bit.

Why in the world didn't Criterion release this? They would have done a much better job and besides, they released the laserdisc version (with commentary tracks from Jack Lemmon, among others, I'm told). What we end up with here is an amazing film with an amazing transfer...and a bunch of lame extras thrown in.

If you're a fan of this film, by all means, buy the DVD...but don't expect much in the area of extras.

Best Sales Movie Ever
Exaggeration & Repetition: Performance keys to live by

There are two keys to being a good performer, whether you are writing or telling a story, whether you are selling something or selling yourself: Always exaggerate things by one thousand percent, and use repetition at least 500 percent.

Those who understate a story or product that may not be very strong in the first place, will fall victims to making that story or product look weak. The way to avoid making yourself or whoever/whatever you are representing look weak is to follow the aforementioned keys. The way to do that when the product or story is weak is to learn how to "B.S." That is where being a good performer comes in...

You are an actor, and being outgoing and to the extreme will always give the impression that whatever you are talking about is "the best." A good actor can do this perfectly and not come off as overly co.cky or obnoxious. Always say what the other person wants to hear. The customer is always right. Do whatever you can to "nail the gig."

There is something else to keep in mind when doing this particular form of "B.S.-ing," and that is the "K.I.S.S." method of "keep-it-simple-stupid." That may sound like a contradiction to the keys, but it is not. Keeping it simple, is not disclosing the real specifics, but still making your case sound like it's above and beyond every other possible option. This comes in handy particularly when someone asks you a question that you may not know the full answer to. That is where "filling" comes in---something that students do when writing an English essay on a test. If you have a general idea of what you want to say but don't have a specific reply to a portion of the question, you "fill" that essay with long winded run-on sentences. However, the whole thing must be coherent, and if your essay is well-written and has a good amount of clever puns and humor, you cannot lose. If you are a slick actor or writer, you can fool even the best of English teachers into at least giving you an "E" for effort.

Another thing to keep in mind is that you will never lose if you can "meet in the middle." What that means is this: Suppose a shirt looks like it is worth $15 to a customer but you build it up so much and make it sound like it's worth $50... By the end of the conversation, if you are doing your job, you are going to get them to meet you in the middle and the final conclusion will be that the price of the shirt is around $25. The real worth may be no more than $15 (and maybe even less), and certainly nowhere near $50, but you still get the "E" for effort and earn $25. You aren't really getting into details on why the shirt is worth so much more than the customer thinks, but you are pounding it into their head that it's worth $50. You are exaggerating and repeating. You are using adjectives that may or may not apply to that shirt but you are making it sound great and far above what it's worth. So finally, they will concede a price of $25. You were stretching the truth about the shirt being worth $50 and they may have been undervaluing it at $15. Essentially, you are both lying and both playing a game with one another, but finally, a minimum of $25 is agreed upon. No one may ever find out the true value, but it's irrelevant anyway. This works in any situation.

Exaggeration and repetition. But remember to K.I.S.S.

These keys could have been discussed in one paragraph, but it took an entire page, yet you as the reader were compelled to hang onto each word from start to finish. So I succeeded as a writer in that this essay was read from start to finish and my point was proven.

The "Whale"

A whale is a customer that you pull in, hook, line and sinker and mount on the wall. He is a golden nugget, a superstar, a monster. This type of customer that you get lucky enough to snag will be your customer for life. That means, you will either be set up for life from one deal you strike up or you will have him as a repeat customer that you can call back as a strong possible prospect forever.

Sometimes it is tough to spot a whale, he may not always be overly outgoing or obvious about being a "buyer." So anyone can be a whale. The way to learn if someone is a whale or not is to simply get into their home and learn about their life and about them. So anything you can do to get your foot in the door will work.

Start off small and discuss something that may appeal to their interest and work your way into their world. Don't pre-judge them until you learn about them. This will take time and patience, but all you need is a small "in" and then you can build on that and if you win the whale's trust, all it takes is one big deal to set you up for life.

So practice the "A.B.C." method of "always be closing" with everyone, because anyone can be a prospect. While the impression may be given that you genuinely care about them, the main objective is getting them to sign on the dotted line.

Of course the obvious "Gordon Gecko" type whales who go around showboating their spending habits and their skills are the true whales that if you are lucky enough to somehow snag, you are set.

A play trapped inside a movie.
'Glengarry Glen Ross' has good dialogue and good acting by the fine actors, but this is actually a play trapped inside a movie. They should not have made it into a movie.

Put that coffee down!
If you're looking for car crashes, gun fights and naked people you won't find them here. But if great dialogue and raw emotion hold your interest, it doesn't get any better than this. Every one of these guys should have won an award for their roles in this movie. Not sure if this particular DVD contains the interview with Jack Lemmon that was included after one of the cable TV broadcasts of the film. If not, it should!

Always Be Closing!
Most people think of explosions, car chases and action/adventure films as guy movies. Well, maybe, but those are for boys. There's no car chase in this movie, no deaths and no guns. But it manages to hold your attention while telling its story of real estate salesmen. This is the quintessential guy movie. This screen adaptation of David Mamet's Pulitzer-winning play is incredibly stagebound, which was a stroke of genius: thus, the fast-paced dialogue and the desperate, macho facades of the characters become, and stay, the focus. This allows the amazing talents of the cast to flourish. Pacino and Lemmon are untouchable. Ed Harris is outstanding. Having just the four main characters makes the whole thing seem oddly forced at times. Baldwin's slick delivery of his ball-busting speech to the three underachieving salesmen, is a scene to remember. Highly recommended. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Hoo-ah! After seven Oscar nominations for his outstanding work in films such as The Godfather, Serpico, and Dog Day Afternoon, it's ironic that Al Pacino finally won the Oscar for his grandstanding lead performance in this 1992 crowd pleaser. As the blind, blunt, and ultimately benevolent retired Lieutenant Colonel Frank Slade, Pacino is both hammy and compelling, simultaneously subtle and grandly over-the-top when defending his new assistant and prep school student Charlie (Chris O'Donnell) at a disciplinary hearing. While the subplot involving Charlie's prep-school crisis plays like a sequel to Dead Poets Society, Pacino's adventurous escapades in New York City provide comic relief, rich character development, and a memorable supporting role for Gabrielle Anwar as the young woman who accepts the colonel's invitation to dance the tango. Scent of a Woman is a remake of the 1972 Italian film Profumo di donna. In addition to Pacino's award, the picture garnered Oscar nominations for director Martin Brest and for screenwriter Bo Goldman. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (73)

By far my favorite movie
When I first heard of this movie, I had no clue what it was about. My friend and I saw a teaser poster with Al Pacino and Gabrielle Anwar dancing the tango labeled "Scent of a Woman". Putting two and two together, we went into the theater thinking we were watching a love story until the movie started. Whoops. Despite my misgivings in the beginning, I was pleasantly surprised. What I found was a riveting story of mentor-mentee relationship. I love movies that involve the master taking young grasshopper under his wing. Except master is not Mr. Perfect himself. Both the student and the teacher learn from each other's weaknesses. And despite Lt Col Slade's struggle with his misfortunate blinding accident, his Army core values were still in tact. Hard-working and willing to give up a Thanksgiving weekend to look after an embittered retiree, Slade sees an underlying goodness in Chris O'Donnell's fragile, fence-sitting character, Charlie. Like most young men his age, he was susceptible to peer pressure and could easily choose the wrong path as his friends had. Slade is blind but easily sees the temptation to compromise the boy's integrity and future. "This old bat has sharper radar than the Nautilus" Slade tells his young league. He lays all the cards out for Charlie to see, but knew instinctively it was up to the boy to make his own decision. Charlie eventually shows his true colors in the face of adversity. Like a good soldier, he never leaves his commander's side even when the danger is self-inflicting. Character like that is a rarity in anyone and must be preserved! This prompts Slade to reciprocate his support for Charlie who is enrolled in a prestigious school reknowned for producing some of the most important figure heads in America. "Be careful what type of leaders you're making," he warns the school staff. Charlie learns lessons in life that no school could teach him.

Underneath the tough exterior, there was a softer side to Slade. He definitely had a thing for the ladies. Instead of playing up a macho cassanova, "Mac-Daddy" persona predominate in a lot of films today, Slade is quite the charmer and gentlemen. He's cultured, sophisticated, genteel and surprisingly knowledgeable about women's perfume. Hence the film's title. I find that warrior-poet quality incredibly sexy and appealing. You can't resist a man who makes the tango look so easy and doesn't mind getting "all tangled up" with you. A beautiful role played by Pacino earning him a well-deserved oscar which probably was most credited for by his empowering monologue in the end. This is by far his best role in a movie.

Lovely film. Sweet, sad, romantic yet uplifting. This is truly a classic for the ages.

One of This Decade's Best Films
I have probably watched "Scent of A Woman" thirty times. I find it one of those movies that becomes hypnotic a few minutes into it. Al Pacino is absolutely outstanding in the role of Lieutenant Colonel Frank Slade, retired from the U.S. Army. Slade, blinded by a drinking/grenade game he was playing with one of his drinking buddies, is now living as an embittered alcoholic with an adult niece, her husband and two little children. He is an arrogant, angry man used to issuing orders and not displaying very much gratitude or affection.

Charlie Simms, played well by Chris O'Donnell, is a scholarship at a nearby prep school in the same town in New Hampshire where Slade lives. Charlie's trying to earn some money over the Thanksgiving weekend so that he can travel home to his parents in Oregon at the Christmas break.He discovers an ad placed by Slade's niece to care for her blind uncle over the Thanksgiving break so that she can travel with her husband and kids to Albany, New York for Thanksgiving with her in-laws.Charlie answers the ad and the adventure quickly develops.

Slade has his own plans for Thanksgiving. A last big blowout in New York City before killing himself.

He is abusive to Charlie at first and acts as if he is one of his military aides. He doesn't let him in on his plans until it's practically time to leave for New York -- while Charlie had been told by Slade's niece that the weekend would be at her home looking after her uncle.

A beautiful bonding begins as Slade and Simms interact and except for his anger and bitterness, it is obvious that Slade is not particularly handicapped by his blindness as he has developed an extra few "senses" which make him seem remarkable.

The journey to New York is a roller coaster of emotion from comic to touching to almost tragic. When Slade finally decides to kill himself, Charlie manages to save the day -- although it's pretty touch and go keeping you on the edge of your seat throughout.

Charlie has problems of his own. He's not particularly self confident and Slade is tremendously intimidating. Charlie's other problems center around an incident at school which places him at a crossroads -- whether he should rat on some kids at school at the headmaster's own brand of intimidation, or face expulsion.

The movie concludes with an impassioned speech by Colonel Slade on Charlie' behalf before a school-wide assembly being held for a disciplinary committee hearing on the incident Charlie has knowledge of.

Simms remains true to himself and proves himself to show new confidence and an outstanding sense of personal integrity.

Slade has also benefited by his own plans gone awry and his opening a window of care for Charlie as another human being. He emerges as a sign of hope to overcome his bitterness, anger and alcoholism.

An absolutely remarkable film!!!

My Two Scents
Actor Al Pacino has amassed quite a stellar career over the years, filled with strong performances, that make him one of the best at what he does. He skills, magnetism, and range put him at the top of my favorites lists. For 1992's Scent Of A Woman he hits another high point, winning an Oscar, and alowing a relative newcomer to earn his acting chops, working with a master.

Charlie Simms (Chris O'Donnell) is a young scholarship student at an exclusive prep school in New Hampshire who agrees to look after Lt. Col. Frank Slade (Al Pacino), a blind retired army officer, to earn extra money over the Thanksgiving break. Frank is an acid tongued and cynical bully who completely suprises Charlie with his plans for their weekend together. He has bought them tickets to New York, booked a suite at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel and rented a limousine, all to take the Big Apple by storm. Before Charlie realizes what he has gotten into, he is accompanying the colonel around Manhattan as they begin their wild and eye-opening adventures that include a fast-paced test drive in a Ferrari and a tango with a beautiful woman (Gabrielle Anwar). Frank's passion is women; he waxes lyrically on their bodies, scent, and sensuality, and gradually Charlie becomes aware of the sentimental romantic buried deep within the lonely man's heart.

Directed by Martin Brest, the film is nearly pitch perfect, with Pacino commanding the screen. Even though, I know Pacino isn't really blind--he plays the disability very well. By the end, I couldn't imagine another actor, playing it as "real" as he did. I thought O'Donnell was also quite impressive holding his own oppossite Pacino. The script from Bo Goldman has drama, humor and is very organic. The only minor problem I had was the film's very end. A bit predictable if you ask me...

The film deserves to have an upgrade to special edition status. The current DVD has little in the way of extras. I wanted more. There's only a few production notes and cast biographies on the disc. Not even the theatrical trailer made the extras. Until a special edition is a reality, the film is still a must see, even in its current form on DVD.

I'll Show you out of order!
I absolutely love this movie. The first advertisement I saw for this movie was a poster of Al Pacino and Gabriel Anwar doing the tango. My firend I went into the movie theaters eagerly awaiting to see a lovely romantic comedy. But when the first scene started with a boys school and just kept going, we were beginning to wonder if we walked into the right movie.

However, the movie was captivating as soon as Al Pacino came on screen, he obligates Chris O'Donnell to accompany him to the airport and head to New York. You keep wanting to see what happened next in the movie and before you know it, you've just fallen in love with a hopeless manic-depressive and a young kid whose promising future is about to go under because of a compromising situation that swing the wrong way.

Where does loyalty start and integrity ends? Both Pacino and O'Donnell have to come to grips with in some fashion or another. But there is no doubt the bond between the two of them is unbr