Reviews (27)

A Real Christian Movie For Once
Quo Vadis is a movie Ive seen many times and never tire watching. It has beautiful and panoramic scenes making it worthy of an epic. I loved Ustinov playing the evil demonic Nero and Laffan playing Nero's Empress wife. Truely I rarely see such great acting in our films of today.
The greatest attributes of the film are the colliseum scenes in which the Christians are slaughtered for falsley being blamed for the burning of Rome. Nero was fully responsible for this horrid act. The scenes of Nero's court are entertaining and funny to see. Watching all of Nero's men cowtowing to their emperor and at the same time showing contempt for Nero's actions.
The sets are great for 1951 standards and even by todays standards. The Roman Legion formations and custumes were excellent. Taylor's acting is medicore but sufficient and Debra Kerr is a beautiful woman who portrays the poor Christian slave convincingly. It is so so convincing, you would think she was a devout Christian in her private life to her credit as an actress. Also the costumes deserve a five star rating!
The only negative thoughts to the film are the historial accuracies which reveal how short of time the Christian persecution lasted. It didn't end with the end of Nero. Don't let this keep you from buying a great film which does show some Roman and early Christian history and how Roman society existed during Nero's rule. I can't wait for the DVD production of this film. I only wish Hollywood would show films of this quality.

The biggest of the spectacle movies!
Quo Vadis is a shining example of Hollywood at it's best, for a change! Big cast, big budget and a big plot set in Nero's Rome. Robert Taylor turns in one of his finest performances as Marcus Vinicus, an arrogant Roman commander who slowly finds his way of life and love being changed by a shy Christian girl, Deborah Kerr. Kerr is bewitching as the innocent in a debauched Rome and Peter Ustinov is chilling as the nutty but deadly Nero. All I can say is, if you buy this movie, you'll never regret it.

A musical review.......
Miklos Rozsa did a terrific job in composing the music for this movie. The great passion and emotion he can communicate is unsurpassed. In my opinion as a freelance composer it was very difficult to write the music for this tremendous film. It requiered a kind of kaleidoscopic character, each scene needed its own aura, its own color and unlike most filmscores it does not and it can not consist of short flimflams, each scene needed its own musical movement.

The most I like the `Christ is King` theme for choir wich is also sung by the matyrs in the arena. A song wich is unstoppable and will not die or fade away, it is the centerstone of the Quo Vadis' musical climax.

VERY ENTERTAINING EPIC!!!
I love this movie but I will not buy this on VHS. Why isn't it available on DVD? This movie deserves to be released on DVD - there is no excuse. What's the problem? PLEASE RELEASE THIS MOVIE ON DVD!!!

Christianity Versus The Decadence of Nero's Rome
"Quo Vadis", based on the novel by Henryk Sienkiewicz would have to be near the top of my list of favourite 1950's religious epic productions. Indeed "Epic" is the word to fittingly describe this mammoth MGM production that cost an amazing 7 million dollars to make in 1950 and was the studio's biggest money maker since "Gone With The Wind". It has everything an epic movie lover could desire, the already stated fine literary source, breathtaking sets (no computer generated effects here!), meticulously researched historical costumes, enormous crowds scenes and a stunning recreation of Pagan Rome at it's height. The film boasts an extraordinary cast but towering over all of them is the late Peter Ustinov in his unforgettable performance as the deranged Nero. His interpretation of this infamous Emperor who began the first concentrated persecution of the early Christians is still the visual image for a lot of people, myself included,that first comes to mind when Nero's name is mentioned. Already having been filmed a number of times in the silent era and once again since this 1951 film, this is still the definitive version of the story of the early Christian Church struggling to survive in Nero's Rome after the great fire.

With the advent of television in the early 1950's Hollywood fought back with splashy, lavish productions that could not be matched by the flickering black and white image of television in it's infancy. "Quo Vadis", lent itself perfectly for this purpose and an already shaky MGM put all of it's resources into the filming of this elaborate production. The story centres around cocky Roman soldier Marcus Vinicius (Robert Taylor) who after three years of successful campaigning returns to savour the delights of Nero's Rome. Detained at the villa of a retired Roman general Marcus falls for the simple charms of the general's adapted daughter Lygia (Deborah Kerr) who unbeknown to Marcus is secretly a Christian. Seeing her love for him but not understanding the families belief in the love of a single god and in loving your fellow man despite their background or race Marcus has Lygia taken to Rome and placed in Nero's "House of Women" and seeks to make her is own. Lygia escapes and is taken in by other believers but in the meanwhile Marcus finds himself the focus of the unwelcome and quite dangerous affections of the Empress Poppaea (Patricia Laffan). Meanwhile Nero's meglomania continues to grow and he develops a wild scheme to rebuild Rome to his own glory and secretly sets the city on fire. The backlash from this act however sets Nero to find a scapegoat and thus begins the persecution of the Christian sect that are, to the amazement of the Romans, the disciples of a simple young carpenter from Galilee who was executed for his beliefs. Marcus finds Lygia however both are imprisoned together as Christian believers to become the sport of Nero's festivities in the arena. The appearance of the Apostle Peter who has been called to Rome by Christ's message gives the Christians the strength to endure their ordeals and Marcus and Lygia are married by him just prior to his own matrydom on Vatican Hill. Nero however goes too far in his persecution and the mob turns on him resulting in his fall from power and suicide and the reins of power being taken over by the more level headed General Galba.

While "Quo Vadis", in some areas is not always accurate historically the faults are not glaring ones and it does give a vivid picture of the growth of the early Christian movement and the persecution it endured which of course went on long after Nero's death. First and foremost it is inspiring and dramatic viewing and is the classic example of old style movie making at its most lavish. The film is filled with unforgettable images, for example the huge crowd scenes during Marcus' triumpiant entry into Rome, and the burning of the city by Nero which incredibly was done on both full sized and miniature sets. The cold blooded destruction of the Christians in Nero's Circus of course is probably the most vivid image in the film and is riverting in it's horror and accurate depiction of people being eaten by lions or being used as human torches. These scenes in "Quo Vadis", have I believe never been bettered in depicting the insanity and brutality of Nero and his regime. Performances are uniformily fine here. As the two lovers Robert Taylor and Deborah Kerr are just perfect as the two illmatched lovers from different worlds. Finlay Currie does a most inspirational piece of work as Peter and special mention must go to Patricia Laffan who is perfect in a chilling performance as the evil Empress Poppaea. Directed by MGM veteran Mervyn LeRoy, who was responsible for such diverse MGM productions as "Waterloo Bridge", and "Blossoms in the Dust", here he is still just as at home with this super scale type of film and his directoral integrity is evident in every frame of this film. "Quo Vadis", ended up being nominated for 8 Oscars including Best Picture and Best Supporting Actor for Peter Ustinov.

I always find "Quo Vadis", a moving viewing experience generally around Easter time when my thoughts often go back to the earliest years of my religion. Liking the older style of movie making I can also appreciate the film on its superb technical achievements and massive historical recreation. This however never submerges my appreciation of its very simple message that all people need to love each other despite their differences for the world to be a happier place. Take time soon to view this epic production of "Quo Vadis", you wont regret it. ... Read more

Reviews (73)

A Disney Great
I recently rediscovered this film in our video collection. I loved it as a young child and still love it now!

Disney's Robin Hood is so funny! There is plenty of silliness for kids and great humor for adults. I find something new to laugh at with each viewing. My favorite line, however, has to be Prince John's "Hiss! Hiss! You're never around when I need you!" (Hilarious in context, I promise) Portraying the characters as animals works well for the film. It makes the story (a classic itself) more accessible to children. The score is simple, but superb and the songs are delightful. Although, as a University of Illinois fan, I am slightly miffed at the use of 'On, Wisconsin!' for Lady Kluck's football-esque run past a score of King John's guards. This is a great story told in classic Disney style.

Although frequently overlooked, I consider this to be the best film version of Robin Hood and Disney's best movie. Enjoyment is guaranteed.

OO-DE-LALLY, golly! What a movie!!
The first movies I can remember watching as a kid are Robin Hood and The Jungle Book. It makes me very curious to read some of the reviews on here that claim that this is a "lesser known" Disney movie, yet so many people have given testimonials about being an adult who still loves this movie. Well... here is my suggestion - buy this movie, a package of microwave popcorn and stake out a spot on the couch with a kid you love and introduce them to this timeless classic!

It is true that the extras are not as great as those on other Disney DVDs (this is a GOLD Collection DVD remember), but are you really buying the DVD for the extras, or for the movie itself? Note to reader: if you answered "extras", then go rent this, rather than buy it. You'll be too disappointed by the one song sing-a-long, storybook option, and brief 16 question quiz to really enjoy your purchase. However, despite being a colorized version of the original, you might get a kick out of the 1933 Mickey cartoon "Ye Olden Days".

Robin Hood is a well-known old English legend, based in part on actual historical people, places and medieval life (ex. King Richard, Price John, Nottingham, caste system, etc). Sounds like a mini history lesson disguised as Disney entertainment! *wink* Older kids might be interested in comparing the Disney version of the story to other film and or book versions of Robin Hood. I know it sounds like I am analysing this too much, but having written a paper on this exact topic for a college english class, I know what I'm talking about. You can't ask for a better assignment than watching a Disney movie, eh?! :)

For whatever reason you choose to watch this DVD, and at whatever age you are, you will love this movie and it will become one of your favorites!

The Best
This is one of the BEST Robin Hood films ever made! I caught this one on Disney when it first came out. I loved the silly king and the goofy vile snake. Such a great classic film. Memories to be made with this one.

A breakthrough in Anthropomorphic characterization!
Disney's version of "Robin Hood" was a breakthrough in the use of Anthropomorphic or "humanized" animals in animation. It was the first time any animation studio created an all-animal cast playing roles usually reserved for humans in a full length movie. It holds a unique place in Disney Animation just for this reason.

Believe it or not, this movie's influence has been far-reaching on the design and stories of later animated movies (Don Bluth's "The Secret of NIMH", Disney's own "Lion King"), many animated television shows ("Ducktales", "TaleSpin"), comic books, video games (Nintendo's "Starfox"), Asian Anime and the growing "Furry" Fandom on the internet today.

The 70's were a uninspired and directionless time for Disney Animation and "Robin Hood" shows the effects of this. The animation is flat and looks cheaply done due to the use of Xeroxing the pencilled animation onto cells instead the precise but expensive way of hand tracing. Some of the animation where characters are dancing was directly copied from "Snow White" and "The Aristocats". When Sir Hiss stares hypnotically into Prince John's eyes for a few seconds - its the same exact animation you saw in 1967's "The Jungle Book". This reuse of animation was fine for Hanna-Barbera and other low-budget TV animation companies but a travesty for Disney which created and set high standards with their animation in the 1930's through the early 1960's (and thankfully recapured some of those standards in the 1990's).

Some characters are recycled from other Disney movies - Little John and Sir Hiss are carbon copies of the Jungle Book's Balloo the bear and Kaa the snake. The songs besides Roger Miller's "Oo-De-Lally" (which was sampled and sped-up for the popular Radio Disney staple "The Hampsterdance") just aren't that memorable or very good. Add to that the direction is very pedestrian with little style or "zing" - typical of most Disney films of the period.

Despite all these flaws the movie is still one of the most charming, fun and entertaining of all of Disney's 1970's output. The biggest reason is the great cast of voice actors - they sound like they were having fun making this movie and their enthusiasm give the characters "life" when the animation doesnt. Peter Ustinov almost steals the movie with his voicing of Prince John. The story is one of the better adaptations of the Robin Hood legend and the script is well paced and full of funny one-liners that might go over the head of young kids but adults will enjoy.

Disney's DVD version is a huge improvement over the old VHS tape from the 80's - but there are still scenes where the colors look washed out from a faded print. Also the movie's soundtrack is still in the original mono. Besides the original trailers and the classic Mickey Mouse short, the extras are only for the kids and not die-hard animation fans. I wish Disney would have spent more time and money for this reissue, restored the color, add archival footage, interviews and remixed the audio for 5:1 stereo like they have done for "Cinderella" and "Sleeping Beauty". This classic movie deserves better than a basic bare-bones presentation.

Awsome!
This is a very good movie. My sister and i really enjoyed it. It is not the modern day war etc. movies it is a nice classic movie with a cool plot.
It is awsome. ... Read more

Reviews (46)

Absolutely great...until the ending
Animal Farm and 1984...along with Aldous Huxley's Brave New World...are my favorite books. So, naturally, I was ecsatic about TNT bringing this classic to life as a movie (TNT usually does better book-to-movie adaptations than Hollywood anyways)

Well, by the end of the film I had decidedly mixed emotions. As far as Orwell's story goes, the film was precise and to the number. The two warring philosophies of leadership, as embodied by pigs Napoleon and Snowball (Stalin & Trotsky) are voiced perfectly by Kelsey Grammar and Patrick Stewart. I think for megolomania, you can't do better than Stewart.

Jesse, the dog, is as I always imagined, the typical Russian citizen during communism, who realizes the evil of totalitarianism, but is too afraid to go against it. And the supporting cast, like Boxer the Horse, represent the many victims of a dictatorship, whose "uselessness" as judged by the state ends in their ellimination.

The makers of this movie put together a fine parallel to Orwell's novel. But the ending didn't sit right with me. Of course, certain imagery, like the rock wall collapsing, is an obvious metaphor for the Berlin Wall falling, and the end of communism. But I don't see why the filmmakers decided to tack on this happy, optimistic ending, with the "brave and free-minded" Americans coming in to take over the farm and save the animals. Why couldn't they have just left it the way Orwell left it, uncertain and hopeless?

Orwell probably knew when he wrote the book that communism would fall in the future, but he left that out because I imagine it wasn't his intention to be a prophet, or a bringer of hope to the Russians. It was his intention to show the evils of totalitarianism, which this movie does well until that ending. Oh well. In the end, it still remains a very good movie, both on its own and as an adaptation.

"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others!"

"O.K., 'Babe', time to make you ham again!"
Orwell's bleak fable about revolution betrayed gets the full sunny "family-entertainment" Hallmark treatment and the result, as you can imagine, is abominable! Pity, for it has a great cast and several scenes worth looking at, but, as a whole, this movie -as all TNT "adaptations"- is completely off the mark! 'Animal Farm' ...for kiddies? With a happy ending? So the entire family can "squeal with delight"? Just who the hell thought that out?! No one, it seems, and it shows. The film is too tame for adult viewers who'd like to see the grim little novel on screen, and too violent for children who certainly won't expect to witness a cutesy Babe-like talking piggie executing his brothers-in-arms legs. My guess is they'll both be horrified at the end, its patched-up "happy" conclusion notwithstanding: Kids, because they're not stupid and sure realize it's back to the chopping block for their furry & feathered friends the moment the "new owners" step in, and adults, not only for the outrageous "liberties" taken from the book, but because -come to think of it- the sugarcoated finale holds a new ominous moral in itself: No, don't worry, the future won't be a Communist dictatorship after all; the future will be one big, happy, postcard-looking Americana, owned by cool Ken and Barbie, whose kinder, gentler slaughterhouse still awaits for your neck! "Hey! Whaddaya expectWe're running a FARM here!"

It made me sleepy.
I haven't read the book, but I've recently had to watch the film in class. Usually, I like watching movies, but this one made me sleepy.

The animals of Manor Farm, owned by Mr. Jones (who is a lazy, ignorant farmer), are hungry and tired. Mr. Jones doesn't know how to take care of his farm animals and farm itself properly. The animals are tired of waiting for Mr. Jones, and decide to take matters into their own hands.

Old Major, an old pig, speaks words of wisdom to the animals in the beginning of the film. He represents Karl Marx (or so I believe). But Old Major is soon killed after his speaking of a revolution and the animals are shocked. A group of the other pigs see this as a chance to seize the animals, particularly the new leader, Napolean.

The animals drive out the Joneses and Manor Farm is renamed to Animal Farm. At first, life is now dandy for all the animals. They are happy with the changes and believe that Napolean is always right because he is an intelligent pig.

Napolean and his pig croonies, however, slowly change their ways. They become more greedy and self-centered. The animals' number one enemy is man and they do not wish to do anything with man. The group of ruling pigs soon appear to act like man does and this appalls the other animals.

You can basically guess what happens afterwards. I heard that the ending of the film is not like the book at all, and I was disappointed with the ending.

BAD!!!
The movie is not the same as the book. They change the ending. that was the worst. They also have the dog Jessie narrate it and she doesn't in the book. TERRIBLE!!!!!!

Insulting! (Warning: Review Contains Spoilers)
I gave this movie 2 stars, because it is clear that a lot of attention and concern was put in the creation of the talking-animal effects. Unfortunately, one cannot say the same for the script. Orwell's "Animal Farm" was a thinly disguised allegory for the failure of the Russian Revolution. By 1999 the USSR was a thing of the past, so the scriptwriters must have felt they had to rework the story for modern times. Perhaps they assumed that their audience had never reads the book, menaing they could change it any way they wanted without opposition. The result was a badly thought out polemic that makes no sense, literally or allegorically.

For example, the characters of Moses the Raven (who symbolized religion) and Clover the mare (the refusniks) were written out. As a result the remaining animals seem to be little more than a faceless mob, differentiated by their species but remaining the same ideologically. When the mob starts to object to the pigs' rulership, they are pacified with television. Now, forgiving the supreme arrogance of a made-for-TV movie portraying TV as a pacifying force (I am sure the animals were not watching TNT, the producers of this film), this pivotal plot point makes no sense. Taken literally, how do you explain animals being interested in visual fare made by, for and about humans? Taken allegorically, the TV broadcasts were an outside force beyond the pigs' control, filling the viewers' heads with visions of unpartiotic decadence. Would-be dictators who permitted such things would have to be very foolish indeed.

Finally there is the ending, where well-intended humans take over the failing farm and become the benevolent guardians of the animals, with the animals' support. If this was an attempt to paste a happy ending over Orwell's cynical but powerful conclusion, it failed. If taken literally it suggets that the animals' sacrifices and efforts were for nothing, making the movie irrelavent. If it was meant to be taken allegorically, the message is that people should not even try to better their society, they should just submit themselves to benevolent masters an avoid this fuss of self determination (any nominations who said masters should be?).

Failed allegory, cheesy animal flick or greedy attempt to cash in on the success of "Babe," the movie version of "Animal Farm" fails on every level. ... Read more

Reviews (29)

ham and cheese deluxe
Sword-and-sandal epic junkies will love this film, that is often hilarious with its over-the top-performances from an all-star cast, often ridiculous stilted dialogue, and tacky ultra-faux sets; at times so bad it's delightful, and always very entertaining, the script as well as the cast improve as the film progresses, and it does become extremely interesting in the last hour.

The cast:
Edmund Purdom is Sinuhe "The Egyptian", and is a physician who throws his life away over a wicked seductress, played to the max by Bella Darvi;
Jean Simmons is beautiful in the thankless role of Merit, the woman who has undying love for Purdom despite his weakness and the fact he totally ignores her feelings.
Victor Mature is terrific as the son of the cheese maker, who rises to command the army.
Peter Ustinov is wonderful as Purdom's servant, and in a tiny part of a grave robber, John Carradine steals the short scene he is in.

The plot takes place during the reign on Akhnaton (around 1352 B.C.), played by Michael Wilding, and portrayed as a real wuss, with a tough cookie sister played by Gene Tierney, who looks stunning in her princess garb. Their mother, fond of "the strong brew", and amusingly played by Judith Evelyn, says of her children: "The gods were perverse; they gave me a son as soft as a woman, and a daughter as hard as a man".
Purdom and Mature save the Pharaoh from being a lion's lunch one day, and so starts the story, and the ups and downs of The Egyptian's life.
The direction by Michael Curtiz is for the most part fairly well paced, and a lush score by both Bernard Herrmann and Alfred Newman, and vivid Technicolor cinematography by Leon Shamroy (which received an Oscar nomination) add to the enjoyment of this film. Total running time is 139 minutes.

Heavy and Dull
Ughh. It was a rainy day when I watched this film, and as dreary as the day was outside, this film managed to beat it. Edmund Purdom stars as the Egyptian in the title, a physician who starts out with the right ideals, but gets sidetracked often. The film follows his journey from nobody to the Pharaoh's personal doctor to nobody again. Along the way he encounters ambitious soldier Victor Mature, barmaid with the bangs Jean Simmons, one-eyed conman Peter Ustinov, wimpy Pharaoh Micheal Wilding, hard as nails sister of the Pharaoh Gene Tierney, and vamping Bella Darvi, the femme fatale. Those characters may sound interesting, but they're not in the least. Maybe it's the terrible writing, but the performances are flat and dry, although Darvi was so awful she had me laughing, which at least got a reaction from me. The Egyptian neither inspired or moved me. I suspect it could have been better, although the writing, acting, and directing would have needed a complete overhaul. I would recommend watching some of the other historical epics of the Fifties before choosing this one.

Epic Retelling Of A Turbulent Era Of Egypt's History
I've always loved Twentieth Century Fox's massive epic "The Egyptian", despite its reworking of many of the historical facts of this period. Taking place during the reign of Egypt's controversial "Heretic" Pharaoh Akhenaton, the film has a colourful and dramatic setting for its story and makes great use of the fascinating characters and events that made up the Egyptian "Amarna" period. Apart from historical fact being "reshaped" I've always thought "The Egyptian",is another example of the solid expertise Hollywood had in the 1950's and early 1960's for producing large scale historical epics. While certainly not as well known or respected as such efforts as "Ben Hur", it has alot to offer from some great performances, elaborate sets, stunning costumes and enough intrigue and drama to satisfy all lovers of Hollywood epics. Being all wrapped up in gorgeous Fox technicolour also helps immensely in giving this story of a humble physician who rises to become the personal aide to the Pharaoh only to be undone by his reckless love for a seductive courtesan, a vivid look and feel that increases its impact.

Based on the novel by Mika Waltari, "The Egyptian", strangely contains no great battles or overwhelming crowd scenes involving thousands of extras and the emphasis is most definately on the characters involved and their often very human emotions. The story told in flashback begins with an abandoned infant found in a reed basket on the Nile who is taken into the home of a talented physician Senmut. Named Sinuhe he grows into an idealistic young man (Edmund Purdom), and undertakes studies to become a physician just like his father. He becomes best friends with the energic and extroverted Horemheb (Victor Mature),who is training for the army at the same school run by the priests. Very different in character they become fast friends and one day on an excursion hunting lions in the desert they save the life of a strange lone man who they find worshipping the carved image of the sun. Unbeknown to them he is actually the new young Pharaoh Akhenaton (Michael Wilding), who is introducing a far less war like type of rule into Egypt based on the worship of one god the Aten. Dragged before the whole court on the charge of having touched the august person of the Pharaoh, the high priest Mekere (Henry Daniell), demands they be both put to death. Akhenaton however overrules him and makes Sinuhe personal physician to the royal family and Horeheb a commander in his army. Enjoying the good life Horemheb one night takes Sinuhe to the home of an infamous Babylonian courtesan Nefer (Bella Darvi), with whom Sinuhe becomes instantly besotted. Nefer however only plays with men and before too long Sinuhe has sacrificed everything for her only to be then cruelly rejected when she is tired of playing with him. Having neglected his duties to Pharoah and having turned from the real love offered by simple tavern girl Merit (Jean Simmons), Sinuhe is a marked man and flees Egypt spending many years in foreign countries practising his medical genius. When he returns home however Egypt has slipped into serious trouble as Akhenaton has lost the respect of the military and his new religion is dividing the country. Sinuhe even finds Horemheb is plotting against the Pharaoh with his ambitious Princess Baketamon (Gene Tierney). In the rebellion that follows Meret is killed when Akhenaton's temple is sacked and Sinuhe loses forever his young son Thoth (Tommy Rettig). Dragged into the plot when it is revealed he is actually the Pharoah's half brother Sinuhe finally realises how he has comprimised all of his principles and leaves to start a lonely existence on his own in the desert, bereft of family or love.

Produced by Darryl F. Zanuck and directed by veteran Michael Curtiz "The Egyptian", boasts great talent on both sides of the camera. Edmund Purdom, (taking over from Marlon Brando who dropped out of the role!), is excellent in the central role of the naive Sinuhe and makes a nice contrast to the rowdy bullying Victor Mature ideally cast as the soldier Horemheb. One of the most interesting performances in the film is delivered by Gene Tierney in a non tradtional "strong" woman role of the almost mannish Baketamon, hers is a great performance and was one of the last important roles undertaken by this great actress. The two pieces of casting always laughed at from this film, Michael Wilding as the gentle Pharaoh Akhenaton, and Bella Darvi as the courtesan Nefer, I actually find very interesting and Wilding in particular captures alot of the dreamy quality associated with the rule of the real Akhenaton. The film's other great assets are its atmospheric musical score created by Alfred Newman which incorporates use of the Egyptian Sistrum and the beautiful use of colour photography which enhances the lavish scenes in Aten's open air temple and in the magnificent palace of Akhenaton.

"The Egyptian", is a Hollywood production of the old school and despite its historical inaccuracy must be viewed first and foremost as sheer entertainment. Michael Curtiz once again reveals his diverse directing talents in this story so different to alot of his other work on "Casablanca" etc. The cast are also what make this film memorable and even the smaller parts taken by performers such as Peter Ustinov, Judith Evelyn and John Carradine are memorable. I highly recommend to all lovers of old style historical epics this great production set in the time of Pharaoh Akhenaton's Egypt.

A rare masterpiece
Many people have criticised this film for it's lack of "historical accuracy" - it's Hollywood, for goodness sake. It's not going to be spot on accurate, and it isn't intended to be. The film wasn't made for that - it was created for etertainment, and entertaining this film most certaintly is. Also, people say that the acting is under-par in this film - that EDmund Purdom is "flat and lifeless" in the lead role. However, remember two things - that he had only just taken the role (which had been dropped abruptly by another actor) when they began filming, and that the character of Sinue is supposed to be (particularly towards the end) quite cold and cynical. I myself think that he was brilliant in the lead role of Sinue. Also the actor who played Akhenaten has been criticised, but the man, in true "historical accuracy" wasn't the most outgoing - was he? I think that the long monologues are the best bit of the film. The only problem I had with this story was the parts with Nefer - too long, with too much of Sinue being a complete idiot. Very annoying!
But, as for the revelation at the end - of Sinue being the rightful pharaoh - *GASP*!!! Classic. This film is an absolute must-see, I couldn't stop thinking about it for days after seeing it for the first time, and it has reawakened my interest in Egyptology. An absolute masterpiece, sadly underrated.

Hollywood epic making at its peak!
From the opening credits with that pseudo-Egyptian music, and if it isn't Egyptian it should be, to the opening scenes of of the pyramids, and then into the school of life with Mika, the Egyptian, and his friend, Horemheb, played by Edmund Purdom and Victor Mature respectively. Pursom is somber and serious, and I think better than Brando would have been here. Brando was too good for these things, and he couldn't get aropund the campiness to make it vital. Purdom can. Alas, Mature cannot; terrible football-atheletic American acting, and listen as he mispronounces Purdom's Egptian name at every turn. The name is Sinue, but Mature has to say Sinyeway.

Gene Tierney is lovely and great, and Jean Simmons adds class and great stauture to anything she does. Ustinov is the wonderful comic relief, and Wilding id very goosd as the monotheistic Aknaton. I like his final speech very much, and his scene with Pursom when he discusses his beliefs.

Curtiz directs, but remember Hawkes directed Land of The Pharaohs..everyone was doing it in the 50' and, William Faulkner wrote some of the screenplay for Land of...

This is great fun, and has a fabulous score by Bernard Herrman and Alfred Newman.

Do not miss this wild experince, and especially Bela Darvi as Nefer..hilarious, like Garbo in Mata Hari, or Maria Montez in Gypsy Wildcat. Hilarious and exotic. marilin Monroe wanted this part..but only with Brando..ofd course.

See and when you go to Egypt, you'll be disappointed that it's not like this Zanuk masterpiece. ... 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 (28)

Great fun, great laughs, and great muppets
I've only seen this movie on a recorded-off-TV format, but this is probably one of the funniest movies you can see (at least with Kermit the Frog in the starring role), and certainly the best Muppet movie, as far as I'm concerned.

The movie begins with Kermit, Fozzie, and Gonzo in a balloon, floating high above the city, reading the credits as they roll. ("Kermit? What does B.S.C. stand for?" "I dunno..." and "Nobody really reads these do they?" "Well sure they do. They all have families.")

Once the credits finish, the balloon plummets to the street, where the trio introduce the movie with a large song-and-dance number amidst a chaotic street scene, complete with a robbery on set!

The rest of the movie is loads of laughs as Kermit and his friends travel to England for their newspaper to interview Lady Holiday (Diana Rigg). Their Muppet entourage grows when the three book their stay at the Happiness Hotel, a run-down England hotel occupied by a crew of lazy Muppets.

Kermit, Fozzie, Gonzo, Miss Piggy, Animal, Dr. Teeth and the whole gang eventually team up to foil Lady Holiday's brother (Charles Grodin) and his three partners in crime from stealing the fabulous Baseball Diamond at the Mallory Gallery. It's pure, hilarious, and classic Muppet mayhem.

Kiddos and adults one and all will most likely enjoy this movie, and you don't have to worry about any unclean humor whatsoever.

I'm in my late teens and I still laugh at this movie. Definitely worth the money.

Great movie, lousy DVD
I've always had a soft spot in my heart for the Muppets, even as I got older and started watching more "grown-up" movies.

Of the three Muppet movies made while Jim Henson was still alive, this was the first one I ever saw, and remains my favorite. The jokes are hilarious (my favorite being the recurring joke "We'll catch them red-handed." "What color are their hands now?"), and the puppetry is just incredible, especially during the scene where everyone goes for a bike ride.

Unfortunately, I can't give this 5 stars, because I'm not just rating the movie, I'm rating the DVD it's on. And quite frankly, the DVD stinks. Even though some bonus features (like on the "Muppet Movie" and "Muppets Take Manhattan" DVDs) would have been nice, what was REALLY lacking was the picture quality. The opening scene with Kermit, Fozzie, and Gonzo in the hot air balloon looked dirty and grainy. This film seriously needed to be cleaned up before being transferred to DVD.

So while the movie itself is great and gets five stars, I can only give the DVD three.

The Great Muppet Caper
I really enjoyed this movie...it's great for the whole family!

Cute but Not my Favorite Muppet Movie!
I saw The great Muppet Caper in a movie theater with my family when I was about 16 years old and though I preferred The first movie and I also prefer the third movie The Muppets Take Manhattan this was a cute movie too but I just didn't enjoy it as much but I do recommend it to Muppet fans but though I would buy the other two movies on DVD I'm not sure if I would buy this one unless I found it on sale at a very low price. Like in a bargain bin or something.

Witty, witty, witty...
As I am indulging in all things British at the moment, I wondered how Jim Henson would be at a British murder mystery. The answer is absolutely fabulous!

In the opening credits, Fozzy complains about how long the credits are taking and says, "Does anyone even read those names?" "Sure," replies Kermit, "they have families." From there Henson takes you on a pure romp of fun, finding the humour in the British, in fashion design, in plot development, in seedy hotels, in Columbo, and in the Muppets themselves. Throughout the film, Henson also plays with the audiences' mind as he breaks down the barrier between the plot and reality. He was an incredibly clever man!

Also, if you have a favorite among the Muppets, yours will probably have his time in the spotlight. My favorites are Beaker and the Swedish Chef, and I was not disappointed in them. However, my appreciation for Kermit, Miss Piggy and Gonzo also grew in this film. (It's been awhile since I watched the Muppets.)

So, all in all, this is a good time for anyone, with humour and creativity there to inspire folks of all ages. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This second motion-picture outing for the adventurous Muppets findsthem in London hunting down jewel thieves while staying at the city's mostcheerfully derelict dive, the Happiness Hotel. Filled with song and dance(and swimming!) numbers, this Jim Henson-directed feature is worth seeing, iffor nothing else than to see the cantankerous Charles Grodin(Beethoven) swoon over Miss Piggy. But The Great Muppet Caper has a lot more going for it: cameos by John Cleese, Peter Falk, and Oscar the Grouch, among others;Miss Piggy parading down a catwalk; and Kermit the Frog on a bicycle. TheMuppets are fond of breaking down that pesky fourth wall, which gives themovie some of its cleverest moments and will elicit the biggest laughs fromthe kids. (Kermit to Miss Piggy: "You're overacting. You're hamming it up.")By the time a framed Miss Piggy is freed and the real jewel thieves arecaught, you'll forget the occasional slow spots and remember the musicalnumbers and the banter. --Kimberly Heinrichs ... Read more

Reviews (28)

Great fun, great laughs, and great muppets
I've only seen this movie on a recorded-off-TV format, but this is probably one of the funniest movies you can see (at least with Kermit the Frog in the starring role), and certainly the best Muppet movie, as far as I'm concerned.

The movie begins with Kermit, Fozzie, and Gonzo in a balloon, floating high above the city, reading the credits as they roll. ("Kermit? What does B.S.C. stand for?" "I dunno..." and "Nobody really reads these do they?" "Well sure they do. They all have families.")

Once the credits finish, the balloon plummets to the street, where the trio introduce the movie with a large song-and-dance number amidst a chaotic street scene, complete with a robbery on set!

The rest of the movie is loads of laughs as Kermit and his friends travel to England for their newspaper to interview Lady Holiday (Diana Rigg). Their Muppet entourage grows when the three book their stay at the Happiness Hotel, a run-down England hotel occupied by a crew of lazy Muppets.

Kermit, Fozzie, Gonzo, Miss Piggy, Animal, Dr. Teeth and the whole gang eventually team up to foil Lady Holiday's brother (Charles Grodin) and his three partners in crime from stealing the fabulous Baseball Diamond at the Mallory Gallery. It's pure, hilarious, and classic Muppet mayhem.

Kiddos and adults one and all will most likely enjoy this movie, and you don't have to worry about any unclean humor whatsoever.

I'm in my late teens and I still laugh at this movie. Definitely worth the money.

Great movie, lousy DVD
I've always had a soft spot in my heart for the Muppets, even as I got older and started watching more "grown-up" movies.

Of the three Muppet movies made while Jim Henson was still alive, this was the first one I ever saw, and remains my favorite. The jokes are hilarious (my favorite being the recurring joke "We'll catch them red-handed." "What color are their hands now?"), and the puppetry is just incredible, especially during the scene where everyone goes for a bike ride.

Unfortunately, I can't give this 5 stars, because I'm not just rating the movie, I'm rating the DVD it's on. And quite frankly, the DVD stinks. Even though some bonus features (like on the "Muppet Movie" and "Muppets Take Manhattan" DVDs) would have been nice, what was REALLY lacking was the picture quality. The opening scene with Kermit, Fozzie, and Gonzo in the hot air balloon looked dirty and grainy. This film seriously needed to be cleaned up before being transferred to DVD.

So while the movie itself is great and gets five stars, I can only give the DVD three.

The Great Muppet Caper
I really enjoyed this movie...it's great for the whole family!

Cute but Not my Favorite Muppet Movie!
I saw The great Muppet Caper in a movie theater with my family when I was about 16 years old and though I preferred The first movie and I also prefer the third movie The Muppets Take Manhattan this was a cute movie too but I just didn't enjoy it as much but I do recommend it to Muppet fans but though I would buy the other two movies on DVD I'm not sure if I would buy this one unless I found it on sale at a very low price. Like in a bargain bin or something.

Witty, witty, witty...
As I am indulging in all things British at the moment, I wondered how Jim Henson would be at a British murder mystery. The answer is absolutely fabulous!

In the opening credits, Fozzy complains about how long the credits are taking and says, "Does anyone even read those names?" "Sure," replies Kermit, "they have families." From there Henson takes you on a pure romp of fun, finding the humour in the British, in fashion design, in plot development, in seedy hotels, in Columbo, and in the Muppets themselves. Throughout the film, Henson also plays with the audiences' mind as he breaks down the barrier between the plot and reality. He was an incredibly clever man!

Also, if you have a favorite among the Muppets, yours will probably have his time in the spotlight. My favorites are Beaker and the Swedish Chef, and I was not disappointed in them. However, my appreciation for Kermit, Miss Piggy and Gonzo also grew in this film. (It's been awhile since I watched the Muppets.)

So, all in all, this is a good time for anyone, with humour and creativity there to inspire folks of all ages. ... Read more

Description

Agatha Christie and an all-star cast make foul deeds fun when a malevolent matriarch is murdered on a 1930s Holy Land tour. Starring Peter Ustinov (as Hercule Poirot) Lauren Bacall and John Gielgud. Year: 1988 Director: Michael Winner Starring:Peter Ustinov, Lauren Bacall, Carrie Fisher ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Great
This is another Christie classic.There are great performances by Peter Ustinov,Lauren Bacall,Piper Laurie,Hayley Mills,and John Gielgud.Another great movie with Ustinov as Poirot.I recomend this.

Peter Ustinov's last as "Poirot".
After the success of Death On The Nile (1978) and Evil Under The Sun (1982) and three tv-movies Thirteen At Dinner (1985-tv), Dead Man's Folly (1986-tv), Murder In Three Acts (1986-tv), Peter Ustinov returns as Belgian Detective, Hercule Poirot for the sixth and final time in this motion picture, Appointment With Death (1988). Piper Laurie is a wealthy, well-to-do woman at the reading of a will by her attourney (David Soul, original "Starsky & Hutch" tv series) of her dead husband. There are two wills. One will means less money to the widow and the step-children get an amount. In an act of blackmail, the attourney is forced to destroy one of the wills. Why does this woman put her "medicine" in a poison glass bottle. David Soul, the attourney, is having a romance with one of the widow's adult step-children. Cast also includes: Lauren Bacall, Carrie Fisher, John Gielgud, Hayley Mills (The Moonspinners), Jenny Seagrove, Nicholas Guest. Filmed in Israel, London and Italy.

He's bacccccccccck
I really enjoyed "Evil Under the Sun" and "Death on the Nile". However, this one was a very big disappointment. Not much of a story, not a good cast, poorly written with a horrible sound track. There was no suspense and no characters I really care about (except the doctor and Gielgud who would be interesting if he just stood there). It was hard to stay with it but I did. Ustinov looks tired and the rest look bored. Sorry to say, unless you are a collector who wants all of the film Ustinov endeavors (as I did), you will not be missing anything if you dont buy it.

The Murder of a Matronly Matriarch
The matriarch of a brood of ineffectual children lords it over them and bullies them almost beyond enduring. They put up with their stepmother because their father's will left everything to her (or did it?) and the children are such wimps they cannot support themselves. Did I mention that the matriarch was once a matron in a women's prison? By the time ...gets bumped off, the viewer will be ready to cheer. But every child has a motive (the money), the means (access to mom's medicine for the overdose), and the opportunity (nobody has an alibi). There are even a few bystanders with ample motive. Not to fear, the redoubtable Hercule Poirot is on the scene to untie this whodunnit's Gordian Knot. He eavesdrops on everyone's conversations, rakes everyone over the coals with his scathing interrogations, and handily exposes the killer.

This all happens in the Middle East, as Poirot vacations in the Holy Land. The environs of Jerusalem provide some beautiful background, and the viewer visits the dusty digs at Qumran, the site of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The movie follows the book pretty well, but I was disappointed that the producer moved the scene of the murder from Petra to Qumran. The beautiful architecture of Petra would have made for more satisfying visuals than the excavation holes of Qumran. Remember the fabulous building in the side of the mountain from "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade?" That's Petra.

Peter Ustinov serves as a passable Poirot, but he's too big and too unkempt to capture the charm of Christie's Poirot. David Suchet, star of the A&E Poirot series, sets the standard against which all other video Poirots must suffer. Lauren Bacall almost stole the show with her rendition of an American-born M.P. who tried to out-English the native born English.

poorly acted adaptation
Ustinov doesn't look remotely like Christie's Poirot, but never mind that. It is the ensemble cast that trashes this film, a group of summer actors who read their lines like they are reading graffiti on the rocks. The figure that should provide the menace of the book -- the evil Mrs. Boynton -- is laughable.

Skip it. Wait for a more modern adaptation or just reread one of the classic Christies. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

An Unsung CLASSIC Of American Comedy!
With "Viva Max!" director Jerry Paris(best known for directing numerous episodes of "The Dick Van Dyke Show")took the skills he had finely tuned for television(sharp, clever, fast-paced comedy)and brought them to The Big Screen. What makes this film such a stand-out from his work in television is that he was successfully able to combine these said skills with social and political themes, creating a film that is both hysterically funny and fast-paced, yet filled with MUCH "Food For Thought".

As a person who hails from BOTH the cultures(Texas Anglo and Mexican-American)depicted in this story, I could relate to the REAL significance of this film. Upon initial viewing, one may only see it as a clever, fast-paced comedy, well-acted by a STERLING cast(indeed, I think John Astin's performance as Sgt. Valdez ranks among the FINEST of his ENTIRE career).

Upon REPEATED viewings however, one can start to recognize FAR MORE to both script and cast of characters, than was initially apparent. The DEPTH of personality(particularly in Astin's and Ustinov's characters)simply DEMANDS repeated viewings to REALLY appreciate. They are complex:both inept and ludicrous, yet oddly courageous, stoic and ultimately WISE in their "Military Conquest" of Anglo-America!

Comedian Jonathan Winters turns in THE performance of a lifetime as the good-natured, befuddled brigadeer general of the Texas National Guard, chosen as a liason between the Mexican Army and the Texas Anglos.

Want to know what Texans are REALLY like? FORGET "King Of The Hill" and WATCH THIS FILM!

Anyone familiar with San Antonio this is a must see.
Fantastic what if story. The picked only serious actors for this politically correct film on manifest destiny. Peter Ustinov is General Maximilian Rodrigues de Santo. Although the story revolves around him many others help carry the story such as John Astin Sergeant Valdez who keeps the general out of trouble and Jonathan Winters as General Billy Joe Hallson of the National Guard.
This film was actually made in San Antonio. Written by Lehrer, James

Basic story is Mexican general is going to retake the Alamo as an act of heroism for his men.

Viva Max?
Viva Max! is a dull, sometimes boring comedy. Filmed on location at the Alamo then relocated in Italy due to angry protesters interference in production, this movie stars Peter Ustinov as a Mexican General trying to re-capture the Alamo. Although Ustinov is great as the bumbling General, the only actor that could breath life into this movie was Jonathan Winters. Although Winters is at his best improvising comedy routines, he still manages to create some fairly funny scenes in this film. This film is a must-have for Ustinov and Winters fans. Otherwise, it bites.

Funny funny irreverent but funny.
This was PBS' Jim Lehrer's first book. The movie, now a video, starred some greats of the past. One almost has to feel sad for General Maxmillian at the end of the story but he most certainly 'saves face' and becomes a hero to his men. One of the most enjoyable books I have ever read and absolutely one of the funniest movies I have ever seen. You'll watch it again and again. Hope you'll tell me I was right! ... Read more

Reviews (1)

surprised
I have watched this documentary on pbs channel. It was very interesting to know exactly the history of African politics after the indenpendance to this day. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

With this powerful 1992 drama, director-producer George Miller (The RoadWarrior) proved that a movieabout a disease doesn't have to be a typical disease-of-the-week movie. Based onthe real-life case of the Odones family, the story concerns 5-year-old Lorenzo, suffering mightily from anapparently incurable and degenerative brain illness called A.L.D. His parents,an economist (Nick Nolte) and a linguist (Susan Sarandon), refuse to accept the received wisdom that there is no hope, and set about learningbiochemistry to pursue a cure on their own. The film becomes an intriguingscientific mystery mixed with a story of pain, grief, and the strain on the two adults. In other words, Lorenzo's Oil is similar to all thosemedical-mayhem TV flicks but with some key differences: a pair of greatactors in Sarandon and Nolte--who actually do some of the finest work oftheir careers here--and Miller's bold and typically inventive direction.Miller, a doctor himself, refuses to shirk from the chaos and horrors of achild's agony, and he makes us hear the death chains rattling behind images that would be purely sentimental in another director's hands. --TomKeogh ... Read more

Reviews (34)

Lorenzo's Oils
Lorenzo's Oil's is a remerkable movie. I had heard about this movie, and the desease the little boy, Lorenzo, is effected with before. When i saw this movie for the first time in 1996, i was overwelmed. The movie is excellent, The acting is wonderful, and overall, i think it was a great idea for the movie. i have seen Loreno's Oils so many times, that i have lost track, and have been so inspired and interested in it, that i have chosen to become a doctor because of it (I'm a highschool sophmore). Also, in my Anatomy class, we have to do a 7 page report on the topic that interests us the most, and of course i chose ALD, Lorenzo's desease, and will also be using clips from the movie as part of my presentation. If this movie can make someone actually WANT to write a 7 page research paper, it must be interesting. i sugest anybody interested in the feild of medicine, or any feild for that matter, watch this movie, just once. after that one time, you'll never be able to stop. I promise.

discriminate between science and voodoo science
This film is finely made, but that confirms me in the idea that scientific problems are very difficult to deal in the cinema. In this movie the medical statement are questioned. The most simple people could get the idea that physicians are mediocre or interested persons, and this is so in some cases, of course.
But there are much diseases so rare that were unknown and undetected owing to poor conditions of general health until practically 50 years ago when infantile rates of mortality were much higher than now, so mostly of these illness were simply ignored under a huge amount of deaths. The parents of Lorenzo love his son, but they -over all the mother- borders the thin frontier between reason and insanity. Of course nobody is exempt of this under extreme conditions, but she demands healing here and now when this is impossible. The doctors are seen under a potent magnifier lens, and I'm afraid at so close distance nobody is good looking. The physicians must treat not only Lorenzo, but also much other patients with another diseases, something that the family of these sick children are unable to understand, and so, this movie presents for me several questions: the barrier between perseverance and mental blockade, the necessity sometimes of resignation and the misjudgement and devaluation of the scientific method. Cinema has a big influence owing to his easy sentimental impact, but I think reality is hard and truly there are things out of reach of science of today and tomorrow no matter how much you love your family... or if not, we should to be gods, no vulgar human beings. Don't trust very much in miracles as the oil of Lorenzo. This film is good only if you see it only as it is: a fiction.

Excellent
Movie shows how desperate people can be for cures for their medically fragile children. This is a very realistic look at people and how they would react to this kind of crisis.

As a father of a child with autism, I have observed some of the same reactions in the autism community. GOTTA FIND A MIRACLE CURE....GOTTA FIND A MIRACLE CURE!!!!

Acting is excellent in this film...it never got the BIG attention it deserved.

Jeffrey McAndrew
author of "Our Brown-Eyed Boy"

Heart-wrenching, inspiring film
Real-life dramas always hold more weight with me, especially when they are crafted as well as "Lorenzo's Oil." The acting is superb and the drama unfolds very carefully and deliberately. I was immediately drawn in. Having known families torn apart by the illness of a child, for me this film captures the paralyzing grief and sense of helplessness that paralyzes a household, and yet this film gives hope when the family starts to fight back against the disease.

Like Augusto did encountering the disease, I discovered I had learned a great deal just watching the film. I wish more films could be as educational and entertaining at the same time -- a rare breed indeed!

If you haven't shed at least a few tears by the end of the film, I'm worried about you if you can get tear-free through the closing montage of boys who are alive and well because of Lorenzo's Oil. Everytime I see that part, I cry.

An Excellent Movie
There is nothing like a true story and great actors putting their all into a most powerful movie...This story, coupled with the Odone's website help you see the progression of Lorenzo. Unfortunately, Lornenzo's mother passed away but his father is still a force to be reckoned with today. ... Read more

Description

Award-winning actor Peter Ustinov stars in this hilarious fantasy as the ghost of the legendary pirate Blackbeard. The once blackhearted scoundrel materializes in a small New England town, cursed to wander in limbo until he performs a good deed. He gets his chance when he decides to help a local college track team ... that hasn't a ghost of a chance of winning! Blackbeard finds himself full of team spirit, and dispensing his own brand of invisible coaching ... in this warmhearted comedy that will have you laughing from his first fade-in to his final fade-out! ... Read more

Reviews (28)

IT'S ABOUT TIME!
I'm so glad that Disney finally came to their senses and decided to release this treasure on DVD. In my opinion, this is one of Disney's best. Starring Peter Ustinov, Dean Jones, and Suzanne Pleshette, this movie has comedy, action, and no worry of bad language or sex. Dean Jones plays a track coach who arrives in a new town, one with many tales and mysteries. Jones arrives at a hotel owned by families of pirates who roamed the area hundreds of years ago. The families are giving an auction to save their beloved, historical home from money-grubbing gamblers who tend to turn the hotel into a casino. When Jones suddenly finds himself bidding on an auction in competition with the football coach, he unwillingly wins a bed-warmer with a story, suposedly coming from Blackbeard the pirate. He soon discovers that he got much more than he bargained for! This wholesome comedy will keep a smile on your face all the way through, Disney fan or not!

Blackbeard's Ghost Should Have Stayed Away
While not a great moment in movie history, Blackbeard's Ghost is a fun film for families and stars the always-great Peter Ustinov. I had been looking forward to it's release on DVD as the print I had on VHS was so terrible, I felt surely that the DVD would offer a better print (and based on the quality of the prints on the recently-released Vault Disney titles I had purchased, I felt even more assured that it would). I was sooooo disappointed today when I received my copy of Blackbeard's Ghost. Of all of the DVDs I have purchased from a name studio, this has to be the worst I have ever seen. The print used seems to be the same as the one used for the old VHS I have. The picture contrast is terrible. The print itself is full of scratches and blemishes and the picture is very grainy. Worst of all it is presented in full screen (I seem to remember reading it would be widescreen when it was first announced), which leaves parts of the picture lopped off. An example of this is when Dean Jones' character is talking to a student while driving and the right half of Jones' face is missing while the left half of the student's is gone. The biggest example of the low quality of the print used is the opening titles. Since the film was not presented in widescreen (although it wouldn't have been too wide, I'm sure), the opening credits are "squished" up, with the picture being presented slightly off-center, leaving about a 1 1/2 inch black space up the left side of my screen. I know this film is not considered a classic by most, but I was hoping Disney would have thought it was and done better than this. Maybe some day they will.

Cute movie, Bad DVD
I enjoyed the movie. Ustinov was soo funny he made the movie for me. Of course the movie is pretty inane, but I knew that before I bought it. What I didn't know is that the DVD quality is the worst I have ever seen. The sound also had scratches and pops. The picture is faded and streaked. I like these kinds of movies, but I now look to the reviews before I buy Disney movies. For the cost I think they could restore them (and in general make them widescreen).

Pirates are cool!
I don't know why, but this movie never ceases to amuse me. The goofy pirate combined with 1960's Disney humor and Dean Jones just makes this movie so entertaining that you'll watch it over and over again. If you like classic Disney movies as much as I do, you definately need to add this one to your collection.

Video quality? Expected better...
This of course is an excellent movie - Ustinov is excellent as well as Dean.

However, I honestly expected better quality video from a re-released classic movie from Disney. The opening credits are truncated on the left side - it almost appeared that the opening credis were done with a hand-held video camera (someone with the wiggles of course). Tons of video artifacts exist throughout the movie (white dust, contrast problems, scratches, blooming, and washed out color etc.). It doesn't seem to have been given the "Snow White" treatment that other released products have gone through. ... Read more

Amazon.com

A minor classic from Disney, this 1973 all-animal, all-animated musicalversion of the familiar story is more charming than one might expect. Perhapsit's the warm, chummy take on key relationships within the legend--the way RobinHood (Brian Bedford) gets twitterpated whenever the subject of Maid Marian(Monica Evans) comes up or the way best pal Little John (Phil Harris voicing avariation on his own Baloo from The Jungle Book) admonishes the SherwoodForest hero, "Aw, Rob, why dontcha just marry the girl?" (Then, of course,there's the canny "casting" of the romantic leads as foxes: Robin the sly oneand Marian the, well, foxy one.) The rest of the vocal cast is lively andeclectic: Peter Ustinov, Andy Devine, Terry-Thomas, George Lindsey. Roger Millerprovides the songs and voice for the minstrel character Allan-A-Dale. The filmis ably directed by W