Amazon.com

If you concentrate on the fact that Howard the Duck was a notorious box office dud (still brought up today) and considered one of the worst films of the '80s, it's entirely possible to enjoy this special effects piffle. Howard, played by a special effect puppet, lives on a planet where ducks evolved instead of apes, but one day he's sucked into a vortex and deposited on Earth. There he befriends Beverly Switzler (Lea Thompson), lead singer for the Cherry Bombs, becomes their manager, and, oh yeah, saves the Earth from the Dark Overlords. Jeffrey Jones is the villain and Tim Robbins (!) is there for comic relief. And who can resist the culmination of synthesizer pop, the Howard the Duck theme song, as realized by the Cherry Bombs? A midnight movie that your kids might watch more than you. --Keith Simanton ... Read more

Reviews (96)

All Hail Howard the Duck!!!
(...)Howard the Duck is all of this and more. I first saw this movie in theaters and loved it. Lea Thompson and the rest of her band The Cheery Bombs are sexy, and the theme song is real catchy!

The special effects are up to par with the technology at the time, and the comedy is right on the nose. I mean c'mon those Dark Overlords were pretty cool looking. Anyone who claims to hate this movie is obviously an 80's hater. (...) This film defines great 80's cinema and I could never understand the backlash. Many great movies have bombed at the theaters only to become favorite classics (the original Blues Brothers and It's a Wonderful Life come to mind).

(...)I will defend this movie until my dying day. Howard the Duck is a great movie from the greatest decade of the 20th Century. Hail Howard!!!

An ILM Late 80's Audition Reel!!
Momma always said, "you learn more from your failures, than you do from your successes." I think Momma has a point. Sometimes failures can point the way to the future. The 80's were a good barometer for that, and no other movie has blazed the trail of failure quite like Willard Huyck colossal miscalculation HOWARD THE DUCK. A movie that is inept and pointless, and yet so full of innovative and yes even breathtaking special effects.

HOWARD THE DUCK tells the story of a duck named Howard (voiced by Chip Zein, and played by a bunch of little people in a duck suit) who lives on a planet much like earth, except Duck's are the top of the food chain. He's a failed rock musician who's finally given up that dream and has settled into the mundane life of an advertising copywriter. On one particular day, he's just gets home from another day of the daily grind, when he's sucked into a giant laser beam and transported to Cleveland, Ohio on our earth. Let the comic hijinks begin...well okay let the less than stellar puns begin.

Howard meets Beverly (Lean Thompson) a struggling rock musician and takes up "roost" in her apartment. After a day or so they fall in love. There's also a young Lab Assistant named Phil (Tim Robbins in a star-making performance) and Dr. Jennings (Jefferey Jones) whom want to help Howard get home, via the giant laser beam that brought him to earth in the first place.

I stop there because the second half of the movie has to do with this wild alien and I'm not quite sure I can do that part of the story any real justice. Suffice to say there's an alien threat and Howard is here to stop it. Actually he kind of runs away from it as the alien menace and the cops try to stop him.

HOWARD THE DUCK is based on a far more interesting and inventive comic book series created by Steve Gerber. This movie and that series have absolutely nothing in common but the name. In fact the movie ruined the comic book series that poor Steve Gerber sued Universal and George Lucas, and then killed off his Duck for a long time. How's that for fair.

Wait a second you say, go back just a minute, did you just say George Lucas? Yes ladies and gentlemen. George Lucas was the executive producer of this film and it shows. His fingerprint is on everything and more importantly Industrial, Lights, and Magic have designed this film as their audition reel. They throw everything into the pot, creature effects, stop motion, animation effects, makeup effects, an elaborate chase sequence (that I'm convinced was shot for shot re-created for the freeway chase in the MATRIX RELOADED, well not really but It's nice to speculate.) involving a small personal aircraft, and all of it is breath taking.

But why? Why did ILM and George Lucas waste all that time and energy? The only thing I can think is that they were doing tests for Lucas's next big project WILLOW.

You're probably now asking why doesn't the film work? The biggest problem is there is absoulty no screenplay. The first 20 minutes of the film fly by, barely allowing the viewer to breathe. The characters have time to meet, time to fight, time to get back together, all before the story begins to take shape. By the time it does it shifts radically into a completely different movie involving giant space creatures.

They started out with a promising idea; it's ET in the city. How does this duck adapt to his surroundings? That should have been the movie. But there's no room for special effects that way. So on comes Act 2, and so many effects shots you shake your head.

I was also a little disgusted by the Human/Duck love scene of course you see nothing, but the implied relationship makes even less sense then the rest of the movie and is really there just to make a silly joke anyway.

This is the key to why this film fails. It doesn't set its tone properly. Every other line is some comic zinger that falls flat because the movie doesn't know whether it's a comedy, or an action picture. There satire, and drama all thrown out there but it goes nowhere.

This effects all the acting as well. The human characters are robbed of any humanity because the script is so disjointed. They overreact to everything and poor Tim Robbins is forced to mug for laughs when the audience already knows that there are none.

The script by director Huyck and his writing partner Gloria Katz is so bad you forget that these are the people who hit just the right beats in their more successful film AMERICAN GRAFFITTI.

The films biggest flaw is that it has no audience. It a tad bit vulgar for little kids, and if you reach the age of 8 you'll be far smarter than this movie is. As for adults there is nothing of substance in the movie for people to grab onto.

But I guess in the end could HOWARD THE DUCK been a good picture? Maybe! There were definitely moments of light in the picture. Moments that seemed unforced. I especially loved the early scenes involving Howard and Beverly. An interesting story could have unfolded. But the films exciting visuals were more important to the bottom line. In fact the bulk of the film contains this huge chase scene involving airplanes, cars, 18-Wheelers and lots of destruction. Sure the scene is cool to look at but it's not worth the Journey.

Stay away from Howard the Duck.

** Out of 5

Love this movie
I am 25 years old. I loved this movie as a kid. I watched it over and over again. I just ordered it for my 7 year old son with the hopes that he will like it as much as I did. I is a funny and stupid movie, but well worth it for the kids to watch. I highly recommend this movie for anyone between the ages of 5-13 years old.

Cult Classic
Lea Thompson, Tim Robbins, and the always entertaining Jeffrey Jones star in this tale of a duck from an alternate universe
who finds himself transported to Earth and is now trying to get home. Lea Thompson plays the young woman who looks after him,
Tim Robbins plays the janitor who pretends to be a scientist,
and Jeffrey Jones plays a scientist who goes a little crazy.

The funny thing about movies that are ambitious and
flop, Is nobody copies that formula. Sure Die Hard has been copied over and over. Under Siege etc. But Movies that don't make the big money are often forgotten. And that is what makes them better now then when they were released. Buackaroo Banzai is another example of a box office flop that has gained alot of
success through video and dvd.

And I know alot of people will think I am crazy. But this is my
favorite George Lucas film. There is something about Howard the
Duck that I gravitated towards as a kid. Maybe it was him being small in a strange foreign world he is yet to understand. Isn't that what childhood is about. The best movies are the ones where
the movie never changes but as you watch it at a different age
and a different point in your life you notice so much more.
I can't explain much further my fondness for Howard the Duck.
But I really love this movie.

I know there are alot of people who can't stand this movie,
But for those who get it, There is nothing quite like it
and probally never will be again.

An insult to a classic comic book
Steve Gerber's original Howard the Duck comics were a classic mockery of the '70s, from jabs at religious cults to Howard's run for president in 1976 and even an issue almost entirely in text because of deadlines. However, Gerber left Howard and Marvel Comics at the end of the decade due to his struggle to gain control of his signature character.

Coming in 1986, at a time when Gerber's dispute with Marvel had exploded into a full-blown legal battle (and the comic publisher had practically destroyed Howard with numerous changes in appearance and origin), the Howard the Duck movie was heavly hyped and awarded a huge budget-largely due to the involvement of one George Lucas. What emerged was the worst movie of 1986, and one of the 1980s many candidates for "worst movie ever". For those ignorant of the original comic book, the reputation is well-earned, with an unlikeable lead and an incredibly stupid plot. For those of us familiar with Steve Gerber's work, this film is nothing short of an abomination. However, years of repeated (and downright excessive) reruns on cable have created a number of apologists for this drivel. Do yourself a favor and avoid this wreck (and pray that George Lucas is able to keep it from appearing on DVD), while tracking down the Howard the Duck comics written by Steve Gerber, which are superior to this travesty in every way. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Alice returns from Wonderland only to discover she's on the wrongside of her living room mirror at the beginning of the second half of IrwinAllen's 1985 production, with teleplay by Paul Zindel and songs by SteveAllen (the three-hour film was broken into two parts for video, the firsttitle being Alice in Wonderland). Before you can say "curiouser andcuriouser" the jabberwocky is after her. It chases Alice back to a strangeland where life appears to be one giant game of chess with pieces portrayedby the likes of Carol Channing and Harvey Korman. The 7-year-old longs to behome, but that doesn't stop her from enjoying some song and dance withTweedledum and Tweedledee (Steve Lawrence and Eydie Gorme), watching a boutbetween the lion (Ernest Borgnine) and the unicorn (Beau Bridges), or beingrescued by the White Knight (Lloyd Bridges). Despite the oddly low-techvisual effects from Star Wars's John Dykstra--the jabberwocky is soclearly a guy in a dragon suit--this thrillingly kitschy movie ablyentertains. Where else will you see Merv Griffin as a train conductor,Sally Struthers and Donna Mills catfighting with Vegas-worthy flowerheaddresses, and Jonathan Winters as a crabby Humpty Dumpty before the fall?Adults who fondly remember the '70s and '80s and children 4 and older shouldenjoy this version of the fabled tale. --Kimberly Heinrichs ... Read more

Reviews (43)

The Ultimate Alice
When I was five, I saw this on tv for the first time and was enthralled. For me, this is the ultimate Alice Through the Looking Glass--so many stars, so many songs and so like the actual story till the end. I've looked for it everywhere but until today it was only a memory. Now I can't wait till it comes in the mail. We had taped it off of tv on a Beta tape years ago but lost the second half so now I can't wait to own it! If you've read the book or have only heard of our Alice, this is the movie to see.

Baaaa-tter, Much Baaaaa-tter!
This movie has stuck with me and my brother for so many years! We taped it off of TV when we were kids, and as everyone knows, "TV Tapes" never last very long in anyone's home. Now, my brother and I live together, and we every so often start singing the movie's songs, or reciting its lines! Our favorite scenes are the train and on the beach with the Tweedles. I am buying a copy of the movie today to give my brother for his 24th birthday, and I know that he will be thrilled to have it! (As will I...)

#1 on my childhood movie collection!
when i was a kid i was so in love with this movie, it was my get away from a bad day at school. the charaters are so magical and realistic. i could only find this movie here and im so glad i could add this to my collection so i could share this great movie to my children.

The best movie ever!!!
Ilove this Alice Through the Looking Glass! It's certainly curiouser and curiouser. It follows the original story the most closely out of all the Alice movies I've ever seen. My favorite part is when the jabberwocky comes out of Alice's present box. When I first saw that I jumped! The only thing I didn't like about the whole movie was that it didn't show the looking glass insects. Other than that I thought it was great! All alice lovers buy this today!

The Jabberwocky
When I was a young child, I had a horrible fear that the Jabberwocky from this version of Alice Through the Looking Glass. I used to believe that he was living in my closet and that someday he would pull me through the large mirror hanging on the inside of my closet door. Over the years I have come to wonder why I was so afraid of him and I have been dying to see this production again. I was so happy when I bought it online and found out how afraid I was of a cheezy dragon costume! This video is absolutly adorable and any fan of Alice in Wonderland will love it! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

The 1951 John Huston classic, set in Africa during World War I, garnered Humphrey Bogart an Oscar for his role as a hard-drinking riverboat captain in Africa, who provides passage for a Christian missionary spinster (Katharine Hepburn). Taking an instant, mutual dislike to one another, the two endure rough waters, the presence of German soldiers, and their own bickering to finally fall into one another's arms. This is classic Huston material--part adventure, part quest--but this time with a pair of characters who'd all but given up on happiness. Bogart (a longtime collaborator with Huston on such classics as The Maltese Falcon and Key Largo) and Hepburn have never been better, and support from frequent Huston crony Robert Morley (Beat the Devil, also featuring Bogart) adds some extra dimension and color. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (52)

Why this movie is considered so good
1) Based on the novel (of the same name) by C.S. Forester
2) Music performed by The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
3) Directed by John Huston
4) Katharine Hepburn
5) Humphrey Bogart

The movie begins in German East Africa, September 1914 with the Germans invading and destroying a small town that missionaries Samuel and Rose (brother and sister) are living in. After the Germans take all the natives away Samuel falls ill and dies.

Mr. Alnutt (sailor of the African Queen), the man who delivers their mail, comes around and Rose goes with him for safety reasons. They hide (Mr. Alnutt feels the Germans will want his boat) and discuss what to do next. With the war all around them, they need to figure a way out of there.

With much pushing on Rose's part they decide to go down a very difficult river and torpedo a German ship to help their country.

The scenery and the wild animals are amazing to behold. I love when Rose calls Charlie "a coward". This very different pair has many adventures.

This is why the movie is considered so good!

Two Great Actors Make A Great Movie
Can two people carry an entire movie? When the two are Humphrey Bogart (who won an Oscar for this performance) and Katherine Hepburn (who did equally well but didn't get the Oscar), the answer is a resounding, "Yes!" Bogart plays a beaten up riverboat (the "African Queen" is his boat) captain in Africa at the onset of World War One. b Hepburn plays a spinster missionary who assists her brother, Robert Morley, in converting the locals to Christianity (or, at least, helps to get them singing hymns, whether they understand the words or not). After the Germans burn the church and kill her brother, Hepburn escapes with Bogart down the river aboard the African Queen. With memorable scene after memorable scene (leech attacks, German attacks, shooting the rapids and then shooting THE RAPIDS, disappearing tributaries, black fly attacks), John Huston directs these two veteran actors through a classic movie. Bogart starts off with many rough edges but gradually gets slightly tamed. Hepburn starts off very prudish, but gradually loosens up. They go from hating each other to getting married in a very predictable, but still realistic way. Adversity is the mother of romance. Buy this one and watch it every year (or more often) on a rainy afternoon or snowy evening. If it's a snowy evening, you might even feel better about the snow afterward.

Kate & Bogey Sparkle in this Classic Hollywood Gem
The chemistry between "old maid" missionary woman Hepburn and rough-guy Bogart streaming along a river together in WWI Africa is great. Through many perils the two manage to survive until they are captured by Enemy Germans who are about to execute the pair as spies. The ending of this Hollywood Classic is extremely satisfying.

Humphrey Bogart won his only Oscar for his role, while Katherine Hepburn chalked up another one of her 12 career nominations. This film is pure cinema-candy. How can anyone NOT love this movie??? Highly recommended.*****

Entertaining Mix of Genres
Bogie & Hepburn in perfect form. She plays an uptight missionary and he plays a carefree everyday guy. They learn to respect and like each other and fall in love and save the day. A perfect blend of romance, adventure, action, comedy, suspense, & war drama. The movie doesn't reinvent the wheel with fancy camera angles and plot twists. Its sheer star powered entertainment. If you're a fan of either star, you can't miss with this.

Cool movie
I watched the African Queen in social studies in 7th grade. It was Ok. I liked the whole idea. I know this will sound stupid but i didnt like the way that Rosie woman smiled.
But in general, the movie was OK. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Jamie Foxx's uncannily accurate performance isn't the only good thing about Ray. Riding high on a wave of Oscar buzz, Foxx proved himself worthy of all the hype by portraying blind R&B legend Ray Charles in a warts-and-all performance that Charles approved shortly before his death in June 2004. Despite a few dramatic embellishments of actual incidents (such as the suggestion that the accidental drowning of Charles's younger brother caused all the inner demons that Charles would battle into adulthood), the film does a remarkable job of summarizing Charles's strengths as a musical innovator and his weaknesses as a philandering heroin addict who recorded some of his best songs while flying high as a kite. Foxx seems to be channeling Charles himself, and as he did with the life of Ritchie Valens in La Bamba, director Taylor Hackford gets most of the period details absolutely right as he chronicles Ray's rise from "chitlin circuit" performer in the early '50s to his much-deserved elevation to legendary status as one of the all-time great musicians. Foxx expertly lip-syncs to Ray Charles' classic recordings, but you could swear he's the real deal in a film that honors Ray Charles without sanitizing his once-messy life. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (276)

Great Job by Jamie Foxx
Jamie Foxx gives a five star, award-winning, performance of a lifetime in this movie filled with drama, romance, humor, drugs, triumph, and quality music. Showing the trials and tribulation of one of the most influential musicians of the 20th century it follows Ray Charles Robinson from the start of his career as he deals with such various obstacles as blindness, racism, his brother's death as a child, and heroin addiction. This film is well rounded with numerous familiar faces but one unknown face deserves just as much recognition as Foxx. This person is Sharon Warren who portrays Ray's strong willed mother who makes his learn to stand up for him self despite his handicap and not to let anyone keep him from what he wants in life. While not being the most glamorous portrayal of a legend it show how strong and utterly amazing the man really was. Laced with the actual music of and by Ray Charles you get the feeling you are really watching the man himself. Highly recommended.

Excellent film...one of the best of 2004
Genre: Bio-Pic Drama/Musical

Genre Grade: A+

Final Grade: A

This was an excellent movie. It was much more serious-toned than I thought it would be, giving a strong glimpse into adultery and drug addiction and also gives a horrific glimpse into Ray's childhood. The movie is also uplifting with the story of Ray finding his own sound, and just all the music in general. Definitely worth seeing (and worth sitting nearly three hours for), and although the conclusion of the movie feels very rushed and unexpected, it has such a strong body and introduction that make it worth it. Jaime Foxx was amazing in it, and I've got my bets on him for taking home the Oscar next year. There were seriously a couple of moments in the movie where it almost seemed like they inserted some old footage with the real Ray Charles in it because he stepped into the role so well. Great movie, see it!

Sheesh...big deal!
Oh please!Enough with all these accolade about Jamie Foxx's performance.All I saw was an IMPERSONATION.He wasnt multidimensional and I didnt see CHARACTER.Acting like Ray Charles is not enough,he should have lived it through the movie.Im not pretending to be an acting expert here (because im not) but Jamie Foxx doesnt deserve all these compliments,seriously.
About the movie,its actually more fitting for HBO but what's good about this movie is that they didnt force the audience to think that Ray Charles was this noble being,unlike other biopics,which portrays the famous characters as if theyre saints.There are lots of holes in the movie and it focused on his music and his womanizing and we can get a glimpse of his childhood with a subplot of him being banned to play in his hometown,other than that,theres nothing else.You should buy this if youre a big fan.But if you just like the music,just rent it.

Superlative Performances Elevate Solid, Episodic Biopic
At this point, it seems superfluous to say Jamie Foxx gives a brilliant, surprisingly nuanced performance as Ray Charles, as he not only mimics the singer's mannerisms flawlessly but also provides texture and depth to the pained man underneath. It's startling to see Foxx perform at the piano in that idiosyncratic spasmodic style that Charles had, as the actor very often becomes indistinguishable from the legend. In the private moments also depicted here, Foxx is amazingly perceptive about the troubled, hard-shelled, often nasty man Charles apparently was in real life. Hardly the image one remembers from the Pepsi commercials or his other frequent, sometimes ridiculous TV appearances...anyone remember he was in several episodes of "The Nanny"?

But the movie is not about the deconstruction of Ray Charles. In fact, director/writer Taylor Hackford and co-writer James L. White have written a literate, often powerful screenplay that makes us understand the complexity behind Charles' genius and the reasons for his inner demons. The challenge is that in order to remain true to his life story, Hackford and White have overstuffed the movie with so many milestone moments that it becomes episodic and sometimes rather wearing, especially when it comes to the film's depiction of Charles' two-decade heroin addiction. The sight of Charles shooting up and denying his addiction becomes almost a repetitive plot device, as if to provide melodramatic filler between the triumphant moments when he conquers musical frontiers that initially meet with resistance. That's not to say there aren't strong, compelling moments, as there are many. Ironically, one of the most memorable has nothing to do with Foxx but depicts a moment in Charles' hardscrabble Georgia childhood when little Ray trips over a chair and screams for his mother. Wordlessly, he picks himself up and becomes attuned to the sounds around him, picking up a cricket and realizing his mother is right in front of him. It's a transcendent moment.

Hackford is not the most subtle of filmmakers (he made the over-the-top "The Devil's Advocate" among others), and unfortunately his exaggerated sense of melodrama creeps in now and then, in particular, the last section when he decides to go for a 1960's movie-style approach to drug rehabilitation and inserts a fantasy scene back to Charles' childhood that provides pat closure to his long-standing issues.It's an oddly surreal Hollywood-style scene that I feel betrays the honesty of what was presented before. But sometimes Hackford's excessiveness works in his favor, as in the supposedly improvised way that classics like "What'd I Say?" and "Hit the Road, Jack" were composed. I also think he does an effective job in making racism an inherent part of the story, not just a pointed plot device, specifically in showing how much of the manipulation Charles experienced in his career was not at the hands of white promoters. The movie also highlights Charles' decision not to play an unsegregated venue in Georgia and revisits that decision in a coda that takes place years later.

Beyond Foxx, there is a gallery of superlative performances, especially by a trio of fine actresses. Kerry Washington is superb as Charles' wife Della Bea providing strength and tolerance in the face of her husband's drug addiction and constant adultery.Regina King plays backup singer Margie Hendricks, Charles' on-the-road mistress, with her requisite sass but with a penetrating desperation. Best of all is Sharon Warren, who portrays Charles' proud mother Aretha in flashbacks that make you understand where Charles got his courage and unbridled fury. Also providing excellent support are C.J. Sanders as the young Ray, who witnesses his young brother's accidental drowning and faces his impending blindness, and Clifton Powell as Charles' right-hand man Jeff Brown. The more well-known figures are played gamely though less memorably by Larenz Tate as an ambitious, very young Quincy Jones; Curtis Armstrong as an overly measured Ahmet Ertegun; and Richard Schiff as an anxious Jerry Wexler. At 153 minutes, the movie is rather long, and because of its episodic nature, stops rather abruptly in 1966 when Charles' personal and private lives seem to gain equilibrium. Regardless, the wondrous Foxx elevates this film biopic into something quite extraordinary.

The two-disc DVD package has several extras worth noting. On the first disc, the chief addition is fourteen scenes deleted in the theatrical version that have been spliced into the version here and notated accordingly. Some provide interesting context to the story, though they sometimes slow the pacing, a problem coupled by the addition of dead pauses that hurt the overall quality of the viewing experience. All told, the extended version clocks in at a staggering 178 minutes. Taylor Hackford's commentary on the alternate audio track is informative but on the perfunctory side (I only wish Foxx could have added his perspective and can only dream what Charles could have contributed had he lived long enough to "see" the film's release.) On the second disc, those fourteen deleted scenes show up individually, and there are also three featurettes. The first is the obligatory making-of short, "A Look Inside Ray", which includes comments by the filmmakers and actors on making the film.The next short, "Walking in His Shoes", is about the meeting between Foxx and Charles before his death and discusses how Foxx got under the skin of the character. The last, "Ray Remembered", is a quick tribute to the spirit of Charles by those who loved and admired him.

The Road Leads Back To You
Most of us under sixty think of Ray Charles as a perpetually smiling, swaying, grayed old man wearing sunglasses, glued to the piano bench who mumbles out "Georgia."What most do not realize is that Ray Charles had been performing since the 1940's until his death in 2004.This film shows Ray as a vibrant young man and opens our eyes to a whole new world that many have never known, a world that includes segregation and the civil rights movement.The movie spans from Ray's childhood up until around 1963.Considering that Ray's career went on for forty years AFTER that is astounding.

Ray Charles was born in Albany, Georgia, in 1930.Growing up in poverty in Florida during the Great Depression, he lost his little brother in a tragic accident that would haunt him the rest of his life.Around age seven, he went blind from glaucoma.Ray honed his knack for music at the state school for the blind and deaf.

Although a true genius and pioneer of jazz, R&B, and even country western, Ray (Jamie Foxx) was not a perfect human being by any means.Ray had learned to be fiercely independent from his fiery and dedicated mother Aretha (Sharon Warren), who died when he was fifteen.Yet he was dependent on a couple of demons - women and heroin.These addictions had tragic consequences.The fact that Bea, his long-suffering wife (Regina King), stood by him all those years is an example of the kind of chemistry and love this man inspired.

The movie reminds me so much of The Temptations (1998) as far as how the plot unfolds, that I would have given "Ray" four stars if it were not for Foxx's and Warren's performances.Foxx won Best Male Leading Actor for his sublime performance of a legend and an icon.Sharon Warren was so intense as Ray's mother.With her visible biceps on a fragile frame, she embodied the plight of all African Americans during Jim Crow.I want to see Warren again in a film.She is absolutely amazing.

The movie has sexuality and drug use, but nothing too graphic.There is no bad language.All of the songs in the film are Ray's original recordings, lip-synched very well by Foxx and the backup girls.When I heard that the songs would be lip-synched, I did not think I would enjoy it, but it works very well and was very entertaining.

The DVD has commentary by the director, and short readable bios of just about all the main and supporting actors in the film.It is a little annoying to have to read the white font and keep scrolling endlessly through each bio.

... Read more

Reviews (99)

Great for its time!
If you have ever listened to the original Orson Welles' infamous radio show of the same name, you will have to watch this movie. The story begins as a meteor crashes to the earth and puzzles the residents of a California town.

The incident isn't given much thought, until one night, everything in town turns off. No electricity, no phones, watches stop. Gene Barry, the resident scientist from Pacific Tech, is trying to find out what's going on, as masters' student Ann Robinson tries to help.....predictably, they fall in love while chaos ensues all over the planet.

The aliens are not friendly. Their technology outdoes anything on earth. Not even atomic energy seems to stop them. So, what does? You'll have to watch this and see. The movie is somewhere between a really great B movie and an actual heavy duty motion picture event. The story is entertaining, and the writing is not as corny and stilted as a lot of sci fi movies made in the 50's. And whoa, those special effects! Not bad for an old classic!

Excellent Adaptation of the H.G. Wells Novel
This movie is one of the standard bearers for early science fiction. The film is well-scripted and acted, and the special effects are quite good considering the age of the film.

Gene Barry plays the central character of the movie, Dr. Clayton Forrester, a scientist from Cal Tech. He and two buddies are fishing nearby when the initial Martian invasion ship lands (crashes) nearby. By the way, that must have been a heckuva landing the Martians had to endure when their 'meteors' touched down.

The movie details humanity's efforts to halt the apparently unstoppable murderous Martian invasion force. No pretenses about peaceful coexistence or some sort of misunderstanding here, folks. The Martians want our planet and are willing to kill every man, woman, and child on it to get it. As such, the military is portrayed in a pretty good light in this film (unlike many others). After all, when the alien's first club out of the bag is lethal force, then you pretty much have to go with the flow.

In the end, with atomic weapons having failed to stop the invaders, mankind appears doomed. Saving the day, however, is the most unlikely of allies (and, no, I ain't talking Russia).

Overall, a well-paced sci-fi/thriller with a basic premise that never fails to entertain when it is well done--as it is here.

When worlds collide
I am by no means a fan of science fiction movies but of the few that I do enjoy, "The War of the Worlds" is my favorite sci-fi flick. Devlin Emmerich's 'Independence Day" has nothing on this film despite having the state of the art special effects. "The War of the Worlds" was based on a radio program that legendary actor Orson Welles read one Halloween night and caused a lot of people to freak out because they thought what they were hearing were true. Dr. Clayton Forrester played by the handsome Gene Barry comes across a small town in California. He was called by the townsfolk to investigate the meteor that crash landed in their town. What Forrester soons discovers is that the meteor that crashed was no meteor. Chaos ensues when the aliens reveal themselves and their deadly intentions. For its time, "The War of the Worlds" had quite the special effects. It may not be as dazzling as that modern rip-off "Independence Day" and even the '80s tv series of the same namesake but it certainly had heart and was more entertaining. I remember first seeing the film in high school and enjoying every second of it, and ten years later I still enjoy watching "The War of the Worlds". Too bad Devlin Emmerich didn't have a backbone and had to ape the concept of this film for his atrocious "Independence Day". That just lacked originality. Nothing beats the original concept of aliens invading earth than "The War of the Worlds" in my book.

War of the Worlds: ground breaking sci-fi
H.G. Wells, is one of the first the introduce readers with the idea of aliens from mars taking over the earth, and triggered many writers later to write books involving martians. In the masterpiece, Wells introduces many ideas and masterfully blends them into his story.
England is in trouble as cylinders of metal carrying martians constantly crash on the earth every 24 hours. Each cylinder carries a walking tripod, that has a heat beam attached, a beam that melts and burns anything it hits. As more aliens come, they bring gasses that can kill a human just when they inhale it.
All seems lost for the main character as he tries to dodge martians, and return to leatherhead, where his wife has taken refuge. He is forced to hide from the martians byhimself, for almost everyone is dead.
Hope of survival is almost noting for humans, when they find out the martians have developed flying machines, to promote their world wide destruction, but something happens to the martians......
This is a great book and I am very pleased that I took the time the read it, even though some parts were very slow.

An Early Color Sci-Fi Classic
"The format is standard instead of widescreen...," says an Amazon reviewer of War Of The Worlds, one "lotus_scrum" of Phoenix, AZ. She also later adds, "Not the WORST looking dvd but the full screen format hurts it badly for me. If it gets a new release with widescreen, remastered sound and picture I'll give it a 5." None of which makes much sense, since the DVD has fine sound, and was NEVER shot in widescreen, since widescreen didn't exist back then!

And as President of the Widescreen Watchers Association, I should know. Here is the release date of the first movie shot in widescreen, which happened to star Marilyn Monroe: How To Marry A Millionaire - November 5, 1953.

And here is the release date of the standard movie in question starring Gene Barry: War Of The Worlds - August 26, 1953.

As you can see, War Of The Worlds could hardly have been presented in late August - almost 3 months before the process was first tried in early November! In addition, although many films started being shot in widescreen in 1954, several studios were slow on the uptake and did not make their films mainly in widescreen until late 1955 or early 1956. From Here To Eternity (1955), shot in standard screen, is a prime example of that.

What all of the above means in regard to this particular film is that nothing was cut off of the picture, so to paraphrase Flip Wilson, "what you get is all there was to see."

It's a beautiful film (although perhaps corny by today's computerized Matrix standards) and the use of color is rich and vibrant. Once you've seen it you'll never forget it. It's Pal and Haskin at their best.

I also recommend other such color sci-fi classics as Forbidden Planet, When Worlds Collide, and The Time Machine. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Sometimes movies are built around a great idea begging for a story, in this case pairing ballet legend Mikhail Baryshnikov with tap great Gregory Hines. The resulting storm of dance in White Nights, as one would expect, is great, but the story is a little forced. Baryshnikov plays (in parallel to his own life) a Russian defector to the U.S. who ends up a prisoner in the motherland after his plane is forced to land in Leningrad during an emergency. Hines is an American expatriate who gets involved with the situation. Director Taylor Hackford (An Officer and a Gentleman) punctuates an escape scenario and relationship dilemmas with as many dance sequences as possible, and the result is a wobbly, unconvincing tale with some furious footwork. Fortunately, performances carry the day, as the two male leads are both very strong as actors, and the supporting cast--Isabella Rossellini, Helen Mirren, and filmmaker Jerzy Skolimowski (Moonlighting)--is terrific.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (29)

It was great when I saw it in high school...
I recently saw this again and sheesh.... it's all about perception. This film is very 80s...very very very '80s. Seeing Mikhail Baryshnikov dancing in tights was worth the experience of the rest of the movie when I saw this back in the carefree days of high school.

Great and convincing acting by Isabella Rossellini, Helen Mirren and Gregory Hines don't save this from being what seems in this day and time to be a ridiculous story. It's easy to forget what a threat the Soviet Union was at the time... and how scary the thought of being trapped in communist Russia really was... neighbor spying on neighbor, eavesdropping equipment everywhere and just cold, dreary days one after another. This is a film best enjoyed by folks who can remember what it was like be around in the 80s w/ the fear of nuclear war. This is hardly a "timeless" piece, but still enjoyable.

Eleven pirouettes!
Baryshnikov does eleven pirouettes straight. What more can you ask for? Anyway, the movie was very good. It was a dark, communist Soviet Union film, with a lot of tension. But most importantly, Gregory Hines and Mikhail Baryshnikov were fantastic. It is superhuman what they can do.

every thing
the beauty,grace, and syncronozation of these two men dancing from such different backgrounds and styles was magnificent. The love, trust, and faith under such difficult situations was indescribable. The story with its action and psychological background kept me riveted to the screen (5 OR SIX TIMES OR MORE!) When do I order my dvd?!!!

Breathtaking!
Wonderful dancing, great story, good music too and Barisnikov back to his roots. Altough the Kirov scenes were filmed in Portugal. Opening scene is lovely.....

Most beautiful!
I love this movie. It's my all time favourite and it's great to see it's out on DVD. Mikhail Barischnikow is of course the greatest dancer and performs his artistry. The storyline is breathtaking. All actors and actresses are simply supreme. It was Isabella Rosselini's first movie role . I saw this movie the first time in the cinema and it was the first time I saw Gregory Hines - who will truely be missed. He was a great actor and step dancer. This movie is one of the greatest but only a few people seem to know ... Read more

Amazon.com

Big Bird and Telly Monster lead young viewers through the alphabet, letter by letter, in a magical and imaginative half-hour discovery of letters and their sounds. The perfect tape for young Sesame Street fans who are just beginning to get the hang of what letters are all about, it includes short skits, songs, and other bits of business--some original, some culled from the Sesame Streetshow--featuring a variety of Muppet characters as well as the human residents of that famously educational thoroughfare. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (14)

The BEST alphabet video on the market!
I bought this tape for my little boy when he was 16 months old.
This is by far the best alphabet movie I have seen to date. It's not all annoying loud songs like so many of the movies are now. My son is allowed to watch one movie per day, and this is usually his first choice. Believe it or not, by 17/18 months he was saying the entire alphabet. His pediatrician was shocked at his 18 month visit! There are lots of neat songs and video clips from Sesame Street episodes from the early 70's I remember myself on this tape!

Variety and simplicity
If you are looking for an introduction to letters for your child, this is a wonderful video. Through entertaining skits and a variety of visuals, the Sesame Street Gang go through the alphabet while coming up with words that begin with each letter. The sequence of photos of street signs and billboards which zero in on each letter in order is a real favorite with our 28-month old and has led to his interest in street signs and letter recognition in our own neighborhood. The pace is leisurely enough for toddlers who are just learning sounds, yet contains enough music and animated sequences to capture the attention of squirmy kids--if you happen to have one of those. Please note: There is no Elmo in this video, which to my mind is a plus but may be a disappointment to rabid Elmo fans.

Excellent Learning Aid
Sesame Street learning about Letters, Has helped my 22 month old twin boys, and my daughter who is 3 1/2 to learn the alphabet, and have fun at the same time. They all ask to watch this video almost every day!

Great entertainment and Great learning!!!
This video has been around for a while; my now 14yr old daughter used to watch this video everyday from 9months old on. No kidding, by the time she was 18 months old, she could identify ALL the letters if you asked her to point to any one!
Now, I have a 4yr old, 3yr old, and twin 2yr olds who are really learning alot from this video, albeit not as fast as my 14yr did.
I would recommend this to anyone with kids from 6months up!

Not bad, but...
The quality of the tape itself could be better. Also, it is a bit tiring for a toddler to sit through this video with the whole alphabet being introduced at once. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Rebecca is an ageless, timeless adult movie about a woman who marries a widower but fears she lives in the shadow of her predecessor. This was Hitchcock's first American feature, and it garnered the Best Picture statue at the 1941 Academy Awards. In today's films, most twists and surprises are ridiculous or just gratuitous, so it's sobering to look back on this film where every revelation not only shocks, but makes organic sense with the story line. Laurence Olivier is dashing and weak, fierce and cowed. Joan Fontaine is strong yet submissive, defiant yet accommodating. There isn't a false moment or misstep, but the film must have killed the employment outlook of any women named Danvers for about 20 years. Brilliant stuff. --Keith Simanton ... Read more

Reviews (115)

Gothic Greatness
From the opening shots and line about dreaming of a visit to Manderly again, to the final shots of Mrs. Danvers and the flames, Alfred Hitchcock creates a dark, eerie atmosphere that will remain with the viewer every time you see the film. Although Rebecca is never seen, her presence is felt throughout the entire movie. Laurence Olivier, as the late Rebecca's tortured husband is good, although I think his moods and personal torture are played too strongly. Joan Fontaine, never an actress I have especially admired, is surprisingly excellent as Olivier's new, unnamed, naive wife, thrust into a world she is unprepared to deal with. But the greatest performance of the film belongs to Judith Anderson as Mrs. Danvers, Rebecca's housekeeper, and consequently, Fontaine's nemesis. With her daunting profile and posture, and her chilling delivery of lines, she creates one of the most memorable film characters I have ever seen. With its winding plot, terrific performances, and the direction of Alfred Hitchcock creating tension and atmosphere on a Gothic scale, Rebecca is one of the greater suspense films I have ever seen.

Classic Suspense
The Best Picture in 1940 and an adaptation of Daphne du Maurier's famous novel. It is not at all surprising this movie won two Academy Awards and nine other nominations. Through the masterful direction of Alfred Hitchcock, you will be kept in complete suspense. The newly restored version from the original negatives is presented full-frame and has been digitally mastered for optimum picture and sound. The result is a sumptuous black-and-white film that is better than I have ever seen it before. They do say this movie gets better each time you watch it, and I must agree.

The opening scenes convince you that this is going to be quite a forbidding story. A meandering path overgrown with foliage and a ghostly manor (Manderley) appears out of the Cornwall, England mist. The gothic quality is only the stage for a love story haunted by the memory of Rebecca. While this is mostly filled with suspense and mystery, there are a few moments of humor.

While a young woman (Joan Fontaine) is vacationing in the South of France as a ladies companion, she meets a wealthy widower Maxim de Winter (Lawrence Olivier). His wife, Rebecca is said to have died in a boating accident. They fall in love, marry and then he takes her home to Manderley. She is ill prepared for such a position in society and stumbles through her days trying to adapt as best she can.

"Rebecca" is the theme of this movie, yet the heroine is the second rather timid Mrs. de Winter when she rises to the occasion and takes on this ghost who haunts her husband. Mrs. Danvers (Judith Anderson) manages the manor and seeks to keep the first Mrs. de Winter's memory alive in an almost obsessive way. She is cold and has no regard for Maxim's new wife's feelings. Judith Anderson is just magnificent in her role and her character is in a way is Rebecca's ghost personified.

The conclusion is surprising as we find out how Maxim really feels and the story unfolds one detail at a time to finish with a satisfying conclusion. You will never once think these characters are actors, they are their characters from start to finish.

You must watch this movie in complete darkness with just a few candles burning for it to be just slightly scary. One of my all-time favorite movies. Definitely worth owning!

Yummy Classic Movie
I have seen all of Hitchcock's American work. If you are familiar with his movies, you probably agree that, with the exception of "Family Plot", his films are delicious brain food! Rebecca is a beautiful, mysterious and tragic piece. Olivier and Fontaine are at the peak of their talent and beauty. By the way, if you like Joan Fontaine in this film, her performance is equally good in Hitchcock's Suspicion, with Cary Grant. Why aren't most modern actors this good, hmmm? Hey Mr. Soderbergh, please don't remake this one! There's a reason why we call them 'Classic'.

A classic shines.
A stunning transfer from Criterion. "Rebecca" remains one of the finest films of the 1940's, and features Joan Fontaine as the second mistress of Manderley, forever living in the shadow of her mysterious predecessor. Lawrence Olivier is perhaps detached in his performance, but nevertheless embodies the master of Manderley as few others of his generation could. "Rebecca" also contains the paranoia, suspense, and dreamlike mood that would color much of director Alfred Hitchcock's later work. Criterion continues to put the major DVD distributors to shame with its transfers of old films, and once again proves that although higher in price, their DVD's are worth every penny.

"We can never go back to Manderley again"
Joan Fontaine laments as she opens the film, obviously several years removed from her time at the lush, oversized estate, which recalls "Tara" from Gone With the Wind as a residence which is actually also a character in the movie. People remember the houses from these two films almost more than the characters. No coincidence that both films were produced by the ridiculously meticulous David O. Selznick. GWtW was of course the most popular film of all time, so Selznick figured he had the right idea about how to make a film. Details, right down to the last corner.

Alfred Hitchcock had made a career in London making films with complete autonomy. He basically called all the shots. When he got to America, he signed a four movie deal with Selznick. Rebecca is the first and best of the three. (no, not a mistake, I'll explain later) Rebecca was the only film by Hitchcock to win best picture from the Academy, although Hitch did not win best director. The film was basically a tug of war between producer and director. Selznick wanted the book followed religiously, Hitch wanted to take the basic idea of the book and add his own touches. Selznick wouldn't allow it, so Hitch was forced to make the film exactly by the book.

The film stars Fontaine as an unnamed young woman who while working as a paid companion for the unbearable Mrs. Van Hopper (Florence Bates), she meets and falls in love with the brooding Maxim de Winter (Lawrence Olivier). They marry after a quick courtship and go "home" to Manderley, Olivier's mammoth estate. Fontaine is very young and has no idea what she is getting into, especially when it dawns on her that Olivier's late first wife, Rebecca, still dominates the house. Her stationery, napkins, and rituals are still present, and Fontaine feels she has no chance against this woman.

The other problem in the house is the housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers (Judith Anderson),who creeps around the house, showing up at any time to frighten Fontaine. She is still obsessed with Rebecca, still keeps Rebecca's old room the same way, hairbrush at the correct angle on the vanity. She makes Fontaine feel she will never measure up, will never be a great lady of Manderley, something that Mrs. Van Hopper tried to tell her as well. Everyone and everything in the house revolves around this dead Rebecca, so much so that Fontaine almost can't live through it.

Rebecca never appears in the film, yet it is amazing how much of a character she is. When Fontaine tries to dress up for a ball, Danvers suggests a portrait on the wall which is supposed to be a long dead relative of Maxims. Of course, when Fontaine wears the dress, she realizes from Maxim's reaction that the woman and the dress were Rebecca and that she just reminded him of her.

Eventually the film goes into Rebecca's death in some detail. We never know for sure that we know all the details of the death, but it doesn't really matter. By the end of the movie, all the major characters in the film will have been changed. Some will have been destroyed forever.

Criterion has done a great job with this film, giving us a great transfer, as always, along with a superb commentary. The second disc features trailers, interviews with Fontaine and Anderson, making of featurettes, examples of Selznick's letters and his attention to detail, and how maddening it got for the master.

By the way, Selznick got three films out of Hitchcock. They were Rebecca, Spellbound, and The Paradine Case. Well, he really got four, but he gave one of them to RKO studios because he was unhappy with the story and he thought it would interest no one. What was the film Selznick gave away? It was Hitch's best film of all time in my opinion--Notorious. What a waste it would have been had Selznick been allowed to ruin Hitch's masterpiece. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

It's hard to know who thought it would be a good idea to make a live-action version of Disney's animated classic. The one bright notion anyone had was casting Glenn Close as Disney über-villainess Cruella de Vil; her flashing eyes and angular features are a perfect match and do credit to what is one of the most indelible animated characters Disney has ever created. The story remains essentially the same, focusing on Cruella's plot to kidnap the puppies of a young married couple (Jeff Daniels and Jolie Richardson) and make them into a coat. But the dreaded John Hughes, who wrote this script, fills it with sadistic slapstick and far too few genuine laughs. The human actors work hard, but to little avail; thankfully, there's a passel of puppies to regularly steal scenes when the going gets dreary--although there are only so many laughs to be had from inappropriate dog puddles. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (48)

Delightful story with puppies that will steal your heart
It was a stroke of genius for the legendary Disney Studio to decide to remake their classic 1961 animated feature "101 Dalmatians", as a live action feature. Never a great fan of remakes, I feel this story is a natural for a live action version and on first viewing it totally won me over. It has so much to offer viewers of all ages, whether it be its 99 gorgeous Dalmatian puppies that would melt the heart of any dog lover, a top class production with terrific sets, locations and stunts or a wonderfully wicked villianess in the incomparable Cruella De Vil played to perfection by gifted actress Glenn Close.

The film follows closely the original story and tells the tale of London couple Roger and Anita who meet through a Dalmatian dog mixup in a London Park and fall in love, marry and find themselves the happy "parents" of 15 beautiful Dalmatian puppies when their Dalmatians Pongo and Perdita begin a family of their own. Their happiness is short lived however when Anita's boss the dastardly Cruella De Vil spots the puppies and immediately makes plans to have the puppies kidnapped so that she can turn their pelts into the extravagant spotted fur coat she has always dreamed of having. What ensures is a comical tale full of laughs, great stunts and hilarious situations of the "boo the villian, cheer the dogs" variety. The Dalmatian parents, with the aid of many assorted members of the animal kingdom from woodpeckers, squirrels, and assorted sheep pigs, and dogs not only succeed in tracking down the missing puppies in their hideout but also outwit Cruella and her incompetent accomplices at every turn. The animals revenge on Cruella and her accomplices makes for most of the humour as they find themselves being dumped through falling roofs, landing in tubs of gooey molasses and being smelled out by skunks!

No expense was spared on this production and indeed all the live action characters bare an amazing resemblance to their cartoon counterparts. Gleen Close towers over the whole production in her performance as Disney Studios most famous villianess the totally over the top Cruella De Vil. Her makeup, hair styles and clothing is everything you would imagine Cruella to be. It is to the credit of Glenn Close that she succeeds totally in bringing to life such a well known and "loved" cartoon villianess. A supremely talented actress as seen in such diverse roles as those in "Fatal Attraction", "Dangerous Liaisons", "Meeting Venus", and "Paradise Road" among others, she is a total riot as the bizzare fashion designer with an extreme fur fetish. It is she who makes "101 Dalmatians" such memorable viewing and her encounters with the animals in the second half of the film will have you laughing for ages. The sight of Cruella rising out of the tub of molasses where she has been unceremoniously dumped by the animal brigade will bring fits of laughter to the viewer. The film also boasts the great talents of Jeff Daniels and the lovely Joely Richardson as Roger and Anita the loving couple drawn to each other by their fondness for Dalmatians, and the gifted Joan Plowright as Anita's former Nanny who finds herself performing the role again but this time for the 15 puppies in the house. Much of the comedy stems from the great playing by Hugh Laurie and Mark Williams as the wacky Jasper and Horace employed by Cruella who's job it is to steal the puppies for Cruella. They receive the main brunt of the animals "revenge" to great comic effect as does John Shrapnel in the role of the sinister scarred Skinner who is employed to turn the puppies coats into Cruella's new coat. The animal stunts performed in this film will have you gasping as the animals seem top take on human personalities of their own to brilliant effect. The location photography around London and in the snow scenes at Cruella's hideaway also create a very pleasing look to the film.

I never fail to watch "101 Dalmatians" without finding a smile appearing on my face. It is a totally delightful film that is just as much for adults as it is children which is a real credit to the Disney Studios. Glenn Close really makes the film a viewing experience with her over the top playing here but if you are in anyway a dog lover you can't help but be totally captivated by these delightful 101 spotted creatures charming the audience in "101 Dalmatians". Enjoy!

"101 Dalmatians"
Having watched both the live-action and the animated versions of "101 Dalmatians," I find the live-action version to be vastly superior. This updated classic has a fresh, fun storyline. The actors who play the characters seem perfectly suited for their roles. Glenn Close is particularly good as Cruella De Vil. The movie was filmed in England and each scene is beautifully crafted. The director has done a remarkable job of giving the dogs respected status as emotion-feeling, three dimensional characters without resorting to the silly and mundane method of giving them human voices. Being a dog trainer myself, the thing I most enjoy about the movie is the absolutely phenomenal job done by the dog handlers. Not only are the trained behaviors remarkable, but the handlers have elicited responses from the dogs that readily convey understandable "emotions" to the audience. The ONE glaring fault of this movie is the final scene where all of the dogs have been allowed to breed ad infinitum. I find that totally irresponsible and the reason this movie gets 4 stars instead of 5.

CORNY!
One of the WORST films by Disney is this "101 Dalmations", which is a live-action version of the original cartoon movie & is nowhere near as good. All it was is just a retelling of the story obviously, but very little excitement and fun, bad acting and cheesy, cheesy, cheesy special effects. (not to mention the jokes sucked!) It is also TOO short! They could've added in more and it would've been better but it all ended too soon. Disney is really going downhill with these sequels and remakes and I suggest that they STOP now!! How anybody could like this film is beyond me! This is the stupidest, crappiest movie remake ever! Save your money and buy the original cartoon version instead cause it's 100% better than this smelly pile of dog crap! Your kids will also like it more.

A dog's life
Don't expect this type of overacting Disney movie that can be a sweet movie. It was pretty funny. It will be better than the second movie 102 Dalmatians.

Calling all dogs, we must find the puppies!
We purchased the cartoon version at our first opportunity, and this has been a heavily watched movie by our kids, especially when they were pre-kindergarten. This is still my 6 year old daughters favorite movie and the family voted it #8 of 41. Not quite up to the production standards of other Disney movies, this one was popular with all 5 children and is very watchable with repeat viewings. It narrowly beat out Fox and the hound for the 8th spot.

Cruella De Vil sees the 15 puppies of Pongo and Perdita and decides that she needs to make a polka dot Dalmatian coat with their fur. Her henchmen kidnap 86 puppies from around London and with these 15 she has 101. Pongo and Perdita call upon their doggie friend to search for the lost pups in hopes of engineering a rescue.
We had a lot of fun by gathering the family together to rank the 41 Disney movies we have that include some cartoon work. All the kids, ages 6 to 27, participated along with mother and dad. Peter Pan is no Codfish, we rank it #2. Lion King was selected number 1 of the 41 as the family favorite, but narrowly. Peter Pan was 2. Pete's Dragon 3, Beauty & the beast 4, Sleeping Beauty 5, Snow White 6 and Robin hood 7. These 7 movies all received a 5 star rating from us and complete our magnificent 7. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

"Very, best favorite "
My two year old daughter would watch this twice a day if we let her. Fortunately we don't mind listening to it. The message is good, the story is cute & the songs are catchy. We find ourselves walking around the house humming, "this is Elmo's train, chugga-chugga whoo whoo!" Since we won't let her watch TV all day, now my daughter want to play with trains.

Dull, long-winded, and not the right message
I have many Sesame St videos from the great (123 Count With Me, Bert and Ernie's Word Play) to the not so great (Get Up and Dance), but I absolutely HATE this one!

Firstly the "sharing" message is delivered in a heavy way with very few songs to liven it up. Then the newsreader/interviewer format used doesn't work at all - it is just incredibly boring. Even the introduction of familiar characters like Jack and Jill and the Three Little Pigs cannot save this dud.

I think it may even teach children to be more selfish and "MINE" oriented than they were before they watched it. Elmo constantly talks about Elmo's train, and it's clear that he absolutely hates to share. At the end he only agrees to share due to purely selfish reasons (otherwise Zoe won't play with him anymore), and he tries to share as little as possible (as little as Zoe will let him get away with).

This DVD portrays sharing as a strict case of quid pro quo - I'll give you a cookie, but ONLY IF you give me half your glass of milk. Never mind that I have lots of cookies (more than I can eat). I think sharing should be portrayed as motivated by friendship, affection and caring, not only selfish "what's in it for me?" thinking.

OK overall; high points for educational value.
My 3-year-old finds it impossible to share trains, which must be a common problem, as the video opens to Elmo and "Elmo's Train." Although not as good as "Big Bird Gets Lost," I think this video has value in a preschooler's collection. The message is clear: it's boring to play by yourself, but nobody wants to play with someone who doesn't treat them with respect. Sharing strategies like playing different parts of a game, taking equal turns, putting different games or toys together, and splitting things into parts are outlined by Elmo, Zoe, Big Bird and the Grouches in the main plot.

Katie Couric (who is not an actress - bear with her) cuts in occasionally as a newscaster for "Cooperation Today" solving conundrums like how Jack & Jill can get up the hill, and how the 3 little pigs can keep themselves safe by helping them work together. A few vintage clips "What is Friend?" with Cookie Monster, and "Two Heads are Better than One" are included. Unfortunately, the rest of the music on this tape is not up to Sesame Street standards. Joe Raposo's "Share" by Elmo, Zoe, and Big Bird isn't too bad - but the Elmo's Train song is annoying, and the Cooperation Song is unpleasantly saccharin.

That being said, my 3 year old preschooler was riveted to his seat, and cried for me to rewind it when it was over. He just started school, and is struggling with this issue - the video seemed to help him collect his thoughts. Again, as in "Big Bird Gets Lost," we had a great discussion afterwards. I'd definitely recommend this to parents whose kids are having a tough time learning to play.

Love this video BUT........
My 22 month old loves this video! She loves Elmo & Katie Couric, and she loves dancing to "So Much Better". She quickly learned "Jack & Jill" and about "The Three Little Pigs". The only bad thing about the video is that it taught her to say "No" even more; she even says "Elmo says no!". And the video taught her the word "MINE". When Zoe asks Elmo if he would share his train with her, Elmo says "No! Elmo says no! This train is mine, mine. MINE!" So when we watch this video, I mute this section.

Good one to have
My son, then 18 months loved this video watched days and nights. I am not sure that has something to do with it, but he is very good at sharing his toys with other chilldren. He also does not touch or grab toys that do not belong to him unless he gets permission. I didn't think asking preschool children to ask so politely (with that kind of choice of words )"Pardon me ...." was realistic, as Katey said in the commentary she made as a parent of preschooler, but other than that it was very entertaining and educational. ... Read more

Reviews (641)

Schizophrenia is *not* this pretty
It's extremely difficult to get into the mind (and therefore the world) of the patient with schizophrenia or a similar thought disorder. Necessarily simplified from the biography of mathematician John Nash, this film achieves dramatic pace and structure that has no analogue in the life of even some of the most extraordinary individuals suffering from such a condition.

Setting aside the fact that Ron Howard's work is not true to the nominal subject of the movie, however, this film comes laudably close to a good clinical depiction of the desperate vividness of the auditory and visual hallucinations suffered by patients with schizophrenia, including the sort of elaborate structures of delusion which the more intelligent individual has been known to develop.

I would wish that Howard and his associates had managed to portray something more of the adverse effects of the drugs available to treat schizophrenia in the '50s and '60s. Indeed, I would've liked to have seen Russell Crowe add to his superb performance some intimation of these harrowing elements so that the audience could better understand the pharmacotherapeutic factors that drove Nash to discontinue his neuroleptic medications and undertake what is essentially self-directed cognitive therapy in order to address his thought disorder. Even the more recently-developed "atypical" antipsychotic medicine