Amazon.com

Okay, blame it on Geordi La Forge. It's his slip of the tongue that causes all the mayhem in this episode. After Data ruins a perfectly good holographic adventure by jumping to the end of a Sherlock Holmes mystery, the frustrated chief engineer asks the computer to create an adversary worthy of defeating the android. What Geordi meant to say was an adversary worthy of Holmes, but never mind. The computer obliges and Moriarty is born. Literally.He comes equipped with superintelligence approaching consciousness and a direct line to the main computer. Somehow, Dr. Pulaski gets thrown into the mix--as a crumpet-eating hostage, of all things--and Moriarty starts messing with the Star Trek universe as we know it and turns reality on its ear.

TNG is at its best when it doesn't take itself too seriously. "Elementary, Dear Data" is an utterly charming outing into high-tech Victorian wacky land. In fact, this episode proved to be so popular that the story was continued three years later in "Ship in a Bottle." The writing is excellent and Daniel Davis is sublime as Moriarty, the hologram who's sentient and knows it.This makes many best of Trek episode lists, and is simply a must-own for all TNG fans. --Kayla Riggney ... Read more

Reviews (7)

A major philosophical point is largely ignored
This episode is more memorable for the extremely significant philosophical point that is largely ignored than it is for the dialog and battle between Data as Sherlock Holmes and a holographic Professor Moriarty. During a lull in duties, Geordi and Data retire to the holodeck where Data is Sherlock Holmes and Geordi is Dr. Watson. However, since Data has memorized all of the stories featuring Holmes, he quickly resolves the mysteries, which frustrates Geordi. In an attempt to spice up the game, Geordi instructs the holodeck computer to create an adversary capable of defeating Data in a battle of wits. The computer complies, creating a conscious, intelligent and self-aware Professor Moriarty, capable of programming the Enterprise computer and gaining control of the Enterprise, all from inside the holodeck.
Eventually, since the program cannot be terminated, Picard is forced to enter the holodeck and meet Moriarty face to face. Picard explains the situation to Moriarty, who returns control of the Enterprise to Picard. In return, Picard has the computer save the Moriarty character, with a promise to revisit the issue in the future.
Since it is the Enterprise computer that creates the sentient Professor Moriarty, the question becomes: Is the Enterprise computer sentient? The answer to this is most certainly no. In the episode "Q Who?" Geordi laughs at Ensign Gomez for being polite to a food dispenser. His statements indicate that he does not consider it to be sentient. Furthermore, the events in all the other episodes support this position. Therefore, the action in this episode is based on the premise that the non-sentient Enterprise computer created a sentient consciousness that is in many ways just as alive as any other creature. The fact that it can exist only in a holodeck is not significant as many organisms can exist only in their specialized environment. This is a very deep philosophical and scientific issue that is largely ignored.
A second problem is the ease with which Geordi misprograms the computer. Given the power of the Enterprise computers, there should be much greater safeguards to make sure that an error in speaking is not misconstrued. The number of safety and security overrides would have to be enormous, and there would have been an immediate directive to fix this obvious and serious software defect.
With these problems aside, this is still a good episode. Moriarty is a character who is devious, ruthless and yet a gentleman. It was a very wise move when he was brought back in a future episode. Dr. Pulaski is adorable in her Victorian outfit as she accompanies Data and Geordi back to the streets of London during the reign of Queen Victoria. There is just too much direct and subtle activity packed into it.

Fun to watch!
Who cares about the technical part of it.
its a fun chase!

It's not elementary.It's not even entertainment!
Based on some prior reviews I bought this. Boy, was I disappointed.
Even though some of the other reviewers give away the plot and surprises, I thought I would enjoy this. All I can say is you have to be brain dead to be entertained by this. Gene Roddenberry would be very disappointed!
Be warned: Data DOES NOT turn out to be Sherlock Holmes' arch enemy, Professor Moriarty.
And yes, Data defeats Professor Moriarty before the professor defeats him.
I think you would have to check your brain at the door to like this one. I really do not understand all the glowing reviews from the other customers.

Cool Episode
This is one of my very favorite episodes. One thing I thought was cool was how they had the bullet holes in wall. For those unfamiliar with the Sherlock Holmes stories, Holmes practiced shooting his gun indoors and shot the letters VR into his wall. Look for it right after Goerdi makes a comment about all the detail.

Data the Detective
Data as Sherlock Holmes

Rob Bowman of X-Files directing fame helms this episode. It's about the Sherlock Holmes program aboard the holodeck. Data wants to create an adversary worthy of his talents. He does. Almost brings down the starship and crew with him. This one marks the debut of "The Nanny" actor Daniel Davis as Moriarty. For those of you who ever read Holmes; Moriarty was his nemesis. Daniel Davis delivers as the episode's villain. There are a few good scenes with Dr. Pulaski. She tells Data that he can't be creative and only solve mysteries that are variations on the ones he's read. She argues that Data is incapable of being creative. Data more than proves that she is wrong. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

A twisted view of the '70s.
Americathon was a satire about the 1970s showing what the country would be like if the trends continued. People don't remember now but every night the news broadcasts announced a new "crisis" When I moved out to college in 1976 I could afford rent and food on minimum wage; by the time I graduated I was living off sardines and crackers. President Carter blamed America for being under a "great malaise" and interest rates hit 20%. To a lot of people the future depicted in "Americathon" wasn't all that unbelievable.

Funny Movie--and Scarily Prophetic...
I remember seeing AMERICATHON a long time ago on video. I thought that it was weird, dumb sometimes, but with a wicked sense of humor that I appreciated. This film was made back in 1979, and the plot is set in 1998.

Well, right now we're in 2001, on the heels of the most catastrophic terrorist attack in this country since Pearl Harbor, on the verge of a deep recession, and we are running out of money--fast. Tonight, we're having the kind of star-studded telethon that took place in this movie. Of course, it's to raise money for the victims of the awful attack, but it IS an "Americathon" of sorts, isn't it??

This movie stars a likably goofy John Ritter as the President of the United States (har-har) and a wonderfully twisted Harvey Korman as the beleaguered host of the Americathon (and whom is not entirely dissimilar to Peter Finch's beleaguered TV news anchor in the great 1976 movie NETWORK). Some of the great cameos include Meat Loaf as a car-battling stuntman and Jay Leno as a mother-boxing son. Sure, it's wacky and sometimes stupid, but overall, I must say that I liked it.

Now let's hope that our real "Americathon" tonight goes much better...and, of course, let's continue to pray for the families who lost their loved ones last week. And, in the middle of all this madness, please take some time to take your mind off this terrible, senseless tragedy, and go watch this movie. I think that it will make you laugh a little.

Funny and Fun
This is a really funny movie, but had great foresight--it was made in 1979 before Ronald Reagan put us into mega debt. It's a strange view of the future where people live in cars since they can't afford to drive them anymore, jog everywhere...the Arabs and Israelis have joined forces...and America is flat broke and about to be foreclosed. Rent this on a day when you need a good laugh!

America-THUD
Here's a great idea for a comedy that assembled a capable cast but lacked enough inspired ideas to make it work. Some scenes like Meatloaf battling a car sound funnier than they are. The film does begin promisingly. A wonderful Beach Boy song, a funny montage, and the humorous premise is laid out by our narrator, George Carlin.

Then it gets tired and labored.

Waste your time with a rental perhaps, but few will want to sit through this more than once.

Christopher J. Jarmick author of The Glass Cocoon with Serena F Holder -- Available February 2001

Watch Meatloaf Battle a Car
It's 1998, America is out of gas both literally and figuratively. People live in permanently parked cars, walking, jogging and biking to work.

When a Native American billionaire who loaned money to the government to cover the national debt threatens to foreclose on the nation, a telethon is held to raise the money to save the country.

An early work from Neal Israel, the man who would later create such classics as the *original* "Police Academy" and "Real Genius," the movie brims with humorous high-concept jokes. For example, in schemes to raise money, San Diego is sold to Mexico and a daredevil (played by Meatloaf) battles a car.

Aside from the comedy, there's a great soundtrack with songs by the Beach Boys and Elvis Costello (who makes a cameo appearance). One of my favorite films of the late 70's, this is a great addition to anyone's video collection. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

good episode
I don't really need to explain the plot of this episode. That has already been done quite well by other reviewers. What I will tell you is my opinion on the episode.

It is really good overall. The only thing I don't care for from Star Trek TNG is how they handle most disability issues.... Most of the time the characters that develop disabilities view them as a fate worse than death (including this one)... and equally as often (including this episode) their disability is miraculously cured by the end of the show. I know that the show is based in a time frame several hundred years from now when medicine is supposedly much more advanced, but still, it gets annoying. I think the series missed out on some important messages by doing this.

Even so, the dicussions between Riker and Worf are great during this episode. (They discuss contradictory cultural and individual belief systems on life, death, what is important in life, and the "right to die").

In the end though, it is all neatly tied up and everything they talked about was for nothing as Worf is cured.

Incidentally, the only disability related episode that I remember that doesn't end with a cure is one in which a NON-Enterprise crewmember is the one who develops the disability. What does this say about the strength of the crew?

I generally LOVE the way in which TNG handles most social issues. Disability is one that could have been handled better though.

Worf has to choose between experimental surgery and suicide
In "Ethics" Worf is injured by a failing container that leaves the Security Chief paralyzed from the waist down. Worf's only hope is a radical medical treatment urged by Toby Russell, a neural specialist who has come to help Dr. Crusher with the injury. Russell wants to create a new spinal cord for Worf, but Crusher wants to try conventional therapy when she learns the new procedure has never been used on a humanoid. Worf would never survive if the experimental treatment failed. Worf rejects Crusher's suggestion since it can only restore partial mobility and asks Riker to help him commit suicide in accordance with Klingon traditions. Of course Russell goes behind Crusher's back to offer the experimental surgery to Worf, giving the injured Klingon another option besides suicide.

Certainly "Ethics" is a rather melodramatic episode, which tries to take full advantage of its title. The ethics of experimental surgery is old hat (have you ever seen an episode of a television show where they did NOT try the experimental surgery in the end?), but Riker's deliberation over Worf's request is the centerpiece of the show. It reminds me of the moment at the end of "The Best of Both World's" cliffhanger where Riker ordered the Enterprise to open fire on the Borg cube with Locutus/Picard. It is totally believable that Riker could honor Worf's request. Those scenes redeem "Ethics" enough to make it an average episode in the series. There are also some implications for the characters down the line when Worf asks a stunned Counselor Troi to care for Alexander in the event that he should die.

Insightful
This episode contains an excellent debate on medical ethics. Worf is in a situation where conventional treatment will not help him make a full recovery (necessary for Klingon honor) but a new, experimental treatment is likely to kill him. Though of course Worf makes a full recovery in the end, the argument is not really resolved. The nature of the debate does not lend itself to easy solutions, but it does bring up many interesting points to ponder.

Star Trek: The Next Generation "Ethics"
Worf is severely injured following an accident, and loses the ability to walk. Dr. Crusher tells him his condition may be permanent, and suggests treatments that could could restore much, but not all, of his mobility. However, Worf is not pleased at that, and considers his own remedy for his disability, until a doctor comes aboard the Enterprise hoping to try out an experimental but risky medical procedure that could restore virtually all his mobility. After conferring with his son about his situation, Worf decides to undergo the procedure, but will he come out of it alive? I like this episode because it's a story about Klingon rituals and what Klingons traditionally do when they're paralyzed. ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Freddie Prinze, Jr.
I well remember, and well liked, FP Jr.'s father, and his TV series "Chico and the Man." A while back, I saw FP, Jr. being interviewed on a talk show, and I thought he came across as so down-to-earth, charming, and cute as can be. But I was totally unfamiliar with his work as an actor.

I finally got around to renting this movie, and thought it was very enjoyable. Similar to "When Harry Met Sally....," but of course no where nearly as great as that classic, superlative film. But still quite pleasant. Leonard Maltin, with whom I usually agree, rated this movie BOMB -- he is absolutely, unequivocally WRONG.

However, after renting ths movie, I did rent FP, Jr.'s "She's All That," and "Head Over Heels." Maltin liked those movies better than "Boys and Girls," but again, he is WRONG -- those two were the bombs, unfortunately. In fact, despite FP, Jr.'s enjoyable screen presence, they were virtually unwatchable.

"Boys and Girls" is a lovely movie (a bit of a weak performance by Forlani was a bit of a drawback, but the rest of the cast was very good, and so was the writing, and the direction).

I feel certain you will enjoy the lovely "Boys and Girls."

Boys and Girls is one of the best teen movies!
This Movie is The Best! The Best Scene is the Scene in the Nightclub to "Stop The Rock" By Apollo 440. Freddie Prinze Jr. is hot in it and Claire Forlani is keeping it real. Funny clip at the end with Jason Biggs. Buy before you rent! It Totally Rocks!

Should friends become lovers?
Should you be yourself, or smooth out the rough edges? What about opposites? After many bad endings, how do you know if love is going to be worth the trouble?

Jennifer & Ryan are pre-teens when they meet. Jennifer is being very forward, discussing the implications of her period. Ryan is a geek, trying to plan everything, who doesn't think Jennifer is his type, and pushes her away. As the plane takes off, he is afraid of flying. I actually missed this symbolism, but something at the end of the movie reminds you of it.

For the next 5 or so years, and dozens of chance meetings, this scenario repeats until the viewer can hardly stand it. Ryan will not pick up on Jenny's advances. For contrast, his roomate works entirely too hard at meeting girls. Does Ryan play it too straight and careful? Is Jenny too slutty? Is her roomate gay? There are lots of interesting angles and subplots, exaggerated so you don't have to be a genius to pick them up, which I find helpful. :)

For the next 3 years Ryan & Jenny are best friends. Then something complicated happens, involving all four characters (including Jenny's roomate). No, not group sex, it's not that kind of movie, but some strange things, and I will try not to give awayany more .

What do you get when you cross Eric Rohmer (director of French "talkie" films about the early stages of relationships, in fact he made one called "Boyfriends and Girlfriends") with Jane Austen (early 19th century author of carefully plotted romances, e.g. the award winning "Sense & Sensibility")? You get something like "Boys & Girls." Unfortunately, it is the only movie in this vein that Robert Isgrove directed.

Ultra-feminists will not like the ending. Everyone else will. A few people will not like the way the flashbacks are done, but it is not overdone. Audio track is selectable for English or French (suggesting Isgrove was possibly aware he was making an intellectual French-style movie, albeit the ending is very American rom-com). Subtitles can be had in Spanisn or English (for the hearing impaired). Lots of previews of other similar movies on the DVD, but no info about cast, director or "making of." Decent pop soundtrack.

As long as your expectation is reasonable (it's not quite as silly and cute as a teen comedy - they meet only once in high school years, most of the action is in college, and they do sometimes pass up parties to hit the books), you should enjoy the movie.

A great movie
Freddy and Claire have many interesting scenes together. From being on a plane together, to falling in love in college, the comedy never ends. Freddie is the tag-along friend as Claire has many boyfriends. Biggs thinks that he's using claire as a "fake girlfriend". I don't want to reveal too much, but it's a good comedy and u should check it out!

For all you Alyson fans out there!!
I just wanted to let you know that Aly has a total of two minutes screen time in this movie... And this movie is totally not worth it!! ... Read more

Amazon.com

First broadcast on HBO in June of 1998--shortly before the theatrical release of Steven Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan--this World War II drama offers an equally intimate and devastating study of combat and its tragic aftermath. Set in Germany during the closing days of the war, the film uses a little-known episode of U.S. military history--the bloody battle of the Hurtigen Forest--as the backdrop for the story of a battle-weary private (Ron Eldard) who is the only surviving member of his platoon. Despite his request for dismissal on the grounds of mental disability and shell-shock, he is considered a promising soldier by his superiors, promoted to sergeant, and assigned to command a fresh platoon of young, inexperienced soldiers. The cycle of war continues, and the film ends as it began--with one soldier carrying a mortally wounded comrade from a scene of devastating loss. A veteran of several war films, director John Irvin emphasizes the gritty, physically exhausting realities of combat with keen attention to detail on location in Hungary. This film is decidedly downbeat (don't look for any Spielbergian uplift here), but its depiction of warfare is undeniably powerful, earning praise for Irvin and HBO for tackling such an uncompromising project. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (84)

"Platoon" set during WW2. Worth watching.
This is a pretty decent look at the "forgotten front", otherwise known as the battle for the Huertgen Forest. This is one of those episodes that doesn't find frequent mention in the history books, but strangely it wound up with its own movie.

When I watched this, I couldn't help being reminded of the Vietnam flick "Platoon." The emphasis here is on showing the gritty, unglamorous side of infantry combat, and it's well done. Heroism, cowardice, mud, blood and fratricide are all featured in this story of a scared G.I. who's determined to survive the war at any cost, even if it means the loss of his honor.

The story opens with a young private, brand new to the war, who is the sole survivor after his platoon attacks a German position and is wiped out. His survival is qualification enough to earn him a promotion to sergeant, and not long after, to lieutenant. He wants neither. All he wants to do is survive at any cost, and he doesn't care what his superiors or subordinates think about it.

The action scenes are generally believable and well done, even if some of the mock-ups of the German tanks aren't. Several of the scenes are particularly intense and bloody, a little reminiscent of Private Ryan, but not to the same degree of utter carnage. In general I thought the acting was okay, but seeing Dwight Yoakam as a light colonel was a little surreal for me. The ending, in my humble opinion, was a little corny, and didn't do justice to the rest of the movie, which otherwise might have rated four stars instead of just three. Still, it's definitely worth watching for anyone who likes war flicks.

Adds a gritty and dark twist to WWII films.....
If you are looking for Saving Private Ryan 2, don't buy this movie. However, if you are looking for a down-in-the-dirt (more so than Pvt. Ryan), grim and gritty war film, than this is your movie.

The plot centers on a Private, in the much-forgotten battle of Hurtgen Forest, who is the only soldier of his platoon to make it back alive from a raid on German foritfications. The company commanders see him as a perfect candidate for a leader, due to his obvious survival skills. He is promoted directly to Sergeant, and is put in charge of a squad of misfits. This Sergeant only cares about himself, and doesn't mind sacrificing others to get himself back to the base alive.

At first, a minor gripe I had is that I never really cared for any of the characters (except the medic played by Frank Whaley, and the young private Sanderson). And I especially hated the main character, who, like I mentioned before, only cares for his own hide and takes advantage of his subordinates (playing with their lives) for personal gain. But, in the end, you will not gripe about this. It will show you a true protrait of the frontline -- there are no glowing Hollywood heroes....just normal boys from all over the country -- some of them good men, others flawed. That is what makes this film so good.

Though not as good as Saving Private Ryan (simply because it is just too dark and bleak at times), it is a good addition to the collection of epic war films.

Bad acting and contrived plot
Compared to the best I have seen, i.e. SPR and Band of Brothers, this dog barks. The acting is atrocious and the plot so contrived it begs ridicule. And the guy that plays the Major should stick to country music and leave the acting to people a bit less wooden.

I know the Hurtgen Forest was a horrendous episode in WWII but this film cannot possibly do the brave US Soldiers who actually fought there justice.

Save your money, buy Band of Brothers or The Lost Battalion.

Those highly feared yet respected German 88's
This is a must see for any WWII movie fan. One of the best. The German 88's were the staple of German terror and here you get to see them in action. Awsome ! Now go see, "A MIDNIGHT CLEAR".

Worth taking a look....if only for Ron Eldard's performance.
I applaud Rod Eldard's performance and would have thought him suitable for HBO'S BOB, not to mention Private Ryan. Support performances weak on the whole I thought, no one else stood out. Subject matter grim but to the point. Considering the Hurtgen Forest Battle was largely overshadowed by The Bulge..am glad this film was made. What a horrible, inhospitable place. The DVD has a relatively short running time. Worth taking a look if only from an historical/educational point of view and Ron Eldard of course. Where was HE when Speilberg and Hanks were casting for BOB ???? ... Read more

Amazon.com

Originally hatched in 1978 as a short film parody for Saturday Night Live, this expanded, 70-minute mockumentary on a trend-setting quartet of British mop-tops bloomed into one of Eric Idle's better projects outside Monty Python.Taking the career (and hagiography) of the Beatles and inverting them quite nicely, Idle conjures up four doppelgangers who offer the familiar mannerisms but practically none of the intelligence of their models. If that sounds like the same gag that powered This Is Spinal Tap (which emerged six years later), it is, with the crucial difference that Idle's lampoon is precise where Tap was consciously generic.

In telling the saga of the Rutles, Idle (who doubles as earnest narrator and McCartney-esque Rutle Dirk McQuigley) works from a rich and immediately familiar trove of pop lore, and he has a ball revisiting and reinventing milestones from the Fab Four's fabled history. The attention to period detail helps elevate the gags further, but Idle's real secret weapon is Neil Innes, standing in as Ron Nasty, the Rutles' answer to John Lennon:it's Innes who serves as the musical architect for the wonderful Beatles parodies that give All You Need Is Cash a delicious kick, and Innes, a one-time principal in the legendary Bonzo Dog Band, is gifted enough to capture the band's lyricism and energy as well as their shifting sense of style.

With the blessing and on-camera participation of George Harrison, and wry cameos from Mick Jagger and Paul Simon, All You Need Is Cash is a perfect companion to the Beatles' own glorious screen comedies and a great antidote to sanctimonious pop documentaries. --Sam Sutherland ... Read more

Reviews (63)

A must for Python, Beatles fans
What's genius about the Rutles is this: Watch the Rutles, and then watch one of the Beatles documentaries (the Compleat Beatles, etc) - then note that the Rutles was made PRIOR to any of the decent Beatles documentaries, yet looks like a parody of the real deal.
This mockumentary pre-dates Spinal Tap, and takes a different approach - by chronicalling supposed "source" material - news reels, press conferences, etc. The approach works well for Eric Idle, and the music by Neil Innes is perfect - slightly silly, but more Beatles than Weird Al.
The knowledge of the Beatles - their personal history, their tv appearances, their scandals, etc - is so well known by Idle - makes this mockumentary spot-on accurate, and all the more funny.

The DVD is worth having. If you have this on VHS, you've got a pretty lousy transfer from the original 16mm film. The film was restored and retransfered for DVD, and it casts the movie in a whole new light of clarity.

The bonus material isn't much to write home (or Amazon) about, but it's nice to have the stuff added on such a low priced DVD.

terrific sendup of Beatlemania stands up well after 25 years
In 1978 it was easy to remember Beatlemania, and this sendup of the mass hysteria was spot-on and hilarious. Starting as a skit for Saturday Night Live, and popular enough to get built into a feature-length film, this Eric Idle project is layered with jokes, spoofs, terrific songs, and great cameos by George Harrison, Mick Jagger, Paul Simon and Idle's wife, and it is still very funny 25 years later.

DVD extras are quite good. Eric Idle's commentary is excellent -- informative and entertaining. There are also 4 deleted scenes that last about 18 minutes; a photo gallery with 29 pictures; a "Play Songs Only" option, where you ee only the film's songs (Goose Step Mama, Number One, Between Us, With a Girl Like You, Hold My Hand, I Must Be in Love, Living in Hope, and Ouch!).

The look and sensibility of the film are exactly right, the writing is VERY funny, and the songs are surprisingly Beatle-like and quite listenable. If you are a Beatles or Monty Python fan, or if you just love good comedy, you will probably get a real kick out of this.

Side Splitting Hilarious
The movie was made more than 20 years ago, but retains its relevance as the Beatles continue to be a cultural icon. While the Rutles was not originally intended to be a full length movie, the product is great.

The project was completed long before John Lennon's murder, so all four members could approve the project. The Beatles are spoofed by the characters in the unique personality traits possessed by each member of the fab four and their scandals. The one-liners and song parodies prove Eric Idle's value to Monty Python and strength as comedic writer. The parody on Yoko Ono being "... a Nazi who's father invented World War II" is hilarious. Look for a scene midway through the song "Ouch!" in which Idle can not even control his own laughter at the monsterous woman in a bikini. I bet it a was too hard to get through a take with a straight face. This is a must for Beatles fans and Monty Python fans.

Idle and Innes compliment each other perfectly
This little treasure is something that all Beatles fans, Python fans and early SNL fans should own. It's the one thing that Idle says he is most proud of, and for good reason. His little bits, which perfectly parody the Beatles that Idle so adored, fit seamlessly into Innes' fantastic songs. Idle comments that Innes' songs added another dimension to the Beatles songs they're based off of rather than becoming shameless parodies (are you listening Weird Al?) and he is quite right.

The film contains moments of comic genius, but mind you they're mostly subtle moments of comic genius. The people I've run into that didn't think this film is funny at all tend to like the blatant, loud, American-style humor. So be patient with the humor, enjoy the music and discover the true genius of the Rutles.

By the end of the film, I almost cared more about the fictional Rutles than I did about the actual Beatles. (And I'm a huge Beatles fanatic) It's just a fantastic, fun film for those who can appreciate the true, witty humor.

Attention All Beatle Fans: BUY THIS!
If you're a Beatle fan, and for some reason you've never heard of this film, immediatley purchase this DVD!
IT is the ultimate parody of Beatlemania. The Rutles was initially released as a made for NBC TV film in 1978. Created by the Saturday Night Live team and Eric Idle (Monty Python), it has a distinct British flavor and Pythonesque sense of humor. It is basically a "mockumentary". Here's an example: after "Nasty" (John Lennon) proclaims the Rutles are bigger than God, the public is outraged, and start burning Rutle records. Record sales soared, people were buying them just to burn them! It turns out that the journalist who interviewed Nasty was hard of hearing. Nasty said the Rutles were bigger than "Rod" (Stewart)!!
The mockumentary covers the entire Beatle phenomenon up to their break-up.
The film gained more fans on video, and is now a bonafide cult classic. The music by Neil Innes (who wrote songs for Python) is superb, and he is perfect as John Lennon. Eric Idle plays McCartney and directs. The songs parodies are also on cd. They are amazingly Beatle-like.
The film is never critical, but made as a tribute with large doses of humor. The harsh aspects of Beatlemania are lightened. For example, Brian Epstein does not die in Rutleland, he accepts a teaching post in Australia.
Even if you are not a Beatle fan, this film is still a lot of fun, although you may not get all of the references. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

1985 was one of the best season's ever for S.N.L. !
I have no idea why Lorne Michaels decided to dismiss every cast member from this season except Dennis Miller and Jon Lovits. Maybe the ratings weren't what was to be expected or maybe he missed the raw talent that made the show (Saturday Night Live) what it is. Still, Damon Wayans, Lovits, and Miller are all naturals and all made their debuts on this season of SNL. Pros such as Randy Quaid, Anthony Michael Hall, Robert Downey Jr., and Joan Cusack are all remarkable and prove that comedy is where they belong. Ron Reagan Jr. and Tom Hanks star in incredibly well done parodies on Back to the Future and Jerry Seinfeld, and one of the greatest monologues in the history of the show is delivered by the great Peewee Herman on this outstanding best of 1985 tape. Don't miss out!

great stuff
When I watch this video, I get flashbacks of my life during that time. The tape features Tom Hanks when he was just another actor in silly movies, PeeWee Herman, Penn and Teller, and the president's son (no, not Dubya!).
Cameos of audience members, a "Back to the Future" spoof, a yuppie-slamming commercial parody, a Hall and Oates impersonation, etc., all show that 1985 was (and is) the most totally "eighties" year.

My only complaint is that Sam Kinnison made numerous appearences on SNL during this season, but none of those were included on this tape. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

OK
A recreation of the actual historic events of the French Revolution, from the elegance of the court of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette, to the fall of the Bastille in 1789, to the defeat of the mighty Prussian Infantry by a unified nation. The film follows the adventures of two young patriots. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Another bad decision under the guise of compassion
The Enterprise answers a distress call, to find that a ship crewed by a group of Talarian boys on a training mission has had an accident. They bring the boys back to the Enterprise for medical treatment and, much to their surprise, they discover that one of the boys is actually Human. Jono initially has no memory of his Human parents and seems completely at ease in the militaristic, male-dominated society of the Talarians. But when those memories do begin to surface and Jono's adoptive father arrives demanding his return, everyone is faced with some very difficult decisions.
There's actually a lot to like in this episode. It makes you think, and there are some strong performances from Patrick Stewart, in an unaccustomed father-figure role for Picard, and the actor playing Jono - whose character provides a good contrast to the nice-as-pie Wesley Crusher. But for me, this episode was really let down by the peculiar attitudes of the Enterprise's crew. Because Jono had a broken arm as a child they assume he must necessarily have been abused by his adoptive father and rush around looking for evidence to prove it. And just when Jono is starting to remember his past and realise what a difficult position he is in (he was orphaned in a battle with the Talarians), with a nod and a smile, Picard hands him back to his adoptive father. Sorry, people, you can't put the genie back in the bottle like that. The end of the episode is not the end of Jono's problems, but their barest beginning.
Three stars.

Better the Alien Species you Know...
The Enterprise rescues a group of young Talarians from a training craft. While dealing with the injured, Dr. Crusher discovers that one of them is human, identified as Jeremiah Rosa. When he was almost four his parents were killed in a border skirmish with the Talarians during their war with the Federation. It was assumed that Jeremiah was killed along with everyone else. However, Endar, a Talarian captain who's own son had died in battle against the Federation, adopted Jeremiah as his own, giving him the name Jono. When Endar asks for Jono to be returned along with the other Talarians, Captain Picard refuses, insisting that Jeremiah should be returned to his biological family. Endar warns Picard that if his son is not returned, there will be another war, but since Jono is of the age of decision, Picard does not believe it will ever come to that.

"Suddenly Human" is a variation on the story found in Westerns such as "The Searchers" or "Dances With Wolves" in which an "alien" culture brings up a child as its own (the theme does pop up in Science Fiction from time to time, most notably in the classic "Stranger In A Strange Land"). The key twist here is that Jono/Jeremiah is old enough to make the decision for himself, so the focus is more on how Picard and Endar make their cases in trying to persuade him where to live instead of the "law" trying to determine what is in the best interest of the child. So this might first seem like a Prime Directive episode, but it ends up being more personal than that. Of course, Talarian culture is a bit more barbaric and a bit less civilized than good old Terran culture (think more "human" looking Klingons), so the cards are stacked in Picard's favor in that regard, but this is the only culture and the only father that Jono knows. It is an interesting debate, even if you do not take it to any sort of allegorical level.

This is the weakest entery in the hightly success series.
This movie has its moments of grandeur, but I found it to be very lame and a real dissappointment (althoughI did like the part where John Luke goes inside that space time continuim and sees his family). The one after this movie "Star Treck First Contact" I think is a much better movie, with better special effects than any of the other ones (including the ones with William Shatner).

Had it's moments
Had it's moment ... Read more

Reviews (8)

a very young work
This is a film that shows the potential of Shohei Imamura, but im afraid it does not fulfill it. The film trys to hard to be arty:the jump cuts and "creative" camera movement serve only to confuse and alienate the viewer.

Imamura is a master film maker, and this isnt a horrible film, but if you want to see his best, get "the Eel" or "warm water under a red bridge"

Quaint and Silly.
There is a case for decrepit cinematic 'crud' being universal. This is it. Get Ozu's "Tokyo Story" instead (out on Criterion). That is a piece of timeless lyrical cinema. This film merely confirms that risque cinema quickly loses its potency (losing it in favour of a ephemeral revolutionary stance). A Waste.

More fun than I ever expected...
The Pornographers explores fetishism and unusual sexual arrangements with the bravado of a contemporary film designed to titillate the jaded bourgeoisie at Cannes, albeit with significantly less nudity. It's real, quirky, humorous, and it has a heart - in addition to dealing thoughtfully with the racy topics at hand. Even the choppily edited dream sequences seem to add to rather than detract from the overall experience.

An artful and engaging piece of cinema far ahead of its time.

NO SKIN FLICK
Love'em or hate 'em, idiosyncratic films that dabble with subversive notions and stories of fringe people make some viewers uncomfortable. You either get it or not. For those who do, there are rewards.

Shohei Imamura's THE PORNOGRAPHERS (Home Vision Entertainment) is about "public service" amateur porn filmmaker Subu. He supports and sleeps with landlady Haru, who thinks her disapproving dead husband has returned as a carp. But really, Sabu lusts after Haru's daughter. Voyeurism and incest is kinky comic fodder for Imamura, who said he's interested in "lower human society and the lower parts of the human body." Not for every taste, but way ahead of it's time. If you liked this one, see if you can find "Down and Dirty."

I did not get it
I had to watch this in a class. I thought this was one of the worst movies ever. The movie was over long. I guess i'm just a dumb college student but i did not get this movie at all. The weird camera work made the movie even more confuseing. Like the shot looking though a fish bowl. The move seems to be about and old pervert that likes to make porn and try to sleep with his girlfriends daughter. Then he becomes frustrated with women and trys to desgin the perfect doll, i got this part of the movie and it was down right discusting and i'm not a partically moral person. I hated every minute of this movie, don't waste your time or money its long borring and discusting. sorry for the misspellings and bad grammar ... Read more

Amazon.com

Film buffs may remember the tangled tale of competing Robin Hood projects in 1991. Kevin Costner, riding high from his Oscar wins for Dances with Wolves, had his pick of projects at the time, and he juggled his interest in parallel Hood films that were under development at different studios. Costner chose Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, of course, directed by his friend Kevin Reynolds, while the other production (the one described here), attached to veteran British director John Irvin (The Dogs of War), ended up on cable television with another Yank, Patrick Bergin, in the lead. Comparisons were inevitable, even though the two films were very different from one another. A little harder edged and more surprising than Reynolds's work, the Irvin-Bergin movie made all that medieval heroism seem more an effort of the heart than previous versions. Roughing things up a bit is Uma Thurman as a bratty Maid Marion, not quite the traditional damsel in distress of yesteryear. Irvin keeps the adventure quotient up, but this is simply a darker, grittier variation on the old tale. With Jürgen Prochnow, Jeroen Krabbé, and Conrad Asquith. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Very Historically Accurate and Well Done English Film!
For students of medieval history, this English version of Robin Hood is a VERY accurate re-telling of the classic Sir Robert Hode, 4th Earl of Huntington (a real person) legend. Reminiscent of the swashbuckling classics made in the thirties and forties, this film transports you back to 12th century England, when the mighty Normans ruled with an iron hand. Sir Robert Hode (Patrick Bergen) is a Saxon nobleman who insults the sinister knight Sir Miles Falcanet (Jurgen Prochnow) and is branded an outlaw. Clever and quick witted, he changes his name to Robin Hood and a legend is born. Robin becomes an outlaw hero, celebrated across the land for his dashing heroism. He ambushes the tax collectors of the greedy Baron Roger Daguerre (memorably played by Jeroen Krabbe), and gives the money to the poor. Then with his true love, Maid Marian (Uma Thurman) about to be married to Falcanet, Robin and his band of loyal men embark on their boldest adventure yet, to storm the Baron's castle and rescue Marian from a fate worse than death. Well written and adapted for the screen, expertly cast, (too many memorable performances to mention here) and superbly directed by English director John Irvin, this relatively low budget production has never received the accolades it deserves. This movie is a thrilling medieval adventure filled with action, romance and humor. If you saw the disappointing "Hollywood formula" American version with Kevin Costner, but prefered the original with Errol Flynn, and missed this one, give it a try! It is an opportunity to be transported back to another place and time, to see an accurate glimpse of medieval history come alive on film. A must see film for all history buffs... Excellent!!!

The best version of "Robin Hood"
Some people enjoy the Kevin Costner-Alan Rickman version of the Robin Hood legend, with its treehouses, American stars (faking horrendous Brit accents), Sean Connery cameo and even a wicked-witch-in-the-cellar. I am not one of those people.

This Bergin-Irving "unknown" version was released a few months before the Costner version. Sadly, it aired only on television for fear of competing with the star-filled, "event" film. And yet, this smaller film is vastly superior to the big-budget Costner "epic" on every single level.

This is a somewhat different version of the legend than what you saw with Costner and Disney. The political background to this tale matters: the uneasiness between the two peoples of England. It involves the Saxons, who had held power for centuries, and the more recent arrival and comeuppance of the French-based Normans. Basically, the Normans are now taking power in England and they're not being too nice to the displaced Saxons.

Early in the film we meet two noblemen who are friends: Baron Daguerre (played superbly by Jeroen Krabbe of "The Fugitive") as the Norman lord of the local province and Sir Robert Hode, a Saxon landowner. Soon, however, Daguerre's aide-de-camp, the brutal knight Sir Miles Falconey (Jurgen Prochnow in another great performance) gets into a tiff with Hode. Hode openly rebels against his former friend (Daguerre) and what follows is a neat retelling of the Robin Hood legend - replete with cross-dressing Uma Thurman as Maid Marian.

This film is beautifully scripted and wonderfully shot. The costumes, acting, and sets feel gritty and authentic. In other words, this is not a Hollywood production. It is simply a great film that nobody saw. I am ecstatic that is coming to DVD.

Far above Costners
This film is one of the best RH films done it certainly is far superior to the joke that Costner did!
I do have a correction that is pretty important, there is no Sherriff of Nottingham or Guy of Gisborne in this version. The Director chose to use the conflict of Norman Vs Saxon as the stronger plot drive and instead had two noble Normans playing the heavys. While it was a surprise to me the first time I watched the film I understood the choice. It makes it much easier for veiwers to see what was the actual conflict of Robin Hood, and not have too many people thinking of Alan Rickman or Basil Rathbone's potrayals of the heavys from the two more well known versions of RH.
Worth seeing, far more historically acurate than either of the other films and Uma's Marion could go head to head with Oliva's and totaly wipeout MEM from Prince of Thieves, or as I call it Robin Hood: Dances With Arrows.

Great action packed movie!
Man oh man this movie is just so great beyond movie borders. A must see!

Sweet!
This is a great movie in all the areas it could be. It is kind of a love story between Robin and Marian and a war between Robin and the merry men against the Normans. This is a great movie and isn't just a little bit boring. A masterpiece! ... Read more

Reviews (5)

The Artist's Life of the '80s
I have to admit. This is the movie that made me want to drop everything and move to NYC to become an artist/writer/hat designer/club kid. Of course, I was 16 when I first saw it and wasn't going to be leaving my Colorado suburban abode anytime soon. But it still inspired me to one day visit NYC and run into the same characters in this movie. Not only is the story entertaining, but the movie style is indeed unique.

My only request: PLEASE MAKE THIS AVAILABLE ON DVD!
I would love to see bonus DVD material including a documentary on NYC in the '80s and commentary with the director and Bernadette Peters. Maybe Criterion will take this one on.

Either way, this flick is a gem.

The Irony is killing me
That last review is not suprising to me...of course some people would be attracted to the way the movie looks, instead of what it preaches. "Slaves of New York" is actually poking fun at those who are shallow...it's not just about artists...or even New York for that matter...it's about how people treat each other in general.

Slaves To Art
Big hair, loud colours, 80's music, and funky hats. Slaves To New York captures the essence of the eighties in a New York party circuit kind of way. I marveled more at the clothes and the hair, and turned a deaf ear at the soap opera that was unravelling before my eyes. Watching all those artists play bed tag with eachother didn't seem to phase me. It's all so passe in the art world.

I loved Bernadette Peters and her constant array of feathered and bowed hats, and the film did supply some awe inspiring shots of New York city skyline. Steve Buscemi provides a cameo as a fashion designer, that was kind of interesting. But like i said before, the hats took center stage in this spectacle. Along with Bernadette Peter's bravado, Slaves of New York is a slice of 80's big apple pie.

Oh heck, guys - it's just plain fun.
An adaptation of Tama Janowitz's novel by the same name, this is a great story about the confusion inherent when you are living amongst those whose creative juices are always the most interesting things to them. We see mainly the emotional, mental, and professional struggles of Eleanor, the protagonist, played by Burnadette Peters. Torn between love and the desire to be loved tenderly, we find Peters stumbling through New York with her uber-cool artist boyfriend Stash trying to just keep her furrowing brow above water. Meanwhile, she works on her own artistic persuit of unique hatmaking. One of the highlights (for me) is watching Stash in artist mode, because - come on - who wouldn't fall for a conceptual artist turned cartoon painter? His artistic ego and blase - yet one would almost swear he has emotions - attitude can both frustrate and amuse. The film captures beautifully Peter's moments when you aren't sure what you would do, either, and also those when you know exactly what you would do. You get the feeling that she knows too; yet everything for Peters simply seems easier said than done. Thrown into the mix are a couple of love triangles involving other artists, and it seems that everyone is acting behind everyone else's back...it's just another element of being too chic to care. Peters remains the exception, simply attempting to break out of her increasingly degrading relationship. We go through the film laughing, shaking our heads, and championing our lovely, confused heroine - an extremely enjoyable two hours. There are some fun technicalities as well - watch for them.

Very entertaining and humorous for the thinking class!
This movie gives a humorous and honest portrayal of the "elite" arts community in NYC, as well as a basic love story. It is particulary funny if you've ever been privy to those (arts related persons) with inflated self-worth or self-esteem. One of my favorite visual parts is during the group softball game when you get a look at the makeshift uniforms the arts community has come up with-- I guarantee you won't be able to stop laughing during parts of this scene... Also, Bernadette Peters' Broadway acting legacy shines throughout the flick. I'm about to sound like an Imposters perfume box, but.... If you liked the movies The House of Yes, Desperately Seeking Susan, and Welcome to the Dollhouse ... you'll like this! ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Watch at least twice
This is a very good film Kon Ichikawa based on the famous novel in Japan. ("Kagi" by Jun-ichiro Tanizaki.) The story is about odd relationships with old connoisseur of classic arts, his faithful and attractive wife, his daughter and daughter's fiancé. Basically, Ichikawa's films are visually very artistic and enjoyable. (Another examples, Actor's revenge, Tokyo Olympiad) Combinations of beautiful cinema photography with very weird characters are so impressive. Since this film is so visually artistic, if you have to depend on subtitles you will miss a lot of great artistic atmosphere. (Probably, that's why critics did not give great reviews for Ichikawa's films.) To enjoy the film you have watch it at least twice. Don't try to understand at once. First time, read subtitles to understand the concept of the story. Second time, ignore subtitles as much as possible and enjoy the beautiful cinema photography and story. If you watch it more, it will be better. One critical point of this VIDEO (not film), subtitles are missing in very very important scene of the movie. But still enjoyable. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

A classic years video with a variety of sketches
Saturday Night Live is usualy very good but most of these sketches suck ... Read more

Reviews (9)

what a show!!!
This was the best show to ever hit tv. It had the best producers and writers. Miami Vice is a legend. It cann't be said enough about Don Johnson and Phillp Michael Thomas as they teamed up to make this amazing tv series. To bad it only runned for few years.It could of been a big hit in the big screen. Thanks for the memory for everyone that was part of Miami Vice.

Sex & The City----male version
As pure action adventure, this suffers somewhat---it's WAY too slow compared with some other VICE episodes.... But its fun is not there---this is basically the teststrone version of the current hit cable show, SEX AND THE CITY, where a bunch of women have sexual/romantic adventures in the Big Apple every week. Here, it's vice cops Sonny Crockett and Ricardo Tubbs, traveling out of sunny South Florida to catch a NYC-based drug cartel, but, along the way finding themselves trying to score---Tubbs with his old flame, played by Pam Grier (long before Quentin Tarantino utiliezed her talents), who's undercover---quite literaly---with a Manhattan gangster; and Crockett, who does it with a mystery woman who gave him the eye in a bar. Oh, yeah, there are the obligitory gunfights, including one set in the plaza of the World Trade Center....

Miami Vice-AWESOME
I just recently purchased this Miami Vice-Prodigal Son Video. It was AWESOME AND INCREDIBLE Experience that I relived. I am remmbering how wonderful, suspenseful and highly charged series this was. I was captivated all over again. This was the 80's but a good series is timeless not matter how old it is. Good Directing, Acting and good plot series this was. No Cop or Suspenseful Drama show can even compare to the Miami Vice Series even today. I was a fan in the 80's in still will always be a Fan. I wish there were more videos regarding this series. Please go get the Video you will enjoy not only the music but the plots the twist the action and drama will keep you in suspense. I Love MIAMI VICE- The Series/The Movies. PLEASE whomever has the ability to GET the entire series in Video/DVD please do. You will be truly blessing a loyal group of fans and also gain new fans. It you want my opinion BUY THE VIDEOS and MUSIC. ENJOY THE EXPERIENCE!!

The Start Of The 2nd Season
A nice, effective start of the 2nd season of Vice, and the action picks up where the 1st season had ended. This episode goes back a little to show us some of where Tubbs had been in before he came down to Miami. Crockett proves he can handle The Big Apple. Look for KISS singer Gene Simmons in a small part of a drug dealer who directs Sonny and Rico to head to NYC.

Columbian drug busts are "sniffed out " by Sonny and Rico
Miami Vice :The Prodigal Son. 1985 ,94 mins Dir, Paul Michael Glaser, Starr, Don Johnson, Phillip Michael Thomas, Saundra Santiago and Edward James Olmos. Score by Jan Hammer . One year TV holdback Extract courtesy of the VHS copy. Crockett and Tubbs (Miami Cops ) are assigned to a mission in Bogota , Colombia; a third world country whose exports are illegal, and where a 2 billion dollar industry is run by a couple of crazed indians. However, when it is discovered that the contraband from their carefully planned ambush has mysteriously failed to arrive at the police lock up . Crockett and Tubbs find themselves in the high-tech world of New York City. Definitely good action packed fun. It is not surprising however that this full lenghth feature film was held back for TV release . The plot is regretably drawn-out and forgotten in the endless soap styled romances between Sonny and Rico's chick flings. The score and cinematography are the highpoints.I especially found the ambient lighting effective for a show such as Miami Vice and all credit goes to Director of Photography James A. Contner. The well chosen sountrack features the likes of Ex- Eagle Glen Frey , Roxy Music, Bob Seeger and The Silverbulletband, Phil Collins and Virtuoso Jan Hammer who is famous for his work with Stanley Clarke, Al Di Meola and Jeff Beck Ex- Yardbird ... Read more

Amazon.com

The second of the three Merchant/Ivory films adapting E.M. Forster novels (between A Room with a View andHoward's End), Maurice deals with a theme few period pieces dare mention--a young man's struggle with his homosexuality. It's not just a gay coming-of-age story, however. The hero wrestles with British class society as much as his personal and sexual identity.

The film opens on a stormy, windswept beach, as an older man awkwardly instructs young, fatherless Maurice Hall (James Wilby) in the "sacred mysteries"of sex. The same turbulent, wordless struggle with passion lasts throughout this slowly evolving, beautifully filmed story. Novelist E.M. Forster's brainy, British melodrama hinges onchoice and compulsion, as the pensive hero falls for two completely different men.First comes frail, suppressed Clive (Hugh Grant), who wants nothing more than classical Platonic harmony... and a straight lifestyle. (Grant's performance is so convincing, one wonders how he ever became a heterosexual sex symbol.) After Clive's wedding, Maurice turns to hypnosis to curehis unspeakable longings. Unfortunately, his "cure" is interrupted by Clive's lustful, brooding, barely literate gamekeeper Scudder (Rupert Graves), aworker more at home gutting rabbits than discussing the classics. Maurice's love for a "social inferior" forces him to confront his illicit desire and his ingrained class snobbery. --Grant Balfour ... Read more

Reviews (69)

Haunting, Transcendent
Merchant-Ivory have often been made fun of for being stuffy and repressed. I don't agree but I understand why they've been parodied. In Maurice, however, the team created something very special--an incredibly lyrical, heartfelt love story. This movie haunted me long after I saw it when it was released, and it's just as haunting now. The performances are simply grand. I wish Hugh Grant would do a dramatic role again to get rid of his mannerisms. Wilby is particularly fine, when you consider this was his first film. I've never seen Graves give a bad performance. I'm so glad to see this on DVD. Would this film be a bigger hit in the theaters if it were released now? I think so.

Forster would have approved!
This is the one of the most faithful novel-to-film adaptations that I have seen. American director James Ivory has a wonderfully British sensibility, and the movie vividly recreates late Edwardian England in muted autumnal colours. In particular, it gives the 21st century viewer a very real appreciation of what it must have been like to be gay in such a society.

The cast is uniformly excellent. James Wilby was not Ivory's first choice for the central role of upper-class Maurice (Daniel Day Lewis and Julian Sands were earlier contenders), but he gives an outstanding and totally plausible portrayal. Equally good is Hugh Grant, years before he found fame as the archetypal British twit. Grant's role is a difficult one; he must at first engage our sympathy and fondness, then gradually lose our respect as he seeks to enter "respectable" society. Ultimately, we come to despise his cowardice. Grant achieves all of this without descending into caricature - a considerable feat.

Rupert Graves makes a fine Alex Scudder, the lusty undergamekeeper who seduces and transforms Maurice. Apart from a slightly inconsistent accent, he, too. seems entirely plausible and fans of DH Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover should note that this full-blooded lad pre-dates Lawrence's own gamekeeper by many years!

An outstanding supporting cast of seasoned pros includes the late, great Denholm Elliot and Ben Kingsley in small, but pivotal roles as, respectively, a bullying doctor and a hypnotist, both of whom Maurice unsuccessfully seeks help from.

This movie has a superb period atmosphere, a leisurely but rewarding pace, plenty of understated passion, memorable music and great script-writing. Kudos to the scenarists for being so faithful to the spirit of Forster, while at the same time adding scenes to remind viewers of the real dangers for gay men in Edwardian England.

Outstanding.

Obsessed!
I mean ME - I am truly obsessed with this film! I have fallen in love with beautiful Cambridge (so masculine and steeped in tradition), with the romantic Edwardian era, with the beauty of the story and especially with Maurice, the title character. Beware... if you're "susceptible" to romantic movies and is a highly sensitive person, chances are this movie will "get" to you in ways I can't fully describe. It doesn't matter if you are gay or straight - against your will, scenes and images from the film will replay in you mind, stay in your heart and affect your mood and feelings (for days, in my case - which is not a good thing because I have a major examination coming up and half my mind is still on "Maurice"!). At times, I wished I was born male like the characters, and have the privilege of a Cambridge education... wishful thinking really (though I've a girlfriend who went to Cambridge on a scholarship, to my eternal envy really).

This film is a faithful adaptation of Forster's novel and brilliantly brought to life by the winning team of Merchant Ivory. The stellar cast comprises James Wilby, Hugh Grant and Rupert Graves; all 3 share great screen chemistry and there is no doubt that the actors gave it their "all" for this film.

This is the story about one man's journey of self discovery about his sexuality and having to live with the prejudices of the times including class distinction (which balks at intimacy with a social inferior, in this case Maurice's desire for Alec). Many reviews have already been written about the story so I would just like to share some of my thoughts and observations of the film:

1) the DVD (R1, released Feb 2004) is beautifully packaged and is chockful of special features including more than 10 deleted scenes, one of which is a most sensual scene involving Maurice and Alec (an "extended" scene of their first night together). The production notes/booklet also provides a treasure of information on the film.

2) James Wilby plays "Maurice" most beautifully and sensitively. He is imperfectly handsome but is still very attractive-looking. The thing that strikes me most about Wilby's "Maurice" is that he has the MOST beautiful hair color - it's practically "golden" - not the usual blond. The color contracts nicely with the black suit he usually wears. In the novel, Maurice has dark hair, but I think a golden-haired Maurice is just perfect - a great contrast too to Clive's and Alec's dark locks!!

3) Clive (Hugh Grant) is older than Maurice by a year. When they get together, Maurice is around 21 years of age. By the time they break off, Maurice is nearing 24. Nothing is mentioned in the book/movie about Alec (Rupert Graves)'s age - but I gather he is the youngest of the three (although most certainly the lustiest!!).

4) Maurice's character is passionate, loving, vulnerable and super-loyal. If Clive had not rejected him, Maurice would have been "his for life". What's with Clive anyway? He's got this idea that a relationship between 2 men should be strictly platonic (no kisses or caresses, even). Thank goodness for the appearance of Alec later on, who is Clive's very opposite!

5) In the novel, Maurice is horrified by his lust for and intimacy with Alec, who is only a servant. But one reason they are perfect for each other is because (in Forster's words): "chance had mated it (i.e. Maurice's body) too perfectly". The 2 characters' growing feelings for each other are a joy to watch.

6) For those who question the ending i.e. whether it is even possible for Maurice and Alec to stay together what with all the difficulties surrounding them, well, let me write that Forster intended the ending to be a happy one (and who would know better than the author himself?). In the "Terminal Note" at the end of his novel, Forster wrote: "A happy ending is imperative. I shouldn't have bothered to write otherwise. I was determined that in fiction anyway two men should fall in love and remain in it for the ever and ever that fiction allows, and in this sense Maurice and Alce still roam the greenwood..." Super, isn't it?

7) The final scene ("In the Boathouse") is wonderfully romantic and is alone worth the price of the whole DVD, so to speak.

I don't want to forget this beautiful movie, and I can't forget it anyway. It is quite simply the most touching film I've ever seen. It deserved an armful of Oscar awards (although in reality it didn't do that well, receiving only Art Direction and Best Costume nominations). I've seen most of Merchant Ivory productions and "Maurice" is hands-down, the BEST. Don't miss it!

"May I Ask Your Name?"--An 'Easter Egg' for MAURICE
There is no need to repeat the praise others here have heaped upon MAURICE and the DVD package. This is the way any film of quality should be treated.

For those who will surely find it entertaining, there's a very nice EASTER EGG on this DVD:

Go to Disc Two--select Deleted Scenes, page 2--select "May I ask you name?" and then right-arrow. A small icon will appear in the lower right hand corner of your screen. Click on that and enjoy a hidden deleted scene.

Exquisite Masterpiece
One common complaint of the critics of this film is that the ending is rather unrealistic - that two homosexual men in English Edwardian society wouldn't *in reality* be able to fall in love and continue their romance as depicted in this mesmerizing film because of the unfortunate obstacles of being from different social classes and being completely different in their interests and unbringing. Although I feel that these critics are correct, I overlook that detail because I recognize that this film was obviously made with love by director James Ivory, producer Ismail Me