Amazon.com

Not nearly as good as the original French comedy, Three Men and a Cradle, upon which this is based, Three Men and a Baby nevertheless is decent brain candy directed with some crackle by Leonard Nimoy. Tom Selleck, Steve Guttenberg, and Ted Danson star as three swinging bachelor roommates who find a baby girl on their doorstep--the daughter of Danson's character (who doesn't know about her) by a woman (Nancy Travis) with whom he had a brief fling. The jokes about dirty diapers and feeding schedules are predictable, but the film gains real warmth from Selleck, who does a convincing job playing a fellow whose life is changed for the better by added responsibility. A distracting subplot involving some bad guys threatens to derail everything, and the ending is a bit unconvincing as filmed, but the virtues of this movie finally win out over its weaknesses. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Wonderful, but also see the French film!
Three Men and a Baby is very good I really liked it a lot and thought that all the actors were great! It is about 3 bachelor friends, Jack, Peter and Michael sharing an apartment in New York, the character named Jack is a womanizer who sleeps around a lot and a baby girl namd Mary is left on the doorstep with a note from her mother Sylvia saying that Jack is the father and all three men who know absolutely nothing about babies have to take care of her. It is a wonderful movie and I highly recommend it, it's the American version of the French film Three Men and a Cradle which is also wonderful and I highly recommend that too, in that movie the guys are named Jacques, Pierre, and Michel, the baby is named Marie and the mother is named Sylvia, I saw that film both in French with English subtitles and Dubbed into English but I preferred it in it's original French with the English subtitles.

Three Men, a Baby and a Cardboard Cutout.
This isn't really my kind of movie, but it isn't bad for what it is - a light comedy. I watched the movie mainly because of the "ghost" controversy. The "ghost boy" and the "shotgun" are actually the same thing seen from different camera angles: the cardboard cutout figure of Ted Danson in a tuxedo. The cutout cardboard figure is shown later in the movie when Ted Danson is talking to the baby's mother in the same bedroom where the "ghost" appeared (note on the cardboard figure the contour of the line where the left side of the black tuxedo meets the white vest). I believe the cutout figure was moved from the window on the right where it was in the earlier scene so it could be shown with Ted Danson for dramatic effect. The light-hearted, show biz bachelor in tuxedo and top hat works nicely as an ironic contrast to Ted's real-life character agonizing over parental responsibility and the possible loss of his baby.

The controversial "ghost" scene opened with Ted's mom entering the apartment. The camera for this scene, located in Ted's bedroom follows Ted and his mother as they walk through the apartment and into the bedroom. They walk right in front of the camera as they enter through the bedroom door and the camera pans to the right as they approach the baby crib. This is when we see the "shotgun" which is actually the left side of the cardboard figure (the right edge line of the "shotgun" is identical to the line on the cardboard figure where the bunched up vest meets the left side of the tuxedo). The rest of the figure is hidden behind the curtain at this camera angle. When Ted and his mother approach the crib the camera man moves to the left towards the window side of the room (watch the background behind Ted's mother). When Ted and his mother, with baby, leave the bedroom the camera man is now in position to precede them out through the bedroom door. This is when we see the "ghost". In the begining of the scene the camera man was at the side of the door away from the windows. So, as he exits backwards through the door and closer to the windows the cardboard figure is seen at a more acute angle exposing more of the tuxedo figure behind the curtain. The sides of the cardboard figure are hidden by the curtains, but the triangular shape of the neck/shirt and the vertical right coat/vest line can be seen. Also, the white tie of the tuxedo cutout, although obscure, can also be identified. The "boy's" face looks fuller to some viewers because they see the top hat without the hidden brim as the "boy's" hair-covered head. The triangular white shape at the waist line is the bottom of one side of the white vest on the tuxedo figure.

Great Family Friendly Movie
Ah, the Eighties. The soundtrack of this movie alone brings a nostalgic tear to my eye. Okay, this movie didn't blow us away with its depiction of bachelorhood, but it did make me laugh, and what more can a person really want in a movie? Steve Guttenberg, Tom Selleck, and Ted Danson are the Three Muskateers Plus Baby. By the way, when compared to its sequel, Three Men and a Little Lady, this movie DOES look like a masterpiece. Good movie -- one you can certainly enjoy with your own little ones, and Grandma and Grandpa.

Fine Entertainment!!
This older film, dating back to 1987, was a sleeper hit and a real favorite when it came out. The cast of Tom Selleck, Steve Gutenberg,and Ted Danson was just fine, and the story line was terrific. Here we see three "professional men" having to deal with the realities of life- a baby- and the predicaments they have to deal with are realistic and not patronizing at all. Then to discover that Danson is the real "Daddy" brings an even greater element to the film.

I believe that this had to be one of Selleck's best movies, and the ensemble cast is excellent. A fine family film, and to watch and listen to the trio sing "Goodnight Sweetheart" is worth the price of the movie.

A baby lover's must
In 1987,when Tom Selleck and Ted Danson were on annual hiatus from their respective television shows,Magnum P.I. and Cheers,they filmed with Steve Guttenberg,this lovely comedy about sudden,reluctant babysitting. Just the previous year,Guttenberg filmed "Police Academy 4:Citizens On Patrol",his last sequel. BAD BOY,performed by Gloria Estefan & the Miami Sound Machine,is played during the opening credits. The babysitting starts one Sunday morning when Peter Mitchell(Selleck) returns from a jog to his apartment and finds a baby in a bassinet on the floor near the door. He calls his roommate Michael Kellam(Guttenberg),so he could take a look at the beautiful baby girl. Near her is a note from her mother written to the baby's father Jack Holden(Danson). Jack lives with Peter and Michael. Peter goes to the supermarket in his workout apparel to buy some baby food and diapers since the trio had none of their own. So Michael entertains Mary,the baby. After Jack,who's an actor,returns home from Turkey after filming a TV movie,he is strangled by Peter and Michael,mistaking him for a burglar. They are pissed at him for putting them through hell with the baby. Peter tells Jack,"We(himself and Michael) put our lives on hold taking care of this kid and now it's your turn." In another scene where Peter and Michael are shooting pool,Jack is having difficulty changing Mary's diaper("How do you put on these goddamn things anyway?")."Figure it out for yourself,d---head!",Peter answers. Things get back to normal when Mary's mother Sylvia(Nancy Travis) shows up at the trio's apartment to reclaim Mary. Sylvia planned to catch a flight to London,taking Mary with her. That didn't happen,realizing Sylvia would have been sorry eventually. So she returns to the trio's apartment. The trio themselves return to the apartment after they rode a cab to the airport from where Sylvia and Mary were gonna take off. The trio thought Sylvia and Mary had. Sylvia,who's an actress,complains to the trio that her hectic work schedule makes her not care enough for Mary. Peter,who's an architect,told Sylvia that he'd build one or two rooms for Sylvia and Mary,inviting them to the household. Jack told Peter and Michael in an earlier scene that Jack and Sylvia met while acting in a play. In the last scene,Peter,Jack,Sylvia and Michael are all pushing Mary in her stroller,with a long handlebar,accomodating four pairs of hands! This movie was released November 25,1987 and became a #1 blockbuster and remained in many theatres for 4 or 5 months. The success of this film spawned a sequel 3 years later entitled "Three Men and a Little Lady". ... Read more

Reviews (12)

The Memphis Sheik.
Entertainment, much as beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. No doubt the steadfast loyalty of dedicated Elvis fans will find value in this movie. Casting Elvis Presley in a spoof of Rudolph Valentino movies was unfortunate. This could be the film that left Elvis crying in the chapel, and it leaves the viewer indescribably blue. Good sense notwithstanding the film was made. That's when your heartaches begin. One could give some credit for attempting a different approach from Elvis' usual "fun in the sun" formula film, but the end result lacks charm. Describing the plot is pointless. The music is the '60s pop fluff that Elvis and the songwriters phoned in. It adds to one's reflective midlife melancholy to remember that in 1965, while Elvis' formidable talent was squandered in cheesy movies, the Beatles were leading the charge of the British Invasion; storming the ramparts and taking no prisoners in the realm of rock music and innovative style. Elvis, you left us much too soon. You really deserved better, and so do we. Return to sender. ;-)

ENTERTAINING!
THANK YOU WARNER BROTHERS for useing the original MOVIE POSTERS for the covers of these wonderful DVDs! They look EXCELLENT! I wish the other companies that put ELVIS films out would have followed suit BUT instead they air brush a still from the film and think they can make a better cover than the EXPERIENCED MOVIE POSTER artists of the 1950's and 1960's. All you can ask from an ELVIS movie is that it is Entertaining and a GREAT Soundtrack...this film has both. HAREM HOLIDAY, the films' opening track, is a classic.

This "Harem" is not at all "Scarem"
I first saw this movie as a very young teenage male who idolized Elvis. It made a lasting impression on me. It was one of the first records (LP's-remember those?) that I purchased. Yes, the movie IS cheesey, and in acordance with most of the other reviewers on this site, was not worthy of Elvis's presence. However, I recently saw the movie again for the first time in years on one of my satellite channels, and I would suggest some alternate obsevations. 1.) The plot is structured to conform to the typical "travelog" Elvis movie, i.e. "Blue Hawaii", and allows for him to sing some songs, do karate moves, and romance women in an environment that actually seems less contrived than perhaps "G.I. Blues". 2.)Yes, the movie is silly, but I still think that the sountrack has some really beautiful melodies, which I still enjoy singing. 3.)I would assert that Elvis' on-screen redition of "So Close, Yet So Far" was one of the very few songs that he seemed to put his heart in for the camera in all of his movie "career". Try to watch at least that scene with an open heart. The song is pretty, passionate, and well done. 4.)Today, the scene with the slave girl in which Elvis sings "Hey Little Girl" would most certainly not past muster for being "politically correct"-in fact, it may not get past many censors. But sometimes we need to regard things in a perspective of more innocent times. Elvis was staged to do many scenes with children in his movies. 5.)I like this movie because I think it did not pretend to be anything other than insipid ententainment. And, I still think that much of the music is very pretty.

Even The King Can't Save This Mess
I am a huge fan of Elvis's music and movies. Own them all on vhs and the DVD's as they've come out. That being said, Harum Scarum is THE WORST piece of trash ever captured on film. It's nearly criminal to watch one of the greatest talents in the history of mankind sleep walk through this pile of rubbish. The Presley estate should do Elvis and the rest of us a favor. Buy the master and burn it in a bonfire celebration at Graceland! (...)

The Most Entertaining Mess...a Real Howler
Words fail to describe how awful this film is...and yet, I have not enjoyed watching a movie this much in a long, long time. It is screamingly funny, albeit in mostly unintentional ways. The dialog is somewhere south of stupid; the sets look as fake and cheap as the backyard of "The Brady Bunch"; the costumes seem to be from someone's attic; and the music is vapid and cheesier than a vat of Velveeta. There is one very creepy sequence where Elvis' character encourages an overly precocious young girl to dance "seductively" for him, and of course, racist stereotyping abounds throughout. Elvis gamely tries to make his character credible, but at times, I think he deserves an Oscar simply for not rolling his eyes. By all means, see this movie with someone you love, and be prepared to hoot like a tree full of owls. This one makes CLAMBAKE look like CITIZEN KANE. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Lightly enjoyable but a disappointment in the context of author Leslie Charteris's popular character, the Saint--who has been played by several actors, most notably George Sanders--this 1997 film is more in keeping with the requirements of high-octane contemporary action than it is the requirements of a particular legacy. Val Kilmer plays Simon Templar, the mercenary spy, who is hired to steal a fusion formula but falls in love with the scientist (Elisabeth Shue) who cooked it up. Kilmer's portrayal bears little resemblance to Charteris's rakish hero, and the film itself becomes increasingly improbable and ponderous the longer it goes on. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (86)

'You can't come to Russia and not play Russian roulette'.
If you are like me then you can't resist a good spy film; especially if my saint, Val Kilmer, appears in it! The film doesn't really follow the storyline of the books or the series, with Roger Moore. If you are nostalgic about the series then this probably isn't the best film for you. The film itself is a blend of action, romance and comedy at times. The stars of the film; Val Kilmer (Heat) and Elizabeth Shue (Hollow Man), have a genuinely believable romance that leaves any Val Kilmer fan wishing that they were Elizabeth! As for the Russians in the film; they add a refreshing edge which reminds us of how corrupt the World can be. The film follows the life of a thief who's only aim is to make $50 million, any way he can, and he uses the names of Catholic Saints to hide his trail. Meanwhile in a small corner of the World, Dr. Emma Russel has just discovered a scientific Phenomenon. The Russians want her discovery and they are willing to pay whatever and kill whoever it takes to get hold of it. The Saint then gets caught up in a web of Russian Maffia, intigue and love. When you have seen the film as many times as I have you learn to love each Saint for all their different qualities!

Abstract and grim, but that's what makes it good
My mother was uncertain about me buying this video at first, but when I insisted on getting it after reading the reviews here I was satisfied that my money had been well spent. The Saint is unlike any movie I've ever seen before. Like in my title: yes, it is abstract and dim, the dialogue gets a little backward and hard to understand, and Simon Templar seems to have very few motives that made him an international spy. His disguises give the movie it's comedy, of which there is not much because the lovely Elisabeth Shue is the co-star which of course catches your eye. The romance is rather weird but charming, and some things in the movie seem to happen for no reason at all. But it's still good spy action as Simon and Emma, Shue's character who has created the formula for cold fusion, are pursued around Russia by a politically powerful and corrupt group of authorities whom Simon tried to trick. Their adventures there, in Russia- which the movie displays as cold, crowded, and rather malevolent- are definitely worth your time. Val Kilmer is quite handsome and suave as the Saint, and although he's not english, this unique film will serve you well.

you wont need the patience of a saint...this is GREAT
I have no complaints at all about this version of The Saint.
I grew up listening to The Saint on radio and reading about him. This film version doesn't do the character any harm. It tells the tale of his early days. On second thought I do have ONE complaint...where's the sequel?

clever modern prequel
The folks who made this flick deserve credit. They cleverly decided to create a modern prequel to the classic character of The Saint. They didn't just ditch the character and steal the name. This isn't I SPY folks. This film IS The Saint. The modern prequel approach let them introduce a whole new audience to The Saint, but it also gave established Saint fans (like me) a rare glimpse at a part of Simon's life that I'd been wondering about for years: just how he got to be The Saint.
This is a great film!

A MIXED BAG IN THE SCRIPT DEPARTMENT BUT STYLISH POPCORN FUN
Short story: Val Kimler makes this absolutely worth it.

Long story: Yes, it may be a weak throwback to the notorious Saint comics and all that. So what. The movie is modern, stylish and always keeps you on the edge with its elaborate pseudo-politics, intriguing ideas and rehashed romantic mishmash.

Whenever it starts to drag Kilmer turns up in a new disguise and that alone carries the film through to its next thrill. Not to mention that the chemistry between Shue and Kilmer is hot enough to sizzle a steak.

Add to that mix a high-octane Prodigy-induced sountrack and you've got a fun flick with an exciting roulette of action and suspense.

Highly recommended rental. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Over 10 years after first turning down the role, Bela Lugosi donned the neck bolts and platform boots to play Frankenstein's monster for the first and only time in Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman. Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney Jr., reprising his most famous role), killed at the end of The Wolf Man, is inexplicably alive and searching for the brilliant Dr. Frankenstein but instead finds the Monster, frozen in ice beneath the castle, and an ambitious scientist (Patric Knowles) who revives the creature and promises to cure Larry. Lugosi is lurching and clumsy as the Monster, while Chaney is appropriately tortured as Larry but stiff and snarly as the Wolf Man, more man than wolf. Last-minute cuts by the studio renders much of the film incomprehensible: the monster was left blind and vocal at the end of Ghost of Frankenstein, but all references to either were deleted (which partly accounts for Lugosi's performance) and he's now sighted but mute. Roy William Neill, a talented B-movie director best known for his Sherlock Holmes films with Basil Rathbone, can't do much with the perfunctory script, but he does deliver a highly entertaining conclusion: the Wolf Man battles the Monster while a spectacular disaster (accomplished with obvious but charming models) wipes the castle off the face of the earth... at least until House of Frankenstein the next year. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (26)

Good, atmospheric Universal Horror Thriller!
Clever sequel to THE WOLF MAN and THE GHOST OF FRANKENSTEIN has Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney, Jr.) revived from the dead and still in his doomed werewolf state seeking the aid of Gypsy Woman Maleva (again Maria Ouspenskaya) for a possible cure for his lycanthropy. Adjourning to Visaria to seek Dr. Frankenstein, they find only angry villagers and no Dr. F. Talbot later discovers the monster (played by now Bela Lugosi who turned down the role 12 years earlier) from the frozen ice caves and sort of befriends the monster, the two seek refuge as English Doctor Patric Knowles tracks Talbot down to help cure him once and for all, but with the lynching mob wanting to destroy the Monster not far behind. That is the plot, but it is not until the end that we are treated to the much awaited "Monster Brawl" as Frankenstein's Monster and the Wolfman battle inside the ruined laboratory. A worthy addition to the FRANKENSTEIN and now also WOLFMAN sequels, excellent cast, but due largely to Lugosi's stiff portrayal of the Monster - remember the Monster is supposed still possessed of Ygor's brain, therefore it probably made some sense to cast Lugosi as the Monster. The result was unfortunately a disaster for both Lugosi and Universal. Lugosi in Frankenstein Monster make-up with his eyes closed, arms out-stretched, and hissing and snarling portrayal is simply far overblown. Which is really too bad, because the film is very effective otherwise, but basically an unimaginative rehash of the earlier films, and definitively sunk by Lugosi's performance.

The Wolfman Returns and Finds Dracula Dressed as the Monster
Good Grade B spook spectacular that combines two classic horror characters of Universal Studio. A resurrected Wolfman, Larry Talbot (Lon Chaney, Jr.), seeks release from his cursed life. Maleva, the old gypsy woman, suggests he consult the infamous Dr. Frankenstein. In Vasaria, Talbot discovers the Frankenstein monster within the ruins of the defunct mad-doctor's gloomy castle. The complicated plot involves Frankenstein's human granddaughter (Ilona Massey), a psychiatrist named Dr. Mannering (Patrick Knowles), and the usual irate villagers. Mannering evolves into a low-key version of the mad-doctor. After poring over Frankenstein's records describing "the secrets of life and death," Mannering decides to drain the energy forces from both Talbot and the monster. The two title characters find themselves strapped to tables in the laboratory on a night of metamorphosis and terror. Dr. Mannering has the urge to crank the monster up to its full strength before undoing Frankenstein's creation. When the full moon shines in the lab window, all hell breaks loose in explosive fashion as the super-charged monster and the Wolfman tear into each other.

Although Bela Lugosi had previously declined the role, he plays Frankenstein's monster. By this stage of his career, Lugosi suffered from advancing age and other physical ailments that no doubt contributed to his uninspired performance. The monster is relegated to a secondary role, and spends his time hanging around the ruins. Instead of terrorizing the countryside, he watches Talbot pace and fume. The movie works better as a "Wolfman" story. The opening segment of the two grave robbers that desecrate the Talbot crypt is one of the scariest scenes in all of Universal's horror flicks. Chaney's "man-into-werewolf" transformation is the stuff of troubled dreams, enhanced by Jack Pierce's classic makeup. After the action shifts to Vasaria, a young woman is brutally murdered, and the bewildered villagers question what animal kills that savagely? On cue, something howls in distance. Classic horror fans will recognize Dwight Frye as one of the respectable villagers. This is an inside joke because the character actor previously appeared as the hunchbacked dwarf in the original "Frankenstein," and played an insane procurer of "fresh" dead bodies in "Bride of Frankenstein." Maria Ouspenskaya returns as the enigmatic Maleva. Her mysterious presence effectively connects with Talbot's lost soul.

This movie is an entertaining, albeit second-string, classic horror flick. Encourage the kids to set aside the playstation for 74 minutes and enjoy the thrills and chills. ;-)

wish they make more movies like this
i t hink the classic universal frankenstein has been played 4 times by different actor's....karloff...is a classic, but i like
glen strange from abbot and costello better.
this movie good for a saturday afternoon..!

Before Freddy battled Jason, Frankenstein meet the Wolf Man!
Before I watched this movie, I didn't think Lugosi could pull it off as Frankenstein. How wrong I was! The legendary actor who was famous for playing Dracula in Universal's classic 1931 film, did a great job as the monster in this film. Although Son of Frankenstein (1939) was a big let down after Frankenstein (1931) and The Bride of Frankenstein (1935), this film returns a little pride in the Frankenstein monster. Even though the title is Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man, don't let it fool you. This film is more of a sequal to The Wolf Man featuring Frankenstein, but that doesn't really matter, because the story is very good.

Lon Chaney Jr. plays Larry Talbot (the wolf man) and he wants to rid himself of the werewolf curse. He seeks the gypsy woman from The Wolf Man (1941), who tells him there is nothing she can do to cure him. Talbot figures the only cure he can hope for is Dr. Frankenstein, who knew the secrect of life and death. As a result of Henry and Wolf Frankenstein now being dead, Talbot seeks the diary of Henry to figure out a way to kill himself and give his soul eternal piece. He runs into Frankenstein's monster (Lugosi) and Elsa Frankenstein. He turns into the werewolf and has a pretty good battle with Frankenstein.

This movie was scary at times. You can really feel sorry for Larry in this film. The performences by Lugosi, Chaney Jr., and the rest of the cast were great. The music was great too. The story was interesting and kept you guessing as to what will wind up happening to Larry. All in all, this is a fun monster movie. If you are a fan of Universal monster movies, this is a good monster mash for you.

Both were fabulous!!
This is a sequel to two films. The prequels are: Ghost of Frankenstein and the Wolf Man. Fabulous horror from beginning to end. Later in the film, the resurrected wolfman digs out Frankenstein's superhuman monster, who still stands tall and strong after being burnt and blown up so many times. Coolest!! I have no favorites out of the dozens of great horror classics made way back, and this a wonderful clash. I won't ruin anything else for you, so enjoy.... ... Read more

Reviews (22)

subspecies . . . THE NIGHT HAS FANGS.
Deep within the heart of Transylvania, a dark power from the past has resurfaced, and three beautiful young research students are caught in the midst of a supernatural battle for control of the vampire kingdom. Blood is the tie that binds the good Stefan (MICHAEL WATSON) and the evil Radu (ANDERS HOVE), vampire brothers reunited by the death of their father, King Vlad (ANGUS SCRIMM). Radu creates an army of hellish creatures of the night--subspecies--to help him in his wicked quest. Stefan has love on his side as Michelle (LAURA TATE), one of the students, joins him in the desperate fight to save the kingdom from the terrifying rule of Radu.

SUBSPECIES IS BETTER THAN DRACULA!
I loved this movie from Full Moon Pictures.It's about a vampire coming back to his hometown.Radu manages to kill his father,the king and pocess the Bloodstone,and acient relic said to drip blood of the saints,a vampire who has the stone can live without killing,and gain power.Radu's brother Stefan and friend Karl find out that evil has returned.Meanwhile three beautiful young research students Michelle,Mara,and Lillian get caught up in the wave of vampires.Radu creates an army of -subspecies- to help him in his evil quest.Stefan has love at his side as Michelle helps him kill Radu.Who will gain power of the Bloodstone?Find out.A must see for all vampire and horror lovers.Graet music and cast. Stefan-Michael Watson Michelle-Laura Tate Radu-Anders Hove Lillian-Michelle McBride Mara-Irina Movila Ivan j.Rado-Karl Angus Scrimm-the king THE NIGHT HAS FANGS!

I like my vampires cold, dead, ugly, and hungry...Radu style
Subspecies is the first in a four part movie series involving Radu, the baddest vampire in town. True, this is a Full Moon production, which equals cheesy horror, but it is definately cheesy horror in its very best form.

Radu is a vampire of the old school, he doesn't want to fit in with the living or find true love or apologize for what he is; he is a vampire and seems to be pretty taken with himself on that level. Our first introduction to Radu is when he kills his father in order to take possession of the Bloodstone, a vampire family heirloom that allows them to survive a long time without a fresh "meal", and gives them power by drinking from it.

Here also we meet the "subspecies", little creatures (make from claymation, not FX) that Radu creates by breaking off his own fingers. They become his tiny minions and assist him in taking the Bloodstone.

Meanwhile, three college girls arrive in Transylvania, and stay together at an old monastery nearby the broken remains of Radu's castle home. Also staying at the monastery is Radu's long estranged brother, Stefan. Radu and Stefan have no love for each other, though both seem to be attracted to the lovely Michele.

Girls get bit and girls scream, and there is a silly "Festival of the Dead" where everybody puts on paper-mache masks, a little bit of nudity, and in the end it all boils down to human vs vampire as do all good vampire flicks.

What makes Subspecies special is Radu himself. He is pasty white, has great fangs, long clawed hands, sleeps in a coffin, and drools...a LOT. He's also a very messy eater, and moves through the film with that bloody, slimy grin we have all grown to love.

In the end, Michele is the only one of the three girls left, and after Radu mixed his blood with hers, his brother Stefan "saves" her by biting her and turning her into a vampire also.

Lovely ending...but remember that there are three more movies...

So far, the first three Subspecies movies are only available as used VHS tapes, often costing a great deal of money. The fourth movie is already out on DVD, so hopefully the rest will be soon. Even on VHS, there is a nice "behind the scenes" feature at the end of the tape, along with previews of other Full Moon productions.

If you are a vampire purist, you should love this film. Enjoy!

One of the best!
A classic vampire movie that has been underrated by many. A movie about two brothers who fight over the bloodstone that would give the owner the ability to not have to kill to stay alive. As the conflict between brothers gains momentum the budding of a love story between one of the brother's and a mortal woman named Michelle begins to blossom she is turned into a vampire by the end of the movie and goes into the end of the 1st part of a 4 movie story as his lover.

Subspecies - Great Series!
I loved this movie the minute I saw it. The location sites and atmosphere are great. The music sets the mood. I felt like I was actually there in Romania. The acting, well ok, not the greatest, and Radu's fingers could have been better. I would recommend this video to all Vampire movie lovers. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Dosent even deserve 1 star
Without a doubt one of the most pathetic films ever made. Extreamly bad acting, Stupid camera angles, Most of the time you cant tell what is happening. The transforming from animals to humans vice vera is the worst effect ever, Basicly you see a bird flying and in the next shot (About a second after) the hairy chuck norris is standing there. Punches look so fake its amazing, Incredibly bad directing makes it look like a 9 year old could of done better if he went into the woods with a cam-corder and some pals. The budget is obvisly tighter than an italien waiters trousers and the only reason chuck norris is in the movie is beocouse the film was made by his brother aron nossis! I really really, really really recomend not buying this film.

Fantastic
This is one of Chuck's best movies. I have seen it on television several times and enjoyed each and every time I just saw it again today and hoped I could find it to buy.

Chuck Norris-Taking charge as protector of the forest
The "Walker, Texas Ranger" star turns in another spectacular performance. How he continues to be passed up for major awards is a mystery to me, especially after this complex role. In this he plays a mytical warrior who can assume the shapes of many animals. He battles evil loggers with his incredibly slow martial arts moves. It appears that as Norris nears his 78th birthday he may have lost a step or two. Aiding Norris in his quest to battle the loggers were a group of kids known as "the green weenies" by the evil loggers. The rebel tactics they employed were remarkably similar to the Wolverines in "Red Dawn" (read my review for that incredible film). In one incredible scene, one of the younger members flooded the walkie talkies of the evil loggers with an 80's rock tune. This caused the loggers to become distracted from their duty as they begin using their deadly chainsaws as guitars. In my opinion this was a briiliant strategy on the part of the greenie weenies. Back to Norris and his convincing role. He plays the role of a convincing leader when he orders a girl to "sleep." Alas, i was not able to finish the movie because one of the people i was watching the movie with had terrible hygiene and i could not stand the stench. I was disheartened by this fact but even not seeing the no doubt orgasmic ending cannot dissuade me from proclaiming that this is the best movie ever...well besides Dracula 2000 (read my friend Quito's review).

Great For Families
I learned about Chuck Norris from my 7-year old grandson back in August 98. Mr. Norris's betrayal of the "Spirit of The Mountain" is in keeping with his own Native American heritage. The violence is low-key compared to many of his other movies. It has raised an awareness in my grandchildren of environmental control, protection of wild animals, and a very keen interest in learning more of their own Native American background. I would definitely recommend it to any family. My 4-year old granddaughter also gets the story and idea behind the movie.

Excellent, suspenceful, a most memorable film.
After seing this movie once, I had to watch it again, and again. I love it, and it is now one of my favriot movies. It demonstrates true friendship, and shows grate sceneary views of the forrest. The child actors were very good, and real beleivable. I will never forget this movie. It's great for familys. Chuck Norris was really good, and that's the first movie i've seen him in, even though I heard about him. I definately recomend this movie. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Get shot in the head and become a better person. This 1991 Mike Nichols(Wolf) film stars Harrison Ford as a big-shot cold-hearted lawyer who gets a bullet in his brain during a holdup. The film de-emphasizes the traumas of recovery to focus on the title character's personality change after the fact. The canny Ford gets to work from his full, familiar palette of arrogance to boyishness, and even builds Henry from top to bottom after the wounded fellow awakens with no memory. But this is a slow and unremarkable film from Nichols, its sentimentality eclipsing all else, most of all profound insight.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (39)

In case you missed this movie...
This isn't one of Harrison Ford's bigger hits, but it should be, at least within the dramatic genre. Sure, he's Indiana Jones, and he's Han Solo, but outside of those series, Ford's movie choices have occasionally left this fan, at least, scratching her head (Sabrina? What were you thinking!?).

"Regarding Henry" is a rare little gem of a story, a simple film about a man whose life changes, believe it or not, for the better when he's shot and nearly killed by dint of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Ford's Henry Turner takes us through a life he doesn't remember, including a daughter and a wife played by an impossibly young and fresh-faced Annette Bening.

Sure, it's a little sentimental. But it's a pretty simple story with a positive feel. Filmed on location in New York City, the Manhattan scenery is rather delightful as well.

It's not film noir, it's not a tour de force of characterization, and no, it's not Academy Award winning screenwriting. But it is a thoroughly enjoyable movie, one Ford doesn't have any reason to be ashamed of.

Sometimes the worst curse is your truest blessing
Despite being less well known, "Regarding Henry" is one of Harrison Ford's best works. The film demands a wide spectrum from this great actor and he delivers convincingly. For the most part, the other performers take their cue from Ford's "Henry" and render a near perfect glimpse of a life that could have been.

The tile character, Henry Turner, is introduced to us as a top-flight litigator for a large New York legal firm. He is well groomed, dressed in a designer suit and he is seen speaking sincerely to a jury about human desires and justice. Our opinion of him changes as soon as Henry leaves the court. He quickly makes a call to his interior designer to berate her for having the wrong table delivered to his palatial home. He is just another lawyer, after all.

It is hard to watch this movie at the start. Henry is one of those men we all love to hate. He is selfish, self centered, successful and confident. His daughter is frightened of him and his wife is a pale reflection of him. Luckily we are not forced to watch this Henry for very long. He makes the classic movie exit and "goes out for some cigarettes."

What follows is a scene that is perfectly directed. Henry walks into a corner store demanding his brand of cigarettes, unaware that the other patron is robbing the owner. Henry does not become scared but before he can even attempt to control the situation, he is lying on the sidewalk with two bullets inside his body and the wail of approaching sirens in the background. This event is the cusp of Henry's life.

Annette Bening plays Henry's Wife, Sarah. She may not be in love with her husband anymore but she needs him. As her financial position becomes clear, she realizes she needs him very much. But she is not unaffected by it all. This is the man in her life, the father of her child, a good provider and protector. Seeing him lying motionless in a hospital bed, drooling and staring vacantly, is probably the most painful thing she has ever experienced. But there is some hope of recovery.

Henry's long rejuvenation at a specialty medical center is like a rebirth. He remembers nothing, coming into his new world without the power of speech or the ability to walk. His midwife/physiotherapist, Bradley, is wonderful. He is full of life, energy and enthusiasm. As Henry is taught to walk and speak and function, Bradely becomes the mainstay of his life. Sarah keeps her distance and Henry doesn't get to see his daughter, (Rachel), at all until the day he is deemed fit to go home, a scary separation from the only people he trusts.

But the Henry that returns to a home he barely remembers, is not the same man that left for cigarettes. He is a little shy, very calm, forgiving, gentle and above all, nice. His transformation is interpreted in different ways by different groups. The movie serves as an interesting depiction of how society views disabilities. His boss is patronizing, his daughter delighted, his mistress is distraught and for the longest time, Sarah doesn't know what to feel.

The ending may be predictable but in this case, it is the journey that we love. Most of us feel we have lost our innocence and that our honor has been a little tarnished by life's decisions. Henry takes us on a trip to see what might happen if we surrendered all the hard won prizes in our life and instead, chose to embrace life itself. This is a film that will make you feel. Some days, that's just what we need.

RITZ!
a great movie. even if you dont like drama i think you will like this one. its about harrison ford gets shot in the head and has to go to rehad to learn how to speak and work again so he can go home to his wife and kid. its not is most knowen movie but still a great one

Worth Seeing
I know this movie was not a big hit when it came out but it is really a good film. Harrison Ford is great as one of his most likeable characters that I have seen him portray. Henry, a corrupt lawyer who withholds evidence when his client is obviously guilty and a womanizer is seriously injured in a robbery. When he comes to, he has lost his memory and has to be re-taught just about everything. His teacher is a very virtuous man, who teaches Henry to enjoy the good things in life (Henry loves most of all Ritz crackers). Thus the mean, cheating Henry who forced his daughter to remain at a boarding school that she hates, is suddenly transformed into a kind man who cares about everybody's feelings.

Eventually, he figures out that the Henry he once was was a horrible person and he hopes never to go back to that life.

Annette Benning is great and beautiful as the wife that had an uncaring husband who all of a sudden loves her more than anything. She has to decide if she is ready to leave the life they led with other uncaring and obnoxious friends.

Priceless scenes, especially those involving Henry and his secretary!

AT LEAST THE FILM'S HEART IS IN THE RIGHT PLACE..
A hotshot, hyper-workaholic lawyer finds himself in the middle of an accidental shootout, loses his memory, and lo and behold, his world goes topsy turvy. Quite predictably, as is the case with pretty much every scene in this feel-good Oscar bait, the man turns over a new leaf, becomes a good father, a conscientious husband and a decent human being. Yawn.

The movie's slowly unfurling narrative and its high predictability levels could have made it a skippable fare, but Ford's rendition of amnesia is moving, and Annette Bening's performance is very impressive. An occasional saving grace is also the music, if you have an ear for that kind of stuff.

Recommended rental. ... Read more

Amazon.com

You didn't think Mr. Spock was really dead, did you? When Spock's casket landed on the surface of the Genesis planet at the end of Star Trek II, we had already been told that Genesis had the power to bring "life from lifelessness." So it's no surprise that this energetic but somewhat hokey sequel gives Spock a new lease on life, beginning with his rebirth and rapid growth as the Genesis planet literally shakes itself apart in a series of tumultuous geological spasms. As Kirk is getting to know his estranged son (Merritt Butrick), he must also do battle with the fiendish Klingon Kruge (Christopher Lloyd), who is determined to seize the power of Genesis from the Federation. Meanwhile, the regenerated Spock returns to his home planet, and Star Trek III gains considerable interest by exploring the ceremonial (and, of course, highly logical) traditions of Vulcan society. The movie's a minor disappointment compared to Star Trek II, but it's a--well, logical--sequel that successfully restores Spock (and first-time film director Leonard Nimoy) to the phenomenal Trek franchise...as if he were ever really gone. With Kirk's willful destruction of the U.S.S. Enterprise and Robin Curtis replacing the departing Kirstie Alley as Vulcan Lt. Saavik, this was clearly a transitional film in the series, clearing the way for the highly popular Star Trek IV. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (141)

Another fine "Special Edition"
Once again, a fine special edition has been released for these venerable Star Trek movies. In this film, the crew heads off to the newly-formed Genesis planet in the stolen Enterprise. They meet up with Klingons newly arrived to try and steal the secret of the Genesis Device, which they call the "Greatest weapon ever invented." This film is clearly more light-hearted than TMP or TWOK, the previous two films in the franchise, and introduced the plot device of sending each crewmember off on their own mission before pulling them back together. As such, we see more of Sulu, Uhura, and Scotty than we are used to, which adds rather than detracts from the story. Another highlight is the scene-chewing performance of Christopher Lloyd as the Klingon commander, in perfect opposition to William Shatner.

Unfortunately, the film tends to be repetative. It starts off with a flashback to Wrath of Khan to bring the audience up-to-date. That's fine, but these moments are relived again when Sarek visits Kirk 20 minutes in, and YET AGAIN at the end of the film. Thus, this 100-minute movie only contains 80 minutes of new material, and repeated watchings tend to leave you fidgiting. In addition, the sound-stage sets of the Genesis Planet (and Vulcan) are impressive, but not the same as actual location footage. However, it's a worthy addition to the Star Trek family, it simply suffers in comparison to the two movies on either side of it.

Likewise, this special edition is good, but not as good as those for TMP and TWOK. The highlights are the text commentary by the Okudas, a featurette (25 minutes) on the development of the Klingon language, and the ILM featurette on the effects. The general making-of feature is interesting (Shatner is amusing in a faux-pompous way), but is mostly a repitition of the audio commentary. The print is curiously grainy, in contrast to the obviously cleaned-up DVD versions of the previous 2 films.

What Odd Numbered Curse?
Despite the holes in the plot and the need to willingly suspend disbelief at times, Star Trek III is among my favorite of the original cast films. I even like it better than Star Trek IV.

The special effects in this film are really good and I love James Horner's score enough to have bought it on cassette. There are many dramatic visual moments, including when the Enterprise approaches the giant space station orbiting Earth and the destruction of the Genesis planet, and of course, the destruction of the Enterprise.

The cast is in their usual fine form. Uhurua gets a smaller role in this movie because she stays behind, but she does get one really good scene giving a young Starfleet cadet his comeuppance. Scottie gets to shine as temporary engineering officer and vandalizer of the new starship Excelsior. McCoy is funny, occasionally slipping into his Spock mode. One of his best lines, upon hearing that he is carrying Spock's "katra" inside him is "It's [Spock's] revenge for losing all of those arguments!" William Shatner has a really good dramatic scene when Kirk learns that his son has been killed by the Klingons. Christopher Lloyd is good as the Klingon commander Kruge. Unrecognizable as one of his subordinates, Maltz, is the guy who played Dan Fielding in the Nightcourt sitcom on NBC.

Merrit Butrick and Robin Curtis are not particularly memorable as David and Saavik, but accomplish what is expected of them. Another reviewer observed that the film barely hints that Saavik sleeps with the young Spock as he experiences Pon Faar. I read the novelization of Star Trek III, and not only does it make it clear that she is "intimate" with him, if indeed Vulcans can be intimate, but that she also sleeps with Kirk's son David as well before they go to the Genesis planet. Had it been included in the film, it really would have added another element to it, though in the end it might have been distracting too.

It is a bit of a coincidence that Kirk gets Spock off the Genesis planet at just the right age, and the way in which Spock is brought back is a bit hard to swallow, after all, even the Vulcan high priestess declared that the process had not been done in ages, and then only in myth. Why would Spock then be confident that it would work? Then again, since all of us Trekkies wanted Spock back, we won't quibble. Star Trek III is a good combination of action, humor and drama. If there is an off numbered curse in the Star Trek movies, it clearly does not apply to this one.

Kirk and Co. have the balls that no one else in ST ever had
Another classic trek movie, this one taking place directly after the famous Spock death scene in Wrath of Khan. But Spock was just so hip and cool in his stiff, emotionless, Spock-ish(??) way that they had to bring him back. And Kirk and the boys do it in style.

The story is basically this: Ambassador Sarek (Spock's father) comes up to Kirk and makes it known to him that his essence may be living within a crew member of the Enterprise. They discover it is McCoy (which is hilarious, considering Spock and McCoy's quirky friendship), which explains why many in StarFleet thought he had been driven insane, and locked him up for it. Kirk and the boys spring McCoy out of the cell, steal the Enterprise, and head into space on "personal matters."

Even if this movie lacked in action, which is does not at all, it would have plenty in hilarious dialogue. There are many examples, such as when McCoy tries to hire a mercenary at a bar (very reminiscent of the Star Wars cantina, clientele et al). McCoy tells him, "Place I name, money I go." And the perterbed alien (eerily reminiscent of George C. Scott and Dr. Evil) fires back, "Place you name, money I name or else bargainnnnnnno." It hilarious the way he says it. Another funny part comes when Sulu jokingly prods a bored Federation security guard, "Keeping you busy?", the guard slowly, menacingly stands up from his chair, towering over the short Sulu and says, "Don't get smart, tiny." It isn't so much what they say that's funny, it's the body language and the intonations, brought out in full by first-rate directing by Leonard Nimoy.

There are tons of great action scenes, and even a stabbing death which is implied, but not shown, making it action-packed but still accessible for the whole family. A memorable performance by Christopher LLloyd as a Klingon renegade is also within this fine film. It's not as good as The Undiscovered Country, but it stands firm not only as a great Trek movie, but just as a great movie overall.

one for all, and all for one
Leonard Nimoy spent most of his time behind the camera directing this film, and though I miss his presence as Spock, it's one of my favorite of the Star Trek series; it's more subdued and introspective than the others, and the overall theme is friendship, and risking one's life for a friend.
The year is 8210, and the plot centers around "The Genesis Effect", an experimental device that can be placed on a "lifeless space body", like a dead moon, and make it flourish with life, but because one of the scientists used risky methods, "life" is happening at a fast clip.
The evil Klingons of course, in their constant lust for power, want the "Genesis" secret, and Admiral Kirk must stop them.

William Shatner is fabulous as Kirk; I've always found him to be a unique, immensely watchable actor, and all the original ensemble cast is wonderful: DeForest Kelley ~ McCoy, James Doohan ~ Scotty, George Takei ~ Sulu, Walter Koenig ~ Chekov, Nichele Nichols ~ Uhura. Added are Mark Lenard as Spock's father Sarek, Robin Curtis as Lt. Saavik, Merritt Butnick as Kirk's son David, and Christopher Lloyd as the Klingon Kruge. Dame Judith Anderson plays the Vulcan priestess TLar, in a scene that is high camp, and quite marvelous.
There are some nifty special effects on the Planet Genesis, and some nice cinematography by Charles Correll, as well as an exceptionally lovely score by James Horner. Leonard Nimoy gave this film a moody, thoughtful atmosphere, and it works for me, and I find the ending quite touching, no matter how many times I see it.
Total running time is 105 minutes.

20 Years of "The Search For Spock"
"How many fingers am I holding up?"
"Thats not very damn funny."
- Kirk gives the Vulcan Salute to Dr. McCoy as they both escape a trip from The Federation Funny Farm, and look for a lost pointed ear friend in "Star Trek III: The Search For Spock"

Its been 20 years to the day since the search began in this third and underated entry in the "Star Trek" saga. "The Search For Spock" is an adventurous (if corny) film that teaches a lesson in the loyalties, & importance of friendship, no matter the consequence.

Picking up where "Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan" left off, with the death & funeral of Captain Spock & the birth of the Genesis Planet, "The Search For Spock" begins with the crew of The Enterprise limping home after the battle wrath with Khan, only to find out that the Federation has decided to decommission the legendary starship & reassign most of its crew. Whats worse is the fact that Dr. "Bones" McCoy is having a sort of nervous breakdown, breaking in to Captain Spock's sealed quarters and giving Admiral Kirk an errie message from the grave.
When Spock's father, Ambassador Saarik, arrives informing Kirk that Spock isn't dead, but, is in a state where mind & body are in seperate forms, its up to both, Kirk & Saarik to find who has Spock's marbles (McCoy has them) & where Spock's body rests (on The Genisis Planet). Once both are retrieved, and thru an ancient Vulcan ritual, only then can Spock become his old self again. With the arrival of the Kilngons, looking for the secret to Genesis, its a race against time as the planet becomes unstable and starts to deteriate at an alarmingly fast rate. The search isn't without sacrfice & Kirk loses the two things he holds dearest to him in order get his friend back.

"Star Trek III" is one of those films thats pretty much written for fans of the series (if this film was your introduction to "Star Trek", I'm pretty positive your reaction was more of a "Huh!?" with a shrug of the shoulders). I hold this as the fifth best in the series tieing it with "Star Trek: Generations" ("II" & "First Contact" are the two best in the series).

The Klingons finally get some much needed screen time in this film. Since they were the main nemesis in the television series, it was only a matter of time before they would show up (the Klingons make a cameo in "Star Trek: The Motion Picture"). A year before he went "Back To The Future", Christopher Lloyd gives a great performance as Commander Kruge, the greedy, power hungry Klingon commander. Kruge is much better than the two Klingons in "Star Trek V". Those two reminded me of the Wonder Twins from the "Super Friends", for some reason. The Klingons in "Star Trek VI" came across as more regal and honorable than threatening and coldblooded, like Kruge is. As for Shatner and the rest of the cast, all are also great & age gracefully in their respective roles.
James Horner's score to "III", like "II", is one of the better scores in the series (acutally, I think, its a lot of reused score material from the previous film, but, I just get so tired of hearing Jerry Goldsmith's opening theme from "The Motion Picture". Its been used in at least half of the the ten films, as well, as the opening theme to "The Next Generation" series). Leonard Nimoy directs his first of two "Trek" films ("III" is his directorial debut) and gets a lot out of his actors and does a good job overall.

The 2 disc DVD edition to "Star Trek III: The Search For Spock" is worth owning and is better than "Star Trek V" on any given Sunday. Join the Search. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Joseph Heller's novel was one of the seminal literary events of the 1960s, but Mike Nichols's film ultimately proved too literal in its attempt to bring Heller's fragmented fiction to the screen. Still, Nichols, who made this on the heels of The Graduate, seemed the ideal candidate to tackle this Buck Henry adaptation. The story deals with bomber pilot Yossarian (Alan Arkin), who has flown enough missions to get out of World War II but can't because the number of missions needed for discharge keeps getting raised. The satire and absurdity of Heller's book get lost in Nichols's effort to give screen time to the members of his all-star cast, which includes Orson Welles, Jon Voight, Bob Newhart, Anthony Perkins, Richard Benjamin, and Martin Sheen, among others. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (35)

For a movie: BEST MOVIE Compared to book: NO CONTEST
I read 'Catch-22' first, and it instantly became my favorite book (as soon as I finally got through it). When I heard of the movied version, I was estatic, but in wonderment. How can such a complex book with no linear structure ever be adapted to movie form? My expectations were high, but weary...

First of all, casting was excellent. Alan Arkin played a perfect Yossarian, as well as Jon Voigt as Milo, and so on. The settings were great, really convincing from what I read from the book.

As far as the comparison to the book. If it stands true for one instance, the book is worlds better than the movie. As a reader, you get so much more out of Joe Heller's sardonic universe. The complex plot, the meticulous descriptions (in which he used words I never knew existed...either have a dictionary with you when you read 'Catch-22', or have a vast vocabulary!), and all the rest...

The movie does attempt to follow Heller's complex plot structure, hopping back and forth to unravel plot points with each pass. The movie does this well with Yossarian's epidemic with Snowden. Most of the ingeniously clever dialogue is brought to the screen, but that's what makes the book/movie so great.

At any rate, I highly recommend this movie, as well as anything from Joe Heller...the best writer of the 20th century.

an excellent dvd
"Catch-22" is a beautifully designed, shot and executed movie that, in the end, doesn't really work. However, it's too elaborately staged and too ambitious to be considered a "bad" movie. And the extra features that accompany the DVD help the film transcend a "thumbs up/thumbs down" rating.

First and foremost, it looks amazing. I loved this film when I initially saw it on tape in 1990, but it was only recently that I was able to see it in a widescreen format -- letterboxing reveals what a brutal disservice pan-and-scan does to the compositions of "Catch's" 2.35:1 aspect ratio. If you've only seen this movie in fullscreen, you haven't really seen this movie.

The transfer is also incredible. I'm so used to seeing the grainy print of my VHS copy that I hadn't realized how great a lot of the cinematography is. The use of front-projection during the air-combat scenes is astonishing and the detail and color really surprised me.

But the main reason to get this DVD is the commentary. Director Mike Nichols is joined by Steven Soderbergh to talk about "Catch-22" and through their discussion, one really gets a sense of how Nichols (who had just directed back-to-back hits with "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" and "The Graduate") took on this project with the best intentions and inspiration... and quickly got swallowed up by the massive project and even bigger budget. Soderbergh is, in my opinion, one of the best directors doing commentary these days (he gives a perfect mix of technical details and storytelling) and he really knows his "Catch-22" ---though I find it a little incredible that he never noticed the changing portraits in Major Major's office, as he claims while watching the scene.

This movie is a great mix of Fellini, Laugh-In, Welles and Salvador Dali. Some may feel there's not enough Joseph Heller here but it would take a mini-series to cover all the bases of such a deep, rich novel. At times, this movie can try your patience (like most Catch-22's often do) but it's definitely worth seeing and hearing in this new format.

A change
I take back most of the things I said. This is a great movie, and Milo is good.

A good film that should have been better
First, I was upset to see that the Hungry Joe's character from the book was all but not used, and that he didn't even die because of the cat, but instead suffered Kid Sampson's death from the book. Now...

I do admit, this movie is better than I thought it would be. I'm especially happy with Bob Newhart's Major Major, the Chaplain, and Major Danby. My only problem is that many of the characters aren't portrayed to the best of their abilities, considering how well the book fleshed them all out. The best example is Balsom's take on Colonel Cathcart. In the book, Colonel Cathcart is prim, proper, and insane. In the movie, he is simply a crude, crusty old soldier, reminicent of Ernest Borgnine in "All Quiet on the Western Front." Though he is good when interacting with Dreedle. Orr is good in this, but maybe just a touch creepier than he should be. Milo is just wasted, and a little bland. Orson Welles is surprisingly good, but that is in direct effect of the good writing of his scenes.
Alan Arkin gets off to a slow start, but becomes very good as the film picks up speed. The Snowden films are great.

My main problem with the film, however, is that two very important characters from the book are completely and utterly not in the movie: Clevinger and Dunbar. Clevinger, while only in the first few chapters of the book, had a lot of very interesting things to say about Yossarian's behavior, and would have just been a good character to have. Dunbar, on the other hand, actually had a very large part in the book, serving as Yossarian's side-kick. He also delivered the classic monologue about boredom being the key to a seemingly-longer life. A great piece of writing that would have worked well with the rest of the film.
All in all, I suppose the main thing that would have made this movie better is an extra half-hour, so that more of the classic scenes could have been used. But still, surprisingly good.

It's not the book - what movie is?
I read Catch-22 many years ago. Loved it. I've seen Catch-22 the movie several times. Loved it. But they are different. You are not going to get every nuance of the complex, convoluted book into the movie, but it is a good approximation. The movie works on its own, mostly due to the collection of oddball characters and circumstances. The long list of big named actors did a good job. However, the cinematography may be the star, here. As an "anti-war" comedy, this ranks near the top.

The reasonably-priced DVD has a so-so commentary by director Mike Nichols with Steven Soderbergh. ... Read more

Reviews (17)

a tour de force of acting!
Alec Guinness and John Mills - two of the best actors for decades, though I don't think either really received their full dues. Face it, a lot of people's awareness of Guinness came from Star Wars. And that is a shame. He was a brilliant actor with a touch of comedic genius, and he shines in this battle of wits and wills with Mills, another great.

It's basically a two man film, though there is a fine supporting cast of John Fraser, Dennis Price, Susannah York, Gordon Jackson, Percy Herbert and Peter McEnery.

Guinness is Major Jock Sinclair who has been with this Highland regiment since he joined as a boy piper, and rose to Second-in-Command during war time. The unit is now back in Scotland during peace time. Had he stayed as second-in-command, it might now have set tone for the conflict with Lt. Col. Basil Barrow (John Mills). But Jock has been Acting-Commander, so he fully expected to be promoted to full command. The men love him, he's a real man's man. He is devastated, a blow to his ego, when they bring in Barrow to assume command.

Barrow is not a very likable character, a martinet, so it's easy for Jock to wage psychological warfare by undermining Barrow at every turn. A Sandhurst trained disciplinarian, Barrows quickly alienates everyone with his prissy by the book ways, giving Jock the power to slowly rot Barrows authority, ultimately shaking Barrows mental foundations.

While Jock is doing all he can to send Barrows into a tissy fit, Jock's daughter is slipping around meeting John Fraser, which is pushing Jock to the edge as well.

There is a coming confrontation and only one man will survive.

This is acting at is best, and this film really should get more attention.

An astonishing story by Ronald Neame...
The sociable and veteran Major Jock Sinclair (Alec Guinness) has been the acting as Commanding Officer for the Highland Regiment since World War II where he once began as a piper. However, Jock is about to be replaced by a new Commanding Officer, Lt. Col. Basil Barrow (John MIlls), and the mere thought of being swapped with another officer upsets Jock. Colonel Barrow is an aloof and pedant officer with deep scares from the war where he spent most of his time in a prison camp. When Colonel Barrow takes over he immediately begins to set his changes into action, which upsets the lenient Jock who does not like Colonel Barrow or his new strict changes that he has brought to the Highland Regiment. These changes instigate Jock to begin a private psychological warfare toward Colonel Barrow where he plays on the fact that the other officers are not used to changes.

Tunes of Glory is an astonishing story as it displays the rough surface of the Highland military, but at the same time presents the affectionate side of grown men that have returned from war. On top of this the audience gets to see two outstanding performances by Alec Guinness and John Mills that are supported by a terrific cast. In the end the audience will have experienced a wonderful film that leaves them with thoughts and stirred feelings.

One astonishing movie
This smart film shows us one true tour de force between John Mills and Alec Guiness.
Besides all the technical aspects that support this work, the dramatic nucleus deserves be remarked.
Yet this film was made in 1960 ; this script turns around one the essentials lines that support the question about what an effective leader must be.
Look inside what Guiness means; he has set up his mood leadership in a crowd of soldiers accostumed to his irreverent behavior.
He shares what they like; he drinks and he's vulgar too; in other words he flies with them , even ridiculizes the essential role of the authority. This a style yet employed for many managements specially in organizations composed by people of medium professional rank ; this leader stans up about the warm scent of the charisma; that behavior lets to Guiness smell and know the hidden weakness of every man under his power.
This approach is suddenly disturbed when an officer (John Mills) comes for him to replace. Obviously; that fact generates an inmediat reaction state in all the officers. Guiness knows his days are gone and yet he fights with his rules ; you disagree with his psycolghical handles; but you think that Mills a distingued officer, will be capable to end with this screwy state of things.
The obstacle are countless: some are direct and the rest you can imagine: that invisible match to establish the real rules of game , will turn in an unexpected twist ending.
The script is very carefully made ; just remember just two years before Stanley Kubrick had filmed Paths of Glory. This is important due the bitter atmosphere about every item related with the authority excess was not accepted in any society status.
Add to this, the Korea Cold War from the fifties ; the russian invassion over Hungary ; the growing nuclear tension around the nuclear weapons and the visible increase of peace movements all around the world in multiple facets as Litherature; poetry ; painting (Jason Pollock) ; music (rock & roll); cinema (New Wave birth) and challenging films as Baby doll, On the waterfront or Anatomy of a crime ; the raising movements for protecting the nature ; at this decade (fifties) the society was opened for new discoveries and sensations search (remember that the pill was discovered in the middle of the fifties) ; and this mood made the loss of certain principles you assumed as permanent.
And this movie walks in that direction. Watch this one; because its values and intentions goes far beyond a mere entertainment , the movie inquires you ; it challenges you and invites you to react.
Another superb achievement.

Fine DVD for a Guinness classic
No need to say much about the film itself: it is superb as others have agreed, with a phenomenally compelling performance from Sir Alec Guinness, with Sir John Mills (who won Best Actor prize at the 1960 Venice Film Festival) and the rest of the cast giving great support.

The Criterion DVD offers a really fine transfer: colours are rich, and there is a total absence of any artefacts, nicks or blemishes in the print. Sharpness is also very good, there is a hint of occasional grain but this is in the original celluloid I think - and anyway is nothing to worry about.

One slight caveat which has been commented upon by various review sites (so is not just a flaw in my DVD copy) is near the end of the film the appearance on the transfer of an opaque vertical line close to the right edge of the image, about a centimetre wide on my 28" screen. This is not really as distracting as it sounds and was presumably unfixable by Criterion from the source print. It starts near the end of the snooker room scene and stays for about 5 minutes - disappearing during Guinness's tour-de-force final scene where he addresses the assembled officers in a bravura display of fine acting - which leads to the unforgettable (and very moving) climax of the film. Certainly no-one should be put off by this slight flaw as it didn't interfere with my enjoyment of the film.

Soundwise this film offers a straight mono track - which with a 5 channel set-up will unusually use only the centre speaker. Manually adjusting my amp I was able to switch to the two fronts (minus the centre) which gives a slightly wider soundstage. In any event the dialogue is clear (subtitles will help with some of the more inpenetrable lines) and Malcolm Arnold'd bagpipe-based score comes through well.

The extras are slight but OK: the audio-only interview with the aged John Mills in 2002 is not too revealing but he is a lovely man, as comes across well here. The filmed interview with Guinness is better but covers his whole career rather than this film - and he doesn't give too much away of the real man. The trailer is interesting - because it is so appallingly (and hilariously) bad, with a dreadful voiceover and bizarre captions.

Get this DVD for the fine transfer of a brilliant film, which at the end of the day is the prime reason for any DVD package.

Och aye, a supairrb disc!
One of my favorite films has finally made it to DVD. One of the true gems of the postwar British cinema, by a director who often gets short shrift alongside his illustrious contemporaries, Ronald Neame. Everything about the picture's been said - some of the best screen acting of all time in this one. The disc does it justice. The delicate color balance is magnificently rendered,
and the sound is equally well-presented. The real kicker, tho',
is in the extras. The Neame interview is a delight, as is the Guinness one. The Mills one is marred slightly by the rather fatuous questions he is aked, but still quite fine. In short, Criterion hits another one out of the park. Pour yersailf a
wee dram, sit down, and enjoy a bona-fide classic. ... Read more

Reviews (56)

Okay Movie
Pushing Tin has it's moments but anyone who watches it has to wade through some rather dull scenes to get to them. It's wasn't written that well and the plot isn't all that great. Let's face it: air traffic controllers can only be so interesting and then what? That's where this movie fails; it doesn't make up for the fact that the plot is a dud. So why did I give it four stars? The acting; I'm just too big of a fan of Angelina Jolie and Billy Bob Thornton to give it any less. What an interesting match! That is where most of the movies good moments come from. John Cusack does do his best but he doesn't have much to work with and it shows. Only buy this movie if you're a die hard fan of one of the actors. If you're anything else, you'll probably end up disappointed.

An Excellent Comedy.
Nick Falzone (John Cusack) turns out to be, the most Busiest and the best Air Traffic Controller on Long Island, when Nick become jealous and curious at the same time about an unusual man named Russell Bell (Oscar-Winner:Billy Bob Thornton), who is actually a very intelligent man, who has a young beautiful wife (Angelina Jolie). Nick has all, has all what he needs including a nice, pretty, caring wife (Cate Blanchett). Everything turns up side down, when Nick and Russell goes Head to Head with eacother by doing uproarious contest of Wit and Wills that can ultimately only have one winner.

Directed by Mike Newell (Donnie Brasco, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Into the West) made a winning (if long) one of a kind comedy to being Free-Spirited and Wildly funny flick (With a Snappy Repartee). Cusack, Thornton and Blanchett offers great and engaging performances. This underrated film was a missed with the Critics and at the Box Office. The movie has become a Cult Classic. DVD's has an strong non-anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and a terrific Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. The film only extra is a Tralier. This film is better on video and DVD. This has a fine Screenplay by Glen Charles & Les Charles (T.V.`s Cheers). Based on a Article by Darcy Frey-Something's got to Give. Super 35. Grade:A-.

Not that great
This movie is predicated on the premise that Air Traffic Control is an interesting job. About halfway through, the filmakers abandon the exitement of the control room for a plot about adultery and revenge. The characters are really uniteresting. John Cusack should be embarrassed for hamming it up as this guy who thinks he is macho because he's an Air Traffic Controler. Or is he an Air Traffic Controller because he thinks he is macho? Australian actress Kate Blanchette, whose best known role before doing this movie was Queen Elizabeth I in "Elizabeth," here plays Cusack's wife as a setrotypically dull middle-class American who doesn't really do that much. Her talent is completely wasted here. The main interest for this movie is that Billy-Bob Thornton and Angelina Jolie seem to have first met while making it, resulting in there breif, yet highly publicized marriage.

Somebody else who reviewed this for Amazon says this movie is a comedy. While I admit there is some comic relief, it never occurred to me that this movie was ever meant to be a comedy.

Pushing Tin
This has to be one of the funniest films I have ever seen. John Cusack plays airtraffick controller extraordinaire Nick Falzone. The environment could be any work place that encompasses a great amount of stress. Billy Bob Thornton (Bell)arrives on the scene, a quiet but brilliant, airtraffick controller. The complete opposite to Falzone's personality. The reaction of the two main characters to each other is swift and combustable. Falzone happens to chance meet (Angelina Jolie)Bell's wife followed by one night of togetherness. Falzone and Mrs. Bell are already feeling guilty. She tells Bell of the occurence and the fun begins. Bell cleverly plays mind games on Falzone by "noticing" Mrs. Falzone (Cate Blachett). Falzone's becoming fanatical about the (implied)relationship between Bell and Mrs. Falzone.Nothing is happening but his desperation drives his wife away.The best scenes are those in the car after the funeral of Mrs.Falzones dad and the scene on the aeroplane. All the actors do a great job of defining real life scenarios, John is wonderful and has a great cast alongside him to present this fabulous film.

Scrary job where split-second decisions are essential.
Starring John Cusack as an air traffic controller, Pushing Tin introduced me to a scary world where split-second decisions can decide the fate of planes full of people, where being good enough to do this job and command good salaries requires quick thinking, fast talking and steady nerves. Set in pre-9/11 New York, I'm familiar with the neighborhoods and the skyline and I must say that every time a camera panned the World Trade Center, I got a little twinge. The year the film was made, 1999, comes across as a much more innocent age.

Anyway, John Cusack is married to Cate Blanchett and they live with their children in an area that looks like Staten Island or Queens. She's a real babe in this film and plays her part well, being so good at her New York accent that I could have sworn she had grown up in Brooklyn.

When Billy Bob Thornton, an air traffic controller from another part of the country, is transferred into the New York area, there is immediate competition between the two men. They compete on the job and I realized that the term "pushing tin" means pushing the planes on their computer screens through the complicated ritual of landing in a way to make sure they come in on time. This sometimes requires big risks be taken, as these planes have to be very delicately manipulated.

The two men also compete for women. Billy Bob is also married to a babe, Angelina Jolie, and it doesn't take long for the two couples to get caught up in a romantic web. There's tension throughout as bedroom shenanigans seem to be getting out of hand and Billy Bob's propensity for unpredictable violent behavior becomes more and more threatening.

Acting was excellent, and I loved the cinematography of the planes and the skylines. The romances were a little silly and maybe that was why the film is billed as a comedy, but it really didn't matter because I was totally caught up in the story itself. Certainly, Pushing Tin gave me a new understanding about the challenges of keeping airline passengers safe in the sky and the jobs of the people who do this for a living. ... Read more

Description

Virtuoso performances fuel this powerful drama about the pressures of military life.Alec Guinness (The Bridge on the River Kwai) stars as a gruff Scottish officer who refuses to relinquish his regiment to an aristocratic colonel (Oscar®-winner John Mills, Ryan's Daughter).The impeccable supporting cast includes Kay Walsh and Susannah York in her film debut. ... Read more

Reviews (17)