Reviews (21)

cool Film&Smoking Soundtrack
Props to the Genius of Brother Sidney Poitier for directing this Classic&also to the Funky vibe of Bill Cosby.John Amos One of the Most slept on Actors Ever.same thing with Clavin Lockhart.Ossie Davis was Cool as was the whole Cast.this Movie pre-dated Hip-Hop.keep in mind the Name Biggie Smalls.the Soundtrack which has Music Produced by curtis Mayfield with the Staple Singers on vocals is a Must have as well.the Movie&Music go hand in hand.finally on DVD with Great commentary.Enjoy.this is a Feel Good Movie with Soul.

It's About Time... Good Comedy From The 70's On DVD
This is one of the few movies I can say I was waiting for to arrive on DVD. Yes, its campy corny, and predictable, but it has something for me at least that a lot of movies dont; it just makes you feel good and have a good time watching it.

Bill Cosby and Sidney Potier had great chemistry together in all three of their films. Uptown Saturday Night was more critically acclaimed, but this film is just more fun.

The Characters names are still unforgetable: 40th Street Black, Bootney Farnsworth, Kansas City Mack, Jody Tibbs and of course Bill as Mongo Slade. Great Stuff.

The Soundtrack with the Staple Singers still makes you move even though the songs are about 30 years old; the mark of hitting the bullseye musically. One thing that must be mentioned is the mostly black cast for a film of this kind was not the norm back when this film was made and the actors in the film all were either stars in their own right, or would be stars later.

Best scene in the movie without giving too much away for those who have not watched it: the final boxing scene and the aftermath; just plain funny.

Anyway, go out and get this DVD. You will be sure to enjoy it. The whole family can watch it also as I can't recall hearing any foul language.

Highly recommended

Two of the Best, in their Best
Of the three that Bill Cosby & Sidney Poitier made (Uptown Saturday Night, Let's Do It Again and A Piece Of The Action) I
loved this one best. An all-star cast along with the plot in
the boxing match,their wives and dealing with the two kingpins
gave me enough laughs to drive my wife up the wall. The Cosby/Poitier team I feel, is a positive comedy duo that rates with Crosby/Hope.

For real
This movie is good clean fun. Not a lot of cursing, fun comedy action. A must see for the new generation. Don't wait for the new Will Smith version. Which he won't give me a roll in. He's going to redo Let's Do it Again and Uptown Saturday night.A very pleasant movie.

THEY DID IT AGAIN
Of all the movies Sidney Poitier and Bill Cosby made, this is the best comedy made together. Very funny and I love the music. I have been waiting for YEARS for this movie to come out on DVD. I,m buying many to give to all my friends. If you wanna laugh a lot, this is the dvd you want. Very, very funny movie. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Briefed by the Ministry of Information to make a film that would foster Anglo-American relations in the post-war period, innovative filmmakers Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger came up with A Matter of Life and Death, an extravagant and extraordinary fantasy in which David Niven stars as a downed pilot who must justify his continuing existence to a heavenly panel because he has made the mistake of falling in love with an American girl (Kim Hunter) when he really should have been dead. National stereotypes are lampooned as the angelic judges squabble over his fate. In a neat reversal of expectations, the Heaven sequences are black and white, while Earth is seen in Technicolor. Daring cinematography mixes monochrome and color, incorporates time-lapse images, and even toys with background "time freezes" 50 years before The Matrix. Roger Livesey and Raymond Massey lead the fine supporting cast. This is one of the undoubted jewels of British cinema.--Mark Walker ... Read more

Reviews (43)

Brilliant, intelligent fantasy
I know this movie under its original UK title, A Matter of Life and Death, and it's one of the finest, wittiest meditations ever on the relationship between earth and heaven, law and justice, England and America.

Bomber pilot Niven finds himself in a rapidly disintegrating aircraft, shortly to come down over the sea. His last radio message is to an American WAC, Kim Hunter, who falls in love with him during their brief conversation. Then they lose contact, the plane comes down and Niven is washed up on a beach - but much to his surprise, he's not dead. He meets Hunter and they connect.

However, up in heaven, things are not well. Niven should have died, and a heavenly messenger (Marius Goring as a deeply camp French aristocrat) is sent to earth to persuade Niven that he's in the wrong place. Meanwhile, Niven is suffering appalling headaches. His doctor (lovably blurry-voiced Roger Livesey) diagnoses a brain injury. On earth, Niven must have a difficult operation. In heaven, he must go on trial for his right to stay alive.

Powell and Pressburger made the movie as part of a wartime propaganda effort to defuse tension between American servicemen stationed in Britain and the British people, who occasionally resented the Americans' higher pay, better uniforms and general chutzpah. But the film-makers exceeded their brief by several degrees. This is a lovely bit of movie-making; one of the wittier conceits is that life on earth is depicted on sumptuous technicolour, while heaven is in silvery black-and-white (the normal practice would have been to have it the other way round). Niven is a live wire, Livesey is as gruff and cuddly as ever, Goring is bright and cheeky (when he first arrives on earth and the rose in his buttonhole turns from grey to crimson, he sniffs it and sighs "Ah! Technicolor!"), Raymond Massey is cragginess incarnate, plus there's the gorgeous ice-queen Kathleen Byron as an angelic receptionist...ahhh. They don't make films as mad and as intelligent as this any more. (Well, maybe Trainspotting.) Great stuff.

Stairway To Heaven -- A Movie Classic Gem
This is one of the most overlooked gems Hollywood has ever produced. -- A young WWII British fighter ace whose plane is about to crash, has radio contact with a young American woman who comforts the brave pilot, knowing that within minutes he will be dead. For some reason the man who should certainly be dead walks away from the wreckage and eventually learns that he was meant to report to heaven. When a messanger is sent to ask the pilot to accompany him to heaven, the man refuses and demands to have his "day in court" to argue his case. The man argues that his situation had changed during the final moments of his earthly life, that he had fallen in love and therefor had become a different person, one who deserved a chance to live on. The "heavenly court" is a cinematic delight! The "announcement of the jury of peers" is a definite highlight. The story, as fantastic as it seems, is an engaging one and will keep you spellbound for the nearly 2 hours play time. The final scene is simply beautiful and will require a "Kleenex treatment" for most viewers. This film is in my personal all-time favorite top 10, it has my highest recommendation!

ssssssssssssssuper
Well... 42+ reviews and not one less than 5 stars certainly makes more of a statement about the quality, or at least value of this movie than I could ever hope to do. Yes it's sort of semi-centred around a partly cheesy but initially poetic romance, and it does ostensibly make some point about "the power of love", but its also about life's sentiments and quirks (love, nationalism, chess...) and perhaps even a point about the nature of reality (is it a dream, is it all real, is it a mix of both, does it matter, doesnt' it matter), the consequence and incosequence of imagination, real and fabricated.

All the BS about themes and cases aside, A Matter of Life and Death is a fabulously entertaining movie, quirky and likable characters, a lovely semi-halucenogenic storyline, a witty script, extrodinarily complex yet readily understood, and terrific visual style.

Certainly see this movie, although this is another movie I pray gets restored and released on DVD (the vhs is tolerable... but with such great visuals it is a travesty that it is yet to be released, when, in fact, it should have been one of the first "classic" titles on the medium).

Fantasy Vs. Reality
Produced by the inventive team of The Archers, A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH, also known as STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN, is a remarkable British fantasy from 1946. Fresh, innovative, and extremely original, the film inspired such directors as Brian DePalma, Vincente Minnelli, and Martin Scorsese. It tells a tale about the powers of love, pitted against the "powers that be." The movie was supposedly devised to smooth over the strained relationship between Britain and the U.S. after WWII. It is disarming in its gentle reminders of the horrors of war and the need to go on when faced with death. Its deception lies in the complexity of its "is it real or is it imaginary?" premise, taking the viewer alone for a fabulous ride of fantasy vs. reality.

Peter Carter (David Niven) is a WWII pilot returning from a bombing raid, who is forced to jump out of his moving airplane without a parachute after an enemy attack. While deciding his fate aboard the plane, he speaks to American W.A.C. June (Kim Hunter) over his transmitter radio, before finally leaping from the plane to what he thinks will be his death. Peter wakes up to find that he has landed utterly unharmed, which wasn't supposed to happen according to the rules of Heaven. Peter meets June on the nearly deserted beach and they fall in love. Before long, he is payed a visit by Conductor 71 (Marius Goring), a heavenly messenger who informs him that he should have died after jumping from the plane. Peter argues that he is now in love and cannot possibly give up his life, wishing to remain on earth. He is given that chance and a celestial trial is called to decide Peter's fate--whether to claim his life or let him survive.

The curious but artistic choice associated with the production was the decision to film the Earthbound scenes in Three-Strip Technicolor and the Heaven sequences in Black and White. The smooth transition from color to black and white works amazingly well, especially under Michael Powell's brilliant direction. The audience never knows if what is happening is real or not. Are the heaven scenes a part of Peter's imagination, or are they actually taking place? The film plays it both ways and leaves it to the audience to decide. The film does a brilliant job of playing with our emotions and making us care for the characters, giving even the heavenly creatures human qualities. It is a brilliant film, that is both important, and extremely enjoyable...

Classic Treasure
Before wasting his talents on many irritating chracterisations David Niven took centre stage in this whimsical, delightfully executed Hollywood fantasy. The story centres around a British WW2 pilot who falls in love with an American after being propelled into a heavenly court when surviving a plane crash. The editing of the dazzling opening sequence leaves much to be desired and for a film made in 1946 AMOLAD bristles with colourful cinematography and a miraculous creation of a heavenly afterlife.

Shining with surrealistic cinematic bravura (the fantasy sequences were shot in black and white, the earthly ones in color), STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN is a marvel, with a notable contribution from production designer Junge. Most remarkable is his monumental stairway which reaches majestically into the heavens, peopled with a cast of history's dead.

Not only is this a philosophically moving and emotionally effecting satire of love and post war politics but a witty, unabashfully joyful creation of pure art and craft. A visually stunning, funny, sad and timeless movie with an impeccably written script, A Matter of Life a Death is an oustanding creation and deserves to remain treasured in years to come. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Sam Peckinpah weighs in on World War II--and from the German point of view. The result is as bleak, if not quite as bloody, as one expects, in part because the 1977 film was cut to ribbons by nervous studio executives. The assorted excerpts that remain don't constitute an exhilarating or even an especially thrilling battle epic. The war is grinding to a close, and veterans like James Coburn's Steiner are grimly aware that it's a lost cause. The battlefield is a death trap of sucking mud and barbed wire, and the German generals (viz., the martinet played by James Mason) seem to pose a bigger threat to the life and limbs of Steiner's men than the inexorable enemy. Not even Peckinpah's famous sensuous exuberance when shooting violence is much in evidence; the picture is a depressive, claustrophobically overcast experience. The bloody high (or low) point isn't a shooting; it's a wince-inducing de-penis-tration during oral sex. For a fun time with the men in (Nazi) uniform, try Das Boot instead. --David Chute ... Read more

Reviews (112)

A very fine war epic
I first saw this movie (albeit in TV-edited version) as a child and knew right away that this was one of the finest war films I had ever seen. As a WWII buff, I had read many books and seen many war films, and Cross of Iron (the movie) was one of the more satisfying (and horrifying!) accounts of the war.

Sam Peckinpah's directing is superb in this film. Coburn's Sergeant Steiner, who is just trying to survive and keep alive the men who follow him, versus the incompetent Captain Stransky (Maximillian Schell) who is on the Eastern Front only because he wants to win the Iron Cross, Germany's military award for valor in combat - makes for a very tense atmosphere throughout the movie. The viewer ultimately sides with Coburn's character, and can't help but feel outrage when Stransky deliberately tries to hang Steiner's men out to dry as the order to retreat is given, and Stransky does not pass along the order to Steiner.

The battle scenes were magnificent, the best I had seen until "Saving Private Ryan" came along. You got a glimpse of the sheer terror the German soldiers must have felt when facing one of the Russians' human wave charges. The T-34 tanks used by the Russians appear authentic, unlike the substitutes used in many war films (see: Battle of the Bulge). This film is a must-see for anyone interested in WW2. It is unfortunate that so few films were made about the Russian Front. The Soviet Union did more to bring down the Nazi regime than the rest of the Allies combined. 90 percent of all battle casualties suffered by the Germans in the war happened on the Russian Front.

The part of the movie that really grabbed me, however, was the beginning. While German children sing a song to the tune of "Lightly Row, Sweetly Row", images are shown of battle, death and the Holocaust - a wrenching juxtaposition of childhood innocence and the horrifying extents of man's inhumanity to man.

Dirty Harry -- in feldgrau.
"Cross of Iron" is a bad movie, made with preconcieved notions that do not fit history or reality. It makes the double mistake of A) cramming an American-style character (the lone wolf anti-hero) into a German uniform and B) tacking the director's well-known appetite for blood and graphic violence to a silly antiwar message.

The movie follows the conflict between an embittered and defiant combat soldier named Stiener (played by James Coburn) and his new CO, a glory-seeking martinet named Stransky (played by Maximillian Schell). From the git-go, the movie follows every stale antiwar convention in the book: the bitter, insubordinate sergeant with an unspoken love for his men vs. the bloodthirsty killer-officer who wants to win a medal and doesn't care how many men die in the process. We've seen this in numerous American war movies, but it never quite works in German unfiorm. This wasn't a democracy; discipline in the Wehrmacht, particularly during the period in questoon, was severe and the slightest defeatism or insubordination were ruthlessly punished. The scene, for example, where Stiener berates and threatens a replacement soldier who is a Party member would probably never have happened. By late 1943 even officers were being degraded and sent off to suicide-squad 'punishment battalions' for minor transgressions or seditious statements. In reality, a soldier like Stiener would have most likely been shot, sent to a military prison or killed off digging up land mines in a penal outfit. The "lone wolf" mentality was simply not tolerated in the German army of 1943 (in Sajer's "Forgotten Soldier" a lieutenant is demoted to corporal and sent to the punishment squad for losing his field telephone when he swam the 900-yard Don River...what would have happened to Stiener for mouthing off to the colonel?).

Additionally, we have more sterotypes: the loveable but doomed men of Stiener's squad, including the "I have dead meat written all over me" teenage boy, the evil Party member, the cowardly lieutenant, the well-meaning but ultimately hapless senior officers (played by James Mason and David Warner) and the obligatory scene where we find out that the Russians are people too. Really, the film is very similar in structure to a Dirty Harry movie: the lone-wolf anti-hero who scorns medals and glory, the pencil-pushing politician/boss, and nice-guy dead-meat partner, the ultimate hollow victory....blah blah blah.

"Cross of Iron" is undermined by the love of cruelty that Sam Peckinpah was rightly infamous for. Graphic violence certainly has its place in a war movie, but as usual, Peckinpah felt the need to cram the viewer nose-first into buckets of human gore. This cheapens the antiwar theme of the movie; viciousness is fine so long as it is committed by the hero, but dastardly if if perpetrated by the villain. Morally, the massage of the movie is unclear: Stiener does not avenge the death of the innocent young soldier by the Russian POW women, but later brutally kills his own lieutenant for shooting others of his squad. Then, when confronting Stransky, who actually gave the order by blackmailing the cowardly lieutenant, he does not kill him but gives him a chance to "show that Prussians can fight." Okay, Stiener is probably insane by the end of the film, but none of this made sense to me. In Peckinpah's mind, the trembling lieutenant deserves to die more than Stransky, because he's afraid and "just wants to go home" wheras Stransky, while evil, deserves to live because he is not a hypocrite: he is willing to kill and allow others to be killed for his Iron Cross, but is also willing to fight himself. Maybe Peckinpah's theme was that war is unfair. So it all balances out, I guess?

I guess not. "Cross of Iron" is a chronically over-rated war movie that bludgeons the viewer with Americanized themes, graphic violence, and a hypocritical antiwar message, brought to you by a director who idolized violent men. As entertainment it is a matter of taste, but as historical fiction, it is nonsense.

Peckinpah's last triumph
Sam Peckinpah, in his 1977 effort "Cross of Iron", darred to look at the war throught German eyes. Thus becoming one of the handful of directors with the audacity to view the German soldiers as a humans, and not as faceless barbarians. Based upon a novel by Willi Heinrich, Cross of Iron is the tale of Steiner, and his troops fight for survival on the Taman peninsula in 1943. Thought it is not near the final stages of the war as many believe, the film depicts the turning of the tables in favor of the Soviets; after the losses at Stalingrad and Kursk. This gritty, unflinching and realistic portrail of combat on the eastern front, seems more stunning if you keep in mind the budget restraints. Authentic in almost every aspect, all the vehicles, weaponry and uniforms all flawless. The Wehrmacht soldiers are dirty and unreasted as they would be during uncessant battle, unlike many a war film which have the soldiers clean and proper. Also during filming, Soviet T-34 tanks acquired from the Czech Republic, were administered during a skirmish. At the time Peckinpah was addicted to coccain and was an alcoholic, yet through all the self-inflicted harm of his reckless life style, his directing capability remained unscathed. The Sam we know from the "Wild Bunch" and "Straw Dogs" is still here, with the slow-motion seens of carnage and his trademark "zooms". But aside from his usual hallmarks, he also give use a personal view of combat. Sam doesn't want to be a spectator, he wants to be a participant, and in doing so he lets us experience the noise, confusion and horror of the Russan front. The film though however great, is not without flaws. First off the casting is questionable, James Mason, David Warner and James Coburn seem somewhat out of place. Being either American of British they could have made a more conscious effort to sustain a fluent german accent. There also is some scenes, a lack of light, which can cause some confusion. Still Sam Peckinpah has left us with an enduring and powerful statement about war, honor, survival and friendship in a world gone mad.

The Idiot: Simon Gurney
I disagree entirely with what that idiot simon gurney said. I read the novel and have seen the film, and not only is it a faithful adaptation, but the few changes which are made only ameliorate the story. I find your comment on the quality of the action scenes offensive. Perhaps you could offer me an example of better ones in a war film. Maybe if you werent so ignorant to history, you could tell just how well done those scenes are, they convey perfecly the madness, and confusion of the desperate days of the Third Reich. I do not think it is proper for you to to critize a film which you yourself have yet to watch in its entirety. I hope others will not be fooled by your groundless comments, thus missing one of the few great war films.

Not exactly a classic, but better than most WW2 films
I would rate it 3.5 stars, because it's better than average as compared to other ww2 films however there are a few small problems I have with this movie. First off, the opening minutes contain scenes of implied homosexulaity between the german soldiers. I'm not sure the accuracy of this, although no doubt it probably did happen, but seems to be a fairly important point thoughout parts of this movie. If this is supposed to further convince the audience of the depraved nature of the soldiers, it works in that regard but it is quite obvious that they are depraved anyway and that added nothing to the storyline nor to the plot.

The other problem I have is, although most of the battle scenes contain close to accurate german and russian weapons, the overhead bombing scenes contain shots of U.S. navy corsairs dropping bombs. These were probably stock footage taken from a navy film and look horribly out-of place here.

But despite those two issues, most of the rest of the movie is good and portrays an accurate, interesting and engaging portrait of battle in the russian theatre during ww2. I especially liked the use of light as most of the battle scenes were shot as daytime attacks and that indeed was the way it happened on the russian front. The sneak attack at the bridge by Steiner's platoon was filmed and sequenced to show all of the moves by the attackers, leaving nothing hidden or off camera. Certainly an interesting way to portray this kind of sequence and it came out quite effectively.

Sam Peckinpah uses the slow motion to good effect and has indeed changed the face of war films circa 1977. Every war movie that was released after this movie tends to show a more grimmer and graphic view of war and that is certainly how it should be done as there is nothing glorious or heroic about war. Those are the words used by the politicians that order people to fight each other to the death.

Great casting, excellent camera work and a good story combined with music that adds a sense of innocence lost and horror to the subject, all ad up to not quite a classic but a very good depiction of ww2 battle action in the Russian theatre. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The movie that made "No wire hangers!" a household phrase, Mommie Dearest is the very model of a modern "camp classic," so crazily outlandish that it's fascinating. Based on the scathing and scandalous tell-all bestseller by Christina Crawford, the adopted daughter of histrionic Hollywood movie queen Joan Crawford, Mommie Dearest was billed in advance as a serious dramatic motion-picture biography. But it turned out to be something much, much weirder--a genuine Hollywood oddity that serves up a bizarre mixture of melodramatic trash and outrageous tragi-comedy. Joan Crawford won an Oscar for playing the role of the self-sacrificing mother, the woman who would do anything for her daughter, in Mildred Pierce. As depicted by Faye Dunaway (playing the hell out of the role as if she's determined to win another Oscar of her own, damn it!), her role as offscreen parent puts her in a league with big-time scary screen mommies such as Mrs. Bates in Psycho, and Angela Lansbury's über-mom in The Manchurian Candidate. Dunaway's Crawford torments and terrorizes her adopted children in myriad ways--making them give away their own birthday gifts and rousting them from their beds for frantic after-midnight bathroom-scrubbing attacks. And when, after the death of her Pepsico chairman husband, Crawford tells the board of directors, "Don't f--- with me, fellas!" one is very much inclined to heed her warning. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (144)

In defense of Diana Scarwid's performance...
I feel I must add to the previous reviews: I really do feel Ms. Scarwid is an exceptional actress (She's outrageously funny as Cher's beautician lover in Silkwood! ), and that she does justice to Christina Crawford's life--or, at least, the cinematic version of it. I don't see how else the performance could be played. It has to be that low-key, because Faye Dunaway is taking up so much space, with her virtuouso turn as Joan Crawford. Also, as Pauline Kael noted in her excellent review of the film, "Scarwid has good low tones in her voice which suggest the ordeals Tina has been through, and she brings the role a twinkle, a gleam of rude humor, that seems to sustain Tina through her mother's most fiendish persecutions." At the end of the film, her character's unresolved anger and sorrow is especially pungent to me. And all of you who feel that doesn't ring true aren't being entirely honest about your relationships with your own parents! Maybe viewers who appreciate the film only as a "camp classic", don't really want to acknowledge the tragic realism of the material? It IS funny, but then it's horrifyingly funny, and worse that that. This film may be one of only a handful to suffer from a feminist double standard: I wonder how many members in the audience would kick up their heels and laugh about it if a father was doing the same things to his kids onscreen?

A big disappointment full of painfully BAD acting!
This is an example of a book with great movie potential going horribly awry! Christina Crawford's autobiograhical bestseller about her Hollywood upbringing at the hands of her alcoholic, moviestar 'Mommie' Joan Crawford, was powerful, enfuriating, and heartbreaking. The movie, unfortunately, is just a mish-mash of overblown acting and there is little continuity between the scenes. I nearly walked out on this movie when I first saw it, and it's not much better on the small screen! The period sets, costumes, and Faye Dunaway's makeup are right, but the tone of the film is way off! Both the Christinas were horribly cast, and I had no sympathy for either one. Diana Scarwid's acting is downright embarrassing (since when did Christina have a Southern accent?)! It's really sad that the original message about child-abuse is lost in this ridiculous, campy trash.

"Tina!... Bring me the Axe!"
This movie scared me to death when I was a kid. I had absolutely no idea who Joan Crawford was, so I just naturally took the whole thing as a tale of a goofball mother who abused her kids a lot. I had nightmares of Faye Dunaway wearing a facemask beating me with wire hangers while screaming, "Don't f--- with me, fella!"

Seriously, I never had the nightmares, but as a child, Faye Dunaway played one vicious bitch who I was glad wasn't my mother. I'm 22 now and know who Joan Crawford is. The physical resemblance between Mrs. Dunaway and Mrs. Crawford is striking at times. As far as Faye's acting goes, well... I'm suprised she didn't gain a little weight during the production from all that scenery she chewed. This is THE definitive "ham" performance. It's just so over the top and hysterically wacko. There's so many instances where the character does something off the wall that it'd be impossible to list them all. In short, it's one of the most memorable performances of the 80's. I would say "bravo," but I'm not sure if this is what Dunaway was going for.

It's also the only interesting performance in the entire movie. At least Dunaway knows how to deliver her lines in a SLIGHTLY realistic manner; the rest of the cast is basically just pathetic. The girl who played Christina (name escapes me) is god-awful in this film. Behold:

"I'm... not... one of yourrrr [FANS]!"

It must be seen to be believed. The entire film revels in the realm of all things bizarre and awful. And that's exactly why it's so darn entertaining. Some of the quotes are so nutty that they've earned a permanent rank into the lexicon of pop culture, the most famous being, of course, "No wire hangers... EVER(....)!"

If you're into this goofy stuff, I'd highly recommend buying it. No interesting extras to speak of, but the price is good. Place it on your shelf right next to your MST3K collection.

NO WIRE HANGERS!
Possibly my fav. movie I've ever watched!

I want the director's cut
Movies are all being re-made these days. How about this one? As much as I love this movie, I must admit it is sloppily edited, and as Christina herself says, it leaves only the highlights and turns the whole story around from a child trying to live through abuse to a woman of Hollywood who just wasn't obeyed.

At the beginning of the movie we see Joan's morning routine of getting ready for work. The movie begins just before she adopts Christina so we don't see anything about her childhood or her early days as an actress. But that is excusable because the movie is based on the book, which is really Christina's autobiography.

I am disappointed Faye Dunaway regrets making this movie because it is one of her finest. Whenever I hear her name I think of this movie. Can anyone else name 3 other movies she was in? I can't.

I don't know what really happened between those two, but I would have LOVED to be a fly on THAT wall. Also, in closing, Christina has said she has not recieved any residuals from this movie which is outrageous. Many will say that hearing her gripe about money discredits her story, but I think if anyone was in her shoes and shared their story that had a huge impact, they deserve a little kick-back. ... Read more

Reviews (24)

The Duke in the Gobi!
Contrary to the critics in general and the reviewers here in
particular, The Conqueror is actually a pretty good film, if you're
a John Wayne fan, or just enjoy Hollywood spectaculars as they
were made back in the '50s. Wayne was not as miscast as one
might think. He certainly had the strength of character and screen
presence to play Temujin/Genghis Khan and he looked good in the
oriental mustache and the Mongol warrior garb. The dialog here is
no dumber than in any other Hollywood historical saga of that
time (or of this time, either, for that matter. Remember Russell
Crowe in Gladiator: "At my signal, unleash Hell!"?)

Movie lore has it that The Conqueror was filmed on location in
Utah either on or near an atomic test site, and that many of the cast
and crew later died from radiation-induced cancers. It may be
true, or it may be just mythology. There were no nuclear test sites
in Utah, but the shooting location could have been near the
Nevada test site. Director Powell and cast members Wayne,
Hayward, Moorehead, and John Hoyt did die from cancer, but of
different types and years apart. Many others died from other
causes. Pedro Armendariz committed suicide. Thomas Gomez
died from an auto accident. Lee Van Cleef died of a heart attack.
And some lived to a ripe old age. Leo Gordon, for instance,
passed away just last year, at the age of78, after a brief illness.
Gordon was a scriptwriter as well as an actor, and wrote two
classic Roger Corman movies: The Terror, and The Wasp
Woman.

The Conqueror also had the distinction of having a Playboy
Playmate, Pat Lawler (Miss August 1955) in a bit part. Ms.
Lawler appeared in the sci-fi comedy Invasion of the Saucer Men
in 1957, and that seems to be the extent of her film career..

To sum up: The Conqueror is not as bad as reported. It's not
nearly as bad as, say, Big Jim McLain, The Fighting
Kentuckian, or Jet Pilot. And it's not nearly as good as, say, The
Quiet Man, Sands of lwo Jima, or True Grit. It's in the middle.
like, say, Hatari, Circus World, or The Shootist.

This DVD edition offers just the movie, a scene index, and
subtitles. The image quality is good, but the sound varies a
bit--some of the dialog seems rather distant and tinny. But at this
price it's a bargain, so don't miss out!

The infamous bad film that killed John Wayen and many others
"The Conqueror" is a movie that is infamous in Hollywood history for two reasons, neither of which is a good. First, it is a movie that has John Wayne playing Genghis Khan with Susan Hayward, Pedro Armendáriz, Agnes Morehead, and William Conrad also playing Orientals. Wayne spouts lines of dialogue like "I feel this Tartar woman is for me, and my blood says, take her," "We'll chase them like rats across the tundra," and "I am bereft of spit," in what must count as the most surreal performance of his career (the role was originally written by Marlon Brando). The decision to cast the Duke as Genghis Khan is, to say, the least, bizarre, and it is hard to take your eyes away from what he is doing on screen (there is a legendary Hollywood joke that the only thing worse would have been casting Mickey Rooney as Jesus in "King of Kings").

Second, 13 weeks of this 1956 movie were spent filming in Utah a bit more than 100 miles from the site of a nuclear testing ground in Nevada and the set was contaminated by nuclear fallout from 11 blasts in 1953. After location shooting was concluded, producer Howard Hughes paid to have 60 tons of dirt shipped back to Hollywood so it could be used to match interior shootings. Of the 220 persons who worked on "The Conqueror" at least 91 had contracted cancer by the early 1980s and over half that number died of it, including stars Wayne, Hayward, and Morehead, and director Dick Powell (Armendáriz committed suicide when learning he was terminally ill). Statistically speaking out of a group that size only 30 people should end up with cancer. The thought that Wayne and the others would lose their lives because of a movie this bad is just a sickening thought, but the evidence seems incontrovertible and there is even a chilling photograph of Wayne on the set with a Geiger counter.

"The Conqueror" is essentially a love story between Wayne's Genghis Khan, originally named Temujin before he becomes emperor of the known world, and the beautiful Tartar princess, Bortai (Hayward). The movie has actually pays some attention to the actual history of the character and the times, at least more than the Omar Sheriff film about Genghis Khan, but clearly the idea here was that it was easier to conqueror the world than it was to tame the red headed woman in his tent. It would have helped if there was some chemistry between the two stars, but there really is not that much difference between Hayward's Bortai when she is demeaning Temujin as a Mongol or when she they ride off into the sunset at the end to live happily ever after out there on that there tundra. Then there is the idea that little Agnes Moorhead is the mother of Wayne and William Conrad, each of whom is twice her size. This film is true Hollywood turkey.

Wayne had pursued the role, seeing it as just a different type of Western, and on some level you have to respect the idea of trying to stretch as an actor. But the results are just so laughable and only the sobering through that Wayne and so many of the cast would pay for this fiasco with their lives keeps this from being a real hooter deserving of "MST3K" treatment. For years you could not see "The Conqueror" because a guilty Howard Hughes pulled it from circulation (or maybe he was not being eccentric; we are talking Howard Hughes here). In fact, "The Conqueror" was his final film. As the most curious film in John Wayne's career it deserves to be seen at least once by both his fans and those who are just curious about one of the oddest bits of Hollywood history.

A BOMB, figuratively and literally!
The well-documented fact that the principal actors in this film eventually died of cancer affirms that this one was doomed from the start. Accepting Wayne and Hayward as Asians is more unbelievable as blue-eyed Burt Lancaster as "Geronimo".

While "The Conqueror" does sport high production values, the absurdity of the casting makes it one of the looniest decisions ever to come from a major Hollywood studio.

Ed Wood would've done better!

Inadvertently hilarious
I laughed so hard I got a side ache.

A 12 million dollar production by the goofy Howard Hughes, directed by Dick Powell in the Utah desert and starring John Wayne, Susan Hayward, Agnes Morehead, Lee Van Cleef among others.

Wayne as the six foot four inch Mongol Prince "Temujin" soon to be crowned King of the Mongols - Genghis Kahn and Susan Hayward as the Red Haired Tarter Temptress, "Bortai," I kid you not, Bortai.

Advertised by the studio as...

"Spectacular as its barbaric passions and savage conquests"
"Mighty in scope"
"Mighty in spectacle"
"Genghis Khan! The world trembled at his name"

And finally...

"They conquered each other and then the world"

Consider some of the dialog...

Wayne: "I feel this Tarter women is for me, and my blood says, take her! There are moments for wisdom and moments when I listen to my blood; my blood says take this Tarter woman!"

Hayward: "For me there is no peace while you live Mongol."

Wayne: "You are beautiful in your wrath!"

Hayward: "The Conqueror? Mighty armies cannot stop him! But one touch of my lips...Yes, he captured me - but he cannot tame me!"

To round out your collection of wonderful Hollywood mistakes you have to have this movie.

Fair to good.
I had problems with some of this movie, but being a JW and SH fan made it watchable. ... Read more

Reviews (60)

Not in this lifetime........PERFECT!
Those were the words that Jay Trotter(Dreyfus)read aloud from the Daily Racing Form about the winning chances of a horse named Charity. This is a been-there-and-you'll-laugh-yourself-silly movie if there ever was one. Go to the racetrack for a day, and you'll see every one of the characters portrayed in this movie, from Cheeseburger, the Hawaiian shirted gambler who knows nothing about handicapping and bets inside tips, to the bookie Lufkin, there collecting money from deadbeats and doctors alike. Based on the book "Good Vibes", this is a non-stop, always entertaining comedy that gives every track goer the incentive to try it one more time. Dreyfus portrays Jay Trotter, a down on his luck cab driver that has given up gambling in order to keep his perilous relationship with his wife (Terri Garr) together. His buddy Looney, also a cab driver played by David Johanssen, is prominent in this film as a born loser who records a conversation taking place in the back seat of his cab stating "The only way Charity can lose is if she's struck by lightning in the starting gate." Jennifer Tilly shows up in all her splendor and beauty as ditzy arm candy for a gambling, middle-aged, business owner who raises the price on the envelopes he sells according to the success he's had at the track that particular week. Tilly's character describes him best, "Herbie is rich." Add to the cast Michelle Phillips as a man-chasing soon to be widow, and run of luck that Trotter can't explain and you have the ingredients of a comedy that you won't soon forget. Get the video, already!

When a Loser can't stop Winning
I'd heard there were problems with the making of this comedy and it slipped in and out of theatres without much notice. I remember seeing the trailer and thinking that the movie looked terrible.
Then I saw it was based on a Jay Cronley novel.

If you've never read a Jay Cronley novel, find one: he has a hilarious writing style that can't be transferred to a movie screen. He wrote FUNNY FARM (made into the Chevy Chase movie) and QUICK CHANGE (with Bill Murray). The perfect John Candy role can be found in WALKING PAPERS but, sadly, John's gone. And then there's GOOD VIBES, which became LET IT RIDE.

This is a funny, funny movie. It takes the seedy setting of a horse track and fills it with hilarious characters all trying to make that winning bet. Richard Dreyfus gives an energetic performance as Jay Trotter, a loser who, for one day, just can't stop winning.

Give this underrated gem a shot. If you connect with it, then it's a winning bet.

We love the longshots
Is it possible that no one rated this film less than five stars? If you watch this movie, you'll see why. LET IT RIDE is one of those quiet sleepers that, at first, attracted a very narrow audience. When it premiered, and when it was released on video, no one I had asked had known of the film's existence. Now, more and more people are asking me if I have. I smugly say, "You bet!" (Bad pun intended.) This is one of those tightly-scripted, perfectly-acted, beautifully paced comedies that make you wish more like this were made. Put your money on the right pony and pick this one up. Sorry, Smarty Jones.

Let It Ride
If you like a punt- this is a must see. It has been surpassed by no other punting video ever made.

Wonderful !!
An amusing, funny film about a guy who is "having a very good day" ! You will not regret picking this DVD up, it's a great Sunday afternoon, laying on the couch film. It will put a few smiles on your face...:+) ... Read more

Amazon.com

When Miss Marple, played by the delightful Joan Hickson, finds herself in need of some rest and relaxation, she decides to take an excursion to the West Indies, where the weather is warm and the ocean peaceful. Unfortunately, her holiday becomes a working vacation when the supposedly healthy Major Palgrave turns up dead. Myriad suspects and an abundance of bodies appear after Palgrave's and Miss Marple has her work cut out for her. The Kendalls, the young couple who own the hotel, are a little too blasé about the whole affair; Mr. Rafael, who is only intent on investing in real estate, appears a tad miserly and mean. A few scientists, a doctor, a maid, and even the maid's mother all prove to be suspects, as well. Filmed on location in the West Indies, this classic Agatha Christie is not only suspenseful, but witty and charming, just like Miss Marple. --Samantha Allen Storey ... Read more

Reviews (4)

fine entry in the series
Joan Hickson stars as Agatha Christie's super-sleuth Miss Marple in the wonderful A CARIBBEAN MYSTERY. Miss Marple has been sent to Barbados by her nephew due to ill-health. But soon Jane finds more adventure and suspense than in her little English village of St Mary Mead. Miss Marple finds that life among the idle-rich, even in a paradise in the West Indies, isn't all it's cracked up to be - in fact, nothing ever seems to happen. Not until old Major Palgrave is found dead at the Golden Palm Hotel. The thought of a good mystery and a death in strange circumstances proves irresistable, but even Miss Marple may have difficulty pointing the local police in the right direction. She know's she's the only one who can crack the case. With Sophie Ward (RETURN TO OZ, YOUNG SHERLOCK HOLMES), Adrian Lukis (PRIDE AND PREJUDICE), Donald Pleasance, T.P. McKenna and Frank Middlemass as Major Palgrave.

The best
Out of all the adaptations of Joan hickson miss Marples this is the best.Highly recomended.

Introducing Jason Rafiel
This story introduces you to Jason Rafiel who will turn up again in "Agatha Christie's Miss Marple, V. 7: Nemesis (1986) ASIN: 6303404855.

This was much better than the 1983 version with Helen Hayes. This version is fuller and closer to the book and closer to Jane Marple's character.

I t was an intriguing touch to have the dead person's spirit supposed to come back after nine days to get revenge.

You will want to view this movie several times to see how the plot could have gone. Later this movie will be like a friend and just need watching again.

Excellent Mystery set in the Carribean
What could be better, Donald Plesence and Joan Hickson matched up in a movie together. Both play their parts to perfection. As do the others. This movie was ten times better than the older Carribean mystery with Helen Hayes. Better Actors , more believable and more suspenseful. Buy it, it is one of the best of Agatha Christie. ... Read more

Reviews (109)

Emotionaly brutal but excellent film.
Midnight Express is the true story of Billy Hayes who is thrown into a turkish prison for trying to smuggle hash out of the country.During the five years he spends in the prison,he suffers emotional,physical and mental torment.The prison is run by a brutal guard played by Paul Smith who seems to have a good time beating the prisoners which makes him a symbol of cruelty.Among with Brad Davis' great performance as Billy Hayes is John Hurt and Randy Quaid who both deliver really great performances as well.Brad Davis I think was overlooked by the academy which surprised me because he displayed his character with so much emotion that you had to feel sorry not just for his character but also for him.Midnight Express is the kind of prison film that makes other prison films too hard to compare.The Shawshank Redemption was also a film I enjoyed but wasn't as gut wrenching or emotional as this film.Midnight Express is in my opinion a film that is too horrifying to ignore which means that this film should not be ignored.It shouldn't be watched for entertainment value.That isn't why this film was made.Midnight Express I highly recommend.

Alan Parker's masterpiece
This is an absorbing and arresting film. Since the first minute of the opening sequence , the dramatic mood will live in our heart .
The inner tension in the airport is perfectly made , the fear , the insane atmosphere in the turkish jails , the language obstacle , the hopeless , the dramatic sense when the Turkish Court gives the veredict in the middle of a bitter political conflict are a true landmark in its style.
John Hurt (Max) plays an unforgettable role as the addict friend of Billy Hayes (Brad Davis) and his performance is only overcome for The elephant man two years after this film.
Magnificent script and extraordinary performances.
A winner.

Lighten Up Folks, Its Only A Movie
I have read some of the reviews posted here for this movie and they almost laughable. People need to lighten up a bit and stop being so goddam politically correct. This true life story is a Hollywood dramatization folks. Its purpose is to entertain. And I for one am not ashamed to say that I would watch this movie just to look at Brad Davis in the buff. Nuff Said.

Very current film
Some might think that this 1978 film is out of date. In fact,
not only is it a riveting film, but it is very current. On page A21 of the February 25, 2004 Washington Post in a story entitled "Turkey's Human Rights Record Is Taken to Task," reporter Nora Boustany writes of hearings on Capitol Hill before the US Congressional Human Rights Caucus that while Turkey now has laws forbidding torture, these laws are not enforced; torture continues in Turkey. Hence, everyone who cares about human rights should buy this film.

Come on, now!
This is one of the best prison films alongside "Papillion," "Death and the Maiden," and "Kiss of the Spider Woman."

It's purpose is to juxtapose foolish freedom with insane ancient cultures. The result is tragic, terrifying, and almost beyond comprehension in it's cruelty. And if you don't believe prison life in Muslim countries isn't still like this, you must be crazy! (Read "Not Without My Daughter;" the film doesn't even begin to touch on the horrors she survived in Iran).

One cool note: you can see the REAL Billy Hayes acting in a play about prison life filmed at San Quentin!! It's called, "The Cage" and it's only available on half(dot)com. Hard to believe that he'd want to recreate the "sadism of prison guards and the inmates' frenzied cruelty to each other" (Variety) only 15 years after escaping the Turkish prison! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

More famous as a controversy than a movie, The Moon Is Blue (1953) marked a turning point in the history of frankness in American film. Because producer-director Otto Preminger owned the rights to the hit Broadway play, he stubbornly refused to change the racy dialogue in the script. The offending words included such end-of-western-civilization-as-we-know-it terms as "virgin" and "pregnant." The Production Code withheld its seal, the Catholic Legion of Decency condemned it, and the picture made a bundle. Its subject matter is antiquated now, but the movie remains a cute and well-played example of pre-Neil Simon stage comedy. William Holden and the virgin Maggie McNamara meet atop the Empire State Building, later joining middle-aged roue David Niven for martinis and steaks in Holden's hep bachelor bad. Preminger's gift wasn't necessarily for comedy, but he steers things with his usual calm style, and lets Niven make the most of a tailor-made role. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (8)

classic sleeper
One of my all time favorites. You forget that it was made in 1953. Very frank dialogue for an early 50's movie. Great acting with many laughs and a little suspense. CAN THEY MAKE IT INTO A DVD PLEASE!!

Maggie McNamara
This movie shows a promising actress Maggie McNamara. She got nominated for best actress and remains a mark as the only person in that category whose career didn't go anywhere. "The Moon is Blue" was put down by the Catholic Legion of Decency because it said the word virgin. Frankly screwball comedies of the 40's were just as suggestive so I don't get the deal.
The connection between this movie destroyed Maggie, right at her career's beginning. It's a shame because Maggie is very cute in this. Afterwards she went on to star in the boring, "Three Coins in the Fountain" and the cheesy "Cardinal." Her stint in Hollywood was then done and she worked as a secretary for the rest of her life. While the movie comes across as stagey, it's worth seeing it just for her.

A CLASSIC LOVE STORY!!
This is a good romantic comedy which features on two characters who meet on top of the empire state building and end up falling in love during the coarse of the night. This film is a bit talkative because it was adapted from the stage play, but it's funny, warm, and romantic because of William Holden, David Niven, and Maggie McNamara.
3 ACADEMY AWARD NOMINATIONS-[1953]
BEST ACTRESS-MAGGIE McNAMARA
Best Film Editing
Best Song-"The moon is blue"

A ONCE CONTROVERSIAL FILM.
A fairly amusing sex farce from nearly half a century ago features the unusual, now-forgotton (and ultimately tragic -- a suicide victim) Maggie McNamara, who is courted, swooned and wooed by both David Niven and Bill Holden. David Niven's career at the time this film was made was in serious jeopardy; he had a contract break-up with the legendary Samuel Goldwyn which was anything but cordial and his pictures prior to this weren't much of any consequence (a good example is a silly, inane "comedy" entitled THE LADY SAYS NO, 1951). The notoriously tyrannical Otto Preminger suddenly came to Niven's rescue ( it was rather like being snatched from drowning by King Kong!). The director was noted for enjoying the experience of striking terror into the hearts of his cast members and technicians alike. Niven emerged unscathed, however, and was ultimately deeply grateful to Preminger for casting him as the middle aged playboy. Niven does a commendable job and there is a certain chemistry between the three leads. THE MOON IS BLUE outraged many in its day by using such words as "virgin" and "seduce". In light of what's allowed in films today, this is hilarious. In 1953, however, it was condemned by the Catholic Church and banned by the censor. Aided by distributors, United Artists and director Otto Preminger defied the ban and released the film -- the first time the American censor had been so defied.

The film about the virgin that was denied a Code seal
Well, if you watched the episode of "M*A*S*H" where the gang tries to get to watch "The Moon Is Blue," you know that this infamous 1953 film directed by Otto Preminger is a moral tale of Patty O'Neill (Maggie McNamara), a young lady who intends to be a virgin when she gets married. Patty fends off guys by asking them if they would try to seduce her or if they have mistresses. Censorship boards went crazy because the film talked about virginity and the Motion Picture Production Code denied the film a Code seal. The result, since there was nothing truly objectionable in the film, all that really happened was Preminger's film got a million dollars worth of free publicity. William Holden as Donald Gresham and David Niven as David Slater who both joust with Patty. Just to make things a bit more interesting, Cynthia Slater (Dawn Addams), is not only the daughter of the aforementioned David, but is ticked at Donald because he was too much of a gentleman on their last date. Based on F. Hugh Herbert's play, today the film is an interesting curiosity and you have to laugh at the idea of people actually being upset by this film. "The Moon Is Blue" received three Oscar nominations, including a Best Actress nod for Maggie McNamara. Niven does a nice job with his role of the aging wolf on the prowl, but Holden seems quite uncomfortable as the unsuccessful seducer. ... Read more

Amazon.com

For truly clever dialogue and a smartly structured plot, you can't go wrong with Oscar Wilde. Wilde's play An Ideal Husband is not his best known, but this film adaptation has all the wit you could ask for and a cast with the chops to deliver it: Cate Blanchett (Elizabeth, Oscar and Lucinda), Julianne Moore (Short Cuts, Boogie Nights), Minnie Driver (Grosse Pointe Blank, Big Night), Jeremy Northam (The Winslow Boy, Emma), and especially Rupert Everett (My Best Friend's Wedding, A Midsummer Night's Dream), who tosses off perfect epigrams with unflappable aplomb. The plot hinges on Northam, a member of Parliament (the British governing body, not the funk band) with a skeleton in his closet who is blackmailed into a shady business deal by a lady of mystery (Moore), who turns out to be a loathed school chum of the parliamentarian's wife (Blanchett). Everything is resolved happily, but not until after some devious twists of fate, several mistaken identities, lots of comic banter, and much social skewering. Wilde, who came to ruin when his homosexuality was brought to light, has a sharp eye for hypocrisy and the artificial poses demanded by society--but political commentary never gets in the way of a smart laugh. Visually sumptuous and briskly paced, An Ideal Husband will satisfy anyone looking for social satire or romantic comedy.--Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (80)

That's Amore!!
I love LOVE this movie! I am sure I have seen it more than eight times since it's initial release...So, beware of it's addictive qualities! This is one of those movies I tell people at the local video store about. As soon as I spot a couple looking for a great flick, I ask if they have seen "An Ideal Husband". It's that good.

Minnie Driver, Cate Blanchett, Julianne Moore, and my new favorite guy, Rupert Everett are the main players in this scrumptious, scandalous tale set in London. It's a period film filled with fabulous homes and costumes.

This movie has everything...love, scandal, letter-chasing, intrigue, politics, affairs, and of course lies. Everybody is involved in gossip. Who was with who?, Who did what?...and the fabulous threads of lies and manipualtion that trickle through the ever twisting and changing plot.

The acting and cast are fabulous. I couldn't have asked for better. Julianne Moore plays a bewitching role as the scandalous visitor from Vienna who loves to start trouble.
The man caught in the middle of the whole mess is Aurthur (Everett), basically the main character that stands amidst of all tradgedies and intrigue that revolve around him and his friends and lovers. He keeps himself busy surrounded by so many catastrophies of the heart, while searching his own.

This movie is a must-own. Charming and fun, it's like a great game of Clue. Who did What, Where, and with Whom.

Charming film, beautifully filmed
The publicity for this film led me to expect quite a different story -- one where Rupert Everett is chased by women intent on marriage. Ho-hum. The film is nothing like it. Jeremy Northam is a man who in youth committed an error of judgement, on which his success and fortune is now based. He is being called to task by Julianne Moore, who does a superb job as the self-serving blackmailer. Cate Blanchette as Northam's wife is forced to choose between her hard-nosed ethics and her love (and she is deeply in love with her husband, he with her, in the sort of charming relationship one rarely sees in a Hollywood production). Then Everett hovers about, a lazy, highly opinionated, and amusingly narcissistic man who finds himself the hero and in love, all in the course of just a few days of his life. A big about-face for a man who seemed so strongly focused on his playboyish, trivial but apparently satisfying lifestyle. Minnie Driver is his love interest, although their whole relationship develops from bickering, to revelation, to romance, right before our eyes. All five main characters are well balanced throughout the film, and all actors play their roles exceedingly well. The men are human, not superheros; the women are tough and intelligent. Emotions play along healthily in each scene, as the story progresses to the will-he, won't-he scene, then beyond to the repercussions and finally the ending, when everyone good-humoredly discovers and accepts that they are all only human. Lovely, entertaining film.

"IT'S NOT THE PERFECT, BUT THE IMPERFECT WHO NEED LOVE"
Don't let the aristocratic costumes deceive you, this is not a story of stifling high-teas consumed in opulent drawing rooms! It's a deliriously enjoyable comedy with colorful dashes of shady plots and mischievous romances.

While a good deal of the wickedly whimsical adaptation of Oscar Wilde's play derives from antics that're suited to stage farces -- switched letters, mistaken identities, farcical blackmailing & ensuing intrigue -- it is ultimately a very, very witty and fast-paced comedy that you'll see more than once, quite likely back to back.

Rupert Everett is the heart and soul of the film, the screen positively crackles when he is on screen delivering his spate of one-liners. Julianne Moore is equally vibrant, if only in a more ascerbic skin. Cate Blanchett, Minnie Driver and Jeremy Northam round out the splendid cast that'll have you hooked.

Despite its maniacal exterior, the movie couches a virtuous message and a beautiful heart. An ingenious gem that your collection is incomplete without.

A Question of Nudity
"An Ideal Husband" is a wonderful drawing room farce. Nodbody does them better than Oscar Wilde and this is a great interpretation of Wilde's play. However, I've read over a hundred reviews here and elsewhere and most -- if not all -- of the reviewers appear to have 'missed the boat.'

That is, in the opening scene at Lord Goring's (Rupert Everett - who is wonderfully cast, by the way) bedroom, where a woman nude is 'glimpsed' sneaking away from the bed -- and the butler's eyes. I thought it was simply an establishing scene for Lord Goring's character (or lack of). HA! Did I drop the ball...

Instead my wife pointed out (after the movie) that the woman was not the prostitute most reviews identified but GERTRUDE. I was shocked and bet otherwise; then I played the DVD (using the pause function to pay it second by second) several times. Yes, it was Gertrude; the wavy hair is the give away since the distant figure is otherwise out of focus!!! I lost the best, but gained a whole new appreciation of the film.

With this in mind, watch "An Ideal Husband" again and everything is different! Gertrude's smug attitude and moral indignation take on an entirely new flavor; the ending, where her husband glosses over the 'revelation' about note suddenly makes sense.

It's a new film. I love it when a director can make a film work on so many levels. Bravo!!!

"To love oneself is the beginning of a lifelong romance."
AN IDEAL HUSBAND, from Oscar Wilde's sparkling and witty play of the same name, was adapted for the screen by Oliver Parker, the same man who adapted Wilde's THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST. While I enjoyed THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST, I think Parker did a much better job with AN IDEAL HUSBAND since the plot is more convoluted, the pacing faster and the characterization deeper.

AN IDEAL HUSBAND centers around two men, one all ready a husband, the other still looking (or being looked at). Sir Robert Chiltern (Jeremy Northam) appears to be the perfect husband, not only to his wife, Lady Gertrude (Cate Blanchett), but also to others in the high society circles in which Lord and Lady Chiltern move. Sir Robert is wealthy, respected and he is a fast-rising politician who hopes to gain a seat in Parliament when the next election rolls around. To that end, he is planning to address the House regarding a shady canal project in Argentina. Of course, being the fine, upstanding citizen that Robert is, he plans on condemning the project.

Enter Mrs. Laura Cheveley (Julianne Moore). Laura has her own reasons why she both wants and needs Parliament to approve the canal project and she is sure she has the means of forcing Sir Robert to comply with her wishes. As perfect, and perfectly impeccable, as Sir Robert looks, he does have a skeleton in his closet. His wealth wasn't obtained honorably and Laura has the proof in the form of a letter. Laura, a devious and sly woman who usually gets what she wants, certainly isn't above blackmail and she lets Sir Robert know it.

Robert turns to his best friend, Lord Arthur Goring (Rupert Everett), a man who can be charming and witty and kind, but more often than not, is drunk and arrogant and lazy. If anyone can charm that letter away from Laura, it's Arthur. This might sound rather like drama or even (horrors) melodrama, but this is Oscar Wilde...it's most definitely comedy, but comedy with plenty of complications. Some of the most hilarious moments occur when Sir Arthur is speaking to his manservant, Phipps (Peter Vaughan).

While Gertrude considers Robert an ideal husband, Laura begins to think that Arthur definitely has the makings of one. Arthur, though, has other ideas and his interests, and his heart, lie with Robert's sister, Mabel (Minnie Driver). While Arthur is trying to figure out if and how he would make an ideal husband for Mabel, his own father, the Earl of Caversham (John Wood) keeps telling him to "get on with it" and "do something with his life,"i.e., get married.

To his great credit, Oliver Parker has managed to translate almost all of Wilde's best witticisms from the play into his screenplay, and he's used a very light touch, something comedy like this needs. A film needs more than sparkling witticisms to keep it afloat, however, but this one, unlike THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST, definitely has it all, though like THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST, the dialogue is the standout. In fact, it's so sparkling and always fresh that it makes one wonder just how Wilde managed it.

Oliver Parker has assembled a perfect cast for AN IDEAL HUSBAND. The very underrated Rupert Everett is wonderful as he discovers just who and what he is, and Jeremy Northam is just as good as a man who must learn to live with the consequences of his actions. Julianne Moore, though not quite convincing as an upper crust Englishwoman, is so sly and devious that it didn't matter that her accent or mannerisms were a bit more American than British. Cate Blanchett is perfect in her role and seemed very comfortable with it and Minnie Driver is simply wonderful. She says volumes with her facial expressions alone. She and Everett were my favorites in this film.

The costumes and sets were gorgeous without being overdone and the cinematography was perfect.

AN IDEAL HUSBAND is a perfect period piece and it's too bad that it's been all but eclipsed by mindless action/adventure films and thrillers. Would be filmmakers and actors, as well as writers, can learn a lot with films like AN IDEAL HUSBAND.

AN IDEAL HUSBAND is one of my favorite DVDs and I think any fan of Oscar Wilde, period pieces or romantic comedies, once they see this film, is going to have to own it, just as I did. I can recommend it without hesitation or reservation of any kind. ... Read more

Reviews (79)

Definitely worth seeing. Worth owning? Questionable.
Dustin Hoffman is a living legend. You can read any of the other excellent reviews here to get a good idea of what the movie is about, so instead I'm going to give you 'the truth as I see it' about why you should see this movie.
Obviously, Dustin Hoffman plays the role of David wonderfully. Susan George does a good job, although it would have been nice for this intended town hottie to have a pretty smile along with her pretty physique. But I guess that's the catch 22 in selecting a British cast, especially from that day and age.
The controversial rape scene in this movie, is almost paralyzingly disturbing. (Yes, paralyzingly...I don't care if it's not a word.) It's disgusting really. It was also very confusing for me, because of the fact that she was saying no, but the viewer actually does get the impression that she doesn't mean no. She kisses her 'rapist' and pulls him closer, and she invites him in in the first place, and then tells him not to leave. A very awkward occurrence. When the second guy rapes her, we understand clearly that she does not want him, but still she seems to have some strange bond with the first guy (apparently and ex-boyfriend or something) as they have a sort of strangely mutually understanding chemistry throughout the movie. This was one of the most disturbing scenes in any movie I've seen recently. It doesn't help that all the while we get up close facial expressions from her, showing a sense of horror and disgust, but at the same time thrilling satisfaction.
Basically, she gives in very easily when there is any sense of punishment as a consequence of resistance. She is trapped in a kind of school-girl mentality, playing childish pranks and teasing the men by showing her breasts and underwear to them. I'm guessing this is related to the way she was treated when she was that age. David, on the other hand, is a controlled, maturing man, trying to focus on his work. He doesn't give in so easily, and although some have said that he plays the role of mouse time and time again until he finally emerges as a 'real man' in the end of the movie, I personally feel that he is not the timid guy everyone thinks him to be, but rather that circumstance does not allow him to show his manliness (for example, when his wife brings in the bowl of milk with the beers). He is more confused than anything because he doesn't believe there is any real reason to confront the hooligans, until the execution of Kitty.
Anyway, like a lot of other people I was very confused by the ending. The implications of David defending his house, his wife, his honor, and his sense of manhood by protecting a man that actually was guilty of murder (albeit accidental), raise a whole other topic of discussion.
The violence, with the exception of the rape scene, is pretty tame according to today's standards, but the psychological horror is in full throttle here. This is a thinker's horror/suspense (not horror in the conventional sense of the word) movie.
The laughter of the crazy hooligan was really annoying to me. I'm sure many people will disagree with my views on the movie, but I think it's important to look at the movie for what it IS, as well as what it means.
I'm definitely glad to have seen this movie, and would highly recommend it, but I don't believe I'll be adding it to my collection. I might see it again one day, but movies this disturbing and confusing aren't usually on my list of favorite flicks to cuddle up to late at night.

PEACENIK HOFFMAN GOES BONKERS
In 1971 Sam Peckinpah's controversial STRAW DOGS was censored by the British Board of Film Classification. The cuts made it even more provocative than Peckinpah intended. Consequently, Straw Dogs was labeled by the media as an obscene, misogynistic piece of filmmaking. Regarding the uncut American version, even the esteemed Pauline Kael said it's "the first American film that is a fascist work of art."

"Straw Dogs" stands as one of Peckinpah's best, and a reminder of the ongoing struggle between an artist's freedom and suppression by the powers that be. But more than that, it's a brilliant and harrowing exploration of man's primitive animal nature and its implied, inherent violence.

The transfer's clean and sharp. Extras include an 80 minute look at Peckinpah's films and a new interview with Susan George, who talks about her daring, controversial performance of a woman who for a few brief moments seemed to enjoy being raped.

What does "Straw Dogs" mean? Is it from the saying: Behind every coward's eyes burn straw dogs? If so, what does that mean? What are "straw dogs"?

Another thing. Recently (of this writingt) Dustin Hoffman has made a point of speaking out about certain military operations to free brutalized, oppressed people. Personally, I'd rather not know what an actor thinks and feels about politics. However, in "Straw Dogs" Hoffman shows what it takes to fight evil aggression. His screen performance will outlive his words.

Recommended.

HORRIBLE!!!
I agree with another reviewer in that you'll either love this or hate it. But I think most people will hate it. (Note: I have nothing against violence in films, and I liked the Kill Bill movies.) The main problem here is that almost every character in this film is utterly unlikable, and terrible things happen to the two characters who are likeable. But even that wouldn't be so bad, if the film had a message.

Dustin Hoffman's character is a whiney, wimpy, and mean spirited person who, when he finally decides to act, he does so for all of the wrong reasons & defends the wrong person. I end up hating him MORE than the bad guys.
I rank this as the most unwatchable movie I have ever seen, even below "Short Cuts".
However, if you liked "Short Cuts", you'd probably like this, and vice versa.

A Remarkable Film Which Stands the Test of Time.
This is a really interesting film on many levels. It's not perfect; but, few works of modern art are. Nevertheless, this work stands the test of time. Firstly, one of the most remarkable things about this film is the absolutely Hitchcockian editing, which is remotely primitivistic, but strangely compelling: the editing engenders a peculiar ambience to the film right from the beginning brawl scene in the pub. Then, from the denoument sequence--which begins with the equally primitive church function and runs through to the climax and epilogue--the editing is nothing less than fine art. Secondly, the sets of the pub and the farm house are very convincing and interesting in their own right: there's plenty to look at. Also, the outdoor scenes with the ocean in background and the Cornish village all have the verisimilitude of realism. Thirdly, the soundtrack is not at all bad. Fourthly, the acting is good: of course, Hoffman is nothing less than brilliant; Peter Vaughn is excellent as the burly boorish Englishman; and Susan George isn't bad: she begins weak, but by the middle of the film she's quite okay, and from the denoument mentioned above, she's fine. Also, David Warner as the half-witted cripple is excellent--though not given notice in the credits. Lastly, the story is fairly well formed and possibly plausible--though that's no recommendation for fiction! It is possible in realistic or naturalistic fiction that a university professor might get a grant and take a semester or even a year off to do research; and this professor might want to go to some remote European destination where his wife has ancestral property by the sea, to get away from it all to do his thought-work; and it is possible that this professor might have married the woman out of sexual attraction, fully knowing that she had much less education than himself and was his intellectual inferior. But the plot has a quasi-classical form of characters with flawed personality traits; tension and contentious issues; incident follows upon incident resulting in a shattering climax, followed by an ambivalent coda. What more can one say?

Another amazing masculine character study by Peckinpah.
It's not at all hard to see the connection between Peckinpah's two greatest movies: Straw Dogs and The Wild Bunch. Both are studies of what it means to be a man, a look at the masculine and sometimes violent male nature. Basically, Straw Dogs is about an extremely timid American intellectual who decides to escape the Vietnam-fueled violence of the USA by moving into the small English town where his wife was raised. However, the man soon realizes that violence is pretty much omnipresent, when the men he hires to fix up his new home begin pushing him and his wife around. I won't give away the ending, but if you know Peckinpah you can probably guess.

of course, most people will probably want to see the movie for its infamous rape scene (which got the film banned in the UK, where it was filmed). Not only is the rape graphic, but the victim actually appears to enjoy it; at least at first. Here I must disagree with the lengthy rant of a prior reviewer when I say that the rape scene is not simply an exercise in mysoginy, but rather helps to show just how immasculinated the main character has become. Throughout the first half of the movie we see his wife slowly flirting with the contractors (at one point even letting them see her topless). This suggests quite obviously that she has become so disgruntled with her husbands lack of backbone that she is actively seducing the very masculine contractors, and the fact that she enjoys the rape is simply the logical extreme of her desire to have a truly "manly" partner. Of course, those who've seen the movie know that eventually she's punished for her covetry of man's aggressive nature.

Overall, I highly recommend this movie. In fact, I'd suggest you get it ASAP, since the Criterion version has been out of print for months now and won't likely be available for much longer. You need a strong stomach to watch it, certainly, and the pace is very deliberate, but those who have patience and put effort into understanding the meaning of the film will be very well rewarded. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

What More Can You Want?
Very good film with Alan Ladd as the head of his O.S.S. team dropped into Germany. Each one the team members do there part and each one pays dearly. The ending is a shocking twist! Buy This Film!

Excellent WWII action/drama