Reviews (2)

great career starter
I remember watching this in high school. Every character stood out on their own. Donna Dixon was my favorite-playing Sonny Lumet-beautiful and brainy. Wendie Jo Sperber was also wonderful. It She had the best lines. I always liked to see Hanks and Scolari get into the women's clothing before they got caught. Every episode is very funny and it's nice to seethem again!

You can't go wrong!
I have been a Bosom Buddies fan since the show came out. Why it still doesn't air is beyond me. This and all the other video's are must haves. When ever I need a smile - these are the tapes that do it! ... Read more

Reviews (19)

Nothing quite like four crazies on the streets of New York!
This movie is hilarious. Michael Keaton, Peter Boyle, and Christopher Lloyd all give career comedy perfomances. The whole idea of four totally crazy psychiatric patients roaming the streets of New York looking for their doctor is great. Michael Keaton is perfect as the leader of the group who's view of reality is way off. Peter Boyle is great as the former executive Jesus Christ messiah. Christopher Lloyd's character (the patient who thinks he's a doctor) adds the perfect spice to the movie to make a great two hour film. I can't wait until the DVD comes out.

One of the funniest movies ever made
A side-splitting comedy about four mental patients: Michael Keaton as a habitual liar who has violent tendencies, Christopher Lloyd as an obsessive-compulsive who thinks he runs the hospital, Peter Boyle as a former advertising executive with a messiah complex who likes to take his clothes off, and Stephen Furst as catatonic couch potato. Against the wishes of the hospital administration, their compassionate doctor takes the four patients to New York City to watch a major league baseball game. When the van reaches the city, the doctor has to exit the van - with patients still inside - only to witness a murder committed by two corrupt cops. The doctor is attacked by the cops, leaving him hospitalized and unable to help his patients. The patients then find themselves framed for the murder. Now the patients have to not only act "sane" to prove their innocence, they also have to save the life of their doctor who is still a target of the two cops.

What makes this movie work is the relationship of the patients. It is so much fun watching Keaton, Lloyd, and Boyle bicker all the time about the littlest things. Boyle has a really funny scene in which he leaves the van while Lloyd tries to block him. Boyle then muscles his way past Lloyd, tells him that He shall have no false gods before Him, and finally he tells Lloyd to get out his way before calling him a seven-letter word. There might only be so much you can do with a catatonic character, but Furst is quite memorable. Even though the doctor must have the patience of a saint when dealing with them, he probably has a harder time suppressing a laugh. Quite simply, this is a movie that gets better every time you watch it.

the second best movie about schizos ever!
this movie is awesome,but borrowed heavily from one flew over the cuckoos nest.4 mental patients are taken on an outing and thier doc gets mugeed.they wander about new york for the next few days.the 4 are:michael keaton with a low frustration tolerance-he beats people up a lot over anything,2-the crazy doc from back to the future as guy who is convinced hes a dr.3-a guy who thinks hes jesus christ and finaly,a chubby little man who only communicates in baseball terminology.children wont understand this but its pretty harmless.it is the second best movie starring mental patients ive ever seen.it is sad in one spot but it goes past quickly.keatons girlfriend is not all that sexy.but i guess you cant be picky when youre an escaped schizo.the guy who acts like a dr is obnoxious with his by the book attitude.michael keaton however does an excellent job in this one.its his best performance.there is a mess up in the film.at the hospital,the real dr has aq cast on a foot of his.later yet,he is helped out of a van with the cast on the other foot.a great film.

What would happen if four insane men were loose in NYC?
This story is a creative, hilarious story about 4 insane men loose in NYC, trying to solve a crime. They find that they can behave in a relitively sane manner and they learn how to work as a group. It is extremely funny. A must see!

"Ah, It's Great To Be Young And Insane" - Michael Keaton
The Dream Team is just another one of those killer comedies that no one went to see when it was originally released, but has now found a nice following on home video. I actually saw the film in theaters and thought it was hands down the funniest movie of the year!

First you have a great comedy ensemble who also can play drama just as effectively. Michael Keaton is Billy Caufield ("I'm an escaped mental patient with a history of violence"), Christopher Lloyd is Henry Sikorsky, an overly organized person ("Why don't we bring this up in group? Or maybe we should just hug?"), Peter Boyle is Jack McDermott who has a Messiah complex ("Arise and walk, my son"), & Stephen Furst is Albert Ianuzzi, who only speaks in TV ads and baseball jargon ("Nobody doesn't like Sara Lee").

If you don't already know by now, these guys are four mental patients, whose doctor, played by Dennis Boutsikaris ("One more afternoon in the rec room and I'm gonna have to go on Thorazine myself"), decides to take them to a baseball game in New York. Only things don't go as planned, as the good doctor ends up getting knocked unconscious and whisked away to a hospital, leaving his patients all alone on the streets of New York City. And the comedy ensues! As the gang tries to figure out a way to find their doctor, they end up finding "themselves" in the process. Add Lorraine Bracco (of "Goodfellas" and "The Sopranos" fame) as Keaton's girlfriend ("So am I walking home with an escaped mental patient or what?") and you know you're set to have a good time.

What makes the film memorable is that it has the perfect blend of laugh outloud humor ("We're a special combat unit with the United States Marine Corps and we've been tracking some Libyan terrorists. In fact I think we've got 'em trailed to a bagel shop around the corner.") combined with some tender dramatic moments, that work together seamlessly.

The DVD is your typical standard DVD. No extras, other than the original theatrical trailer. Happily the film is presented in Anamorphic Widescreen in its original aspect ratio of 1.85:1, which looks pretty good. A little dark in some spots, but not too much to complain about.

So if you're looking for a comedy that's full of great laughs as well as a good story with some dramatic moments thrown in for good measure, pick up The Dream Team today. It's the sanest choice to make!

The Dream Team - a very funny movie.

Henry - "We're directly under the Hudson River now".

Billy - "Yeah. You guys see those tiles up there, all those individual tiles? Doc, isn't true that if even one of those tiles were to come loose, like millions and millions of gallons of water would come pouring down on us and crush us like tiny little bugs? (pauses) Is that a leak up there? You see those tiles? They're leakin' water! Oh, my God!"

Jack - "I will hold back the waters".

Billy - "Thanks, Jack". ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Liz and Dick (a.k.a. Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton) almost seemed to be importing the psychodramas of their marriage into this 1967 film (of course, the same was true of every film they made together). Adapted from Shakespeare's play and directed by Franco Zeffirelli (Romeo and Juliet) with his usual eye for sumptuousness, this version of Taming features a particularly boisterous, bawdy, fun performance by its stars. Composer Nino Rota--best known for scoring several of Fellini's best-known works--received a National Board of Reviews award for his vivid soundtrack. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (31)

This Shrew Remains Untamed
It's very difficult to be very critical of such a roisterous, good-natured version of Shakespeare's rowdiest play, and in truth one has to admit that this is probably the first of the truly modern Shakespeare films. There are some real assets here -- Zefferelli's eye has never lighted on a landscape more beautiful, more seductive, and Nina Rota's score fits beautifully.

But Shakespeare, even on film, stands or falls on the acting. This version -- with one exception -- is filled with one-note performances (they're very GOOD notes, but single notes nonetheless). Let's deal with the exception first -- Elizabeth Taylor is a delightful, intelligent Katarina. Her development is exactly what Shakespeare obviously intended, and if her early scenes are a bit uniformly shrill, the case could be made that that's what the Bard wrote. In general, she's an admirable Kate.

Burton, however, is something else entirely. Despite his acknowledged skill with Shakespeare (his Hamlet was glorious), he takes a monochromatic approach to Petruchio, with an annoyingly stagey laugh running through virtually every scene. By halfway through the film, you tend to want him to get off screen so you don't have to listen to that "manly" laugh any longer. Unfortunately, much of Kate's dialogue was cut (the assumption being, I suppose, that Taylor would have trouble with the language) while too much of Petruchio remains.

The secondary characters, if cut from different bolts of cloth, are all a single color. Michael Hordern bumbles his way through Baptista the same way he did in countless other movies. Michael York and Natasha Pyne as the young lovers are efficient and attractive, but not particularly engaging. The suitors are a group of living cliches. Even the humor is raggedly overdone to the same degree in almost every scene.

There are things to appreciate in this movie, and there's no better Shrew available, but I'd recommend finding another of Shakespeare's comedies until a better version of this rowdy comedy comes along -- someone's bound to get it right soon.

An excellent movie to add to your collection!
This Shakespearean story is about the daughter of Baptista (Michael Hordern), Katarina (Elizabeth Taylor). Very unlike her younger, quiet and gentle sister Bianca (Natasha Pyne), Katarina is strong-willed and has a nasty temper. Many men want to woo the lovely Bianca, including a young scholar (Michael York), but Baptista is adamant that nobody will be wed with his Bianca until the older daughter, the shrew Katarina, is married. And there is only one man who is willing to marry her for her dowry, Petruchio (Richard Burton). When Petruchio and Katarina are wed (forcefully against Katarina's will), Petruchio proceeds to make his 'dear Kate' into a good wife, but is anyone capable of 'taming the shrew'?
A remarkable tale by the talented and famed writer, William Shakespear. And with a delightful cast of Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, who can resist liking it? Elizabeth Taylor practically shines in her role! Especially at the part in the end where she makes her strong speech. I was as quiet and attentive as all the guests at the wedding.
For anyone who likes Shakespeare, who likes Elizabeth Taylor, or Richard Burton, or for that matter, want to watch a good movie, watch "The Taming of the Shrew".

More Fun Than A Barrel Full Of Burtons
A rollicking feast for the eye, ear, and funny bone, Franco Zeffirelli's "The Taming of The Shrew" is a tour de force for Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor. This pared down version of William Shakespeare's play is a fit morsel for anyone suffering from a fear of the Bard. It's fast pace keeps things going and with a cast of well-known British stars the whole thing is served up to delectable visual perfection.
Richard Burton blends his fabled abilities as a Shakespearian genius with his star power to give us a ribald and loveable Petruchio. This is one of his crowning moments on the screen and we are lucky to have this record of Mr. Burton at his very best.
Elizabeth Taylor is a comic revelation in this, one of her jewels in her acting crown. At the time the film came out, many scoffed at the idea of a mere movie star taking on the challenges of Shakespeare. Miss Taylor rises to the challenge and shines as a stunning, sexy and very funny Kate, in fact she more than rises to the occasion, she shows her command of the medium of film and her understanding of comic timing. The wedding scene is a pure Zeffirelli invention. If you didn't know better you would swear that it was part of the play, it is so well done in faux Shakespeare. Elizabeth shines in this scene. In the final fifteen minutes when she delivers the famous "Lord and Master" speech she is triumphant as she submits to her man. At the same time we know that she is the one who holds all the cards and in the off stage end will rule the roost from now on, all the while letting poor Petruchio think he is king.
The chemistry of Burton and Taylor is pure dynamite that explodes in riotous color across Zeffirelli's Renaissance canvas. Highly recommended viewing, especially if you are new to Shakespeare. It's more fun than a barrel full of Burtons!

The Bawdy Bard !
"The Taming of the Shrew" is a delightful romp, and very entertaining, even for people who do not normally go out of their way to watch Shakespeare. I can imagine serious scholars rolling their eyes at the liberties taken here, and the "star turns" by those two icons of 60s Hollywood, Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton.

However, for most of us who basically just want to be entertained--and I suspect with this play, that was the bard's intent--this version is good fun, robustly acted, and with lovely sets and costumes, a feast for the eye. One suspects that Ms. Taylor had a ball, hurling insults and various pieces of furniture at her real-life, on-again off-again, spouse. It looks like Mr. Burton had a good time too, although one frequently has the impression that this was a "well-lubricated" performance !

The supporting cast is fine, with a pleasant film debut for Michael York. As usual, Zeffirelli gives us a film that is gorgeous to look at--and I'm not just referring to Ms. Taylor !
The DVD has a certain haziness to it, but this may be the way that Zeffirelli intended the film to look.

"The Taming of the Shrew" today, of course, is about as "politically incorrect" as a piece of literature can be. While women will find this film amusing, the idea that the female spirit should be "reined in" like that of a wild horse, will cause some discomfort to feminist viewers, I'm sure.

Nevertheless, this film is highly entertaining, and might give younger viewers an idea as to what all the Taylor/Burton fuss was about. Recommended.

Burton & Taylor Are Pure, Fiery, & Feisty Sex Magic
No wonder Burton and Taylor married and divorced many times. The sexual tension between them in this film can be cut with a knife. Taylor plays Kate, the beautiful, fiery, feisty, mean-spirited, unloved eldest daughter of a wealthy man. She has a beautiful & kind sister who has a string of beaus, but... the eldest sister MUST marry first. Enter Burton as Petruchio. Loud, boisterous, dirty, obnoxious and SEXY! He plans to tame Kate, marry her and be a rich man on her dowry. The famous tongue in the tail speech is given on their first meeting, which sets the mood for lusty, sweaty, swarthy fighting. All the while, the sexual tension builds throughout. Many fights & torments ensue... with a beautiful ending that I will not spoil. If you like Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton or just the great and powerful Bard, himself, this is a great movie, directed by the great Franco Zefferelli that is a must see! "There is no other beast on Earth so horrible as man..." (Katharina, Taming Of The Shrew) ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

This 1980 film by director Robert Zemeckis gives no indication of things to come in his career(Contact,Forrest Gump), but it is representative of a certain cynical humor he shared early on with writer-partner Bob Gale. Kurt Russell and Jack Warden star in a sketchy comedy about competing used-car salesmen who resort to outrageous tactics to lure customers away from each other. The jokes, like the characters, are intentionally recycled, self-conscious comic fodder from a baby-boomer's lifetime (such as Gale's or Zemeckis's) of immersion in pop culture. That makes Used Cars more pastiche than original (the film's title itself suggests that), but as such it has some good, if vaguely familiar, laughs in it. Russell, particularly, is very funny as a practiced con man.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (58)

Hiliarous movie!
This movie is incredibly funny! It's a movie that pulls no punches, and will hit you square onto your funny bone. Kurt Russell's best role, starring as Rudy Russo, a used car salesmen who's ambition is to run for congress. Rudy works for a guy named Luke Fuchs, who owns the used car lot. His brother, Roy Fuchs, owns another lot directly across the highway. There's one thing Rudy must do before going to the Capitol Building - he first must protect the used car lot he works at before Roy claims the property, which would ultimately be used as part of a new new highway, which would increase business for Roy's lot. Roy will stop at nothing, even murdering his own brother! The script is amazing, the plot is original, and you'll finally know the schemes a used car salesman will employ to get you to buy a total klunker. Toby the dog is a riot! The dog, alone, had me rolling on the floor. Jack Warden puts on a great, great dual-performance as the rival brothers. 'Lenny' and 'Squiggy' from "Laverne & Shirley" star as friends of Rudy's. Al Lewis, the beloved 'Grandpa' from "The Munsters", stars as a mean, tobacco chewing judge. If you are into great movies, don't rent this one... *BUY IT* as part of your video collection!

Buckle up for a great ride down a cheap highway
"Used Cars" is the mother, or ugly stepmother, of great American bathroom humor. Long before the politically-correct craze of "Forrest Gump," director and co-writer Robert Zemeckis spit up "Used Cars" with a little help from executive producer Steven Speilberg. Not quite sweet enough for 'Gump-isms,' "Used Cars" explores the seedy world of the car lot and the stereotypical husslers running the joint. With gags that include strippers atop automobiles, reeling a customer across a busy city street with $20 hooked to a fishing line and a commercial jammed during a presidential address, "Used Cars" rips apart middle America to the tune of 50,000 laughs per second. Kurt Russell shines as the cheeseball in charge in one of his first post-Disney era films. Russell gets plenty of support from an ensemble cast that includes Gerrit Graham, Frank McRae, Joe Flaherty, Deborah Harmon and David L. Lander and Michael McKean (better known in the early 80s as Lennie and Squiggy). However, the real salesman is veteran actor Jack Warden who easily handles a dual role of twin brothers with competing car lots. Although not likely to appear on Zemeckis's or Speilberg's Oscar-winning resumes, "Used Cars" is hilarious, sharp and clever. I consider this vehicle one of the greatest comedic rides ever made. Trust me.

A gut busting classic!
BEHOLD! PERHAPS THE GREATEST COMEDY EVER MADE,USED CARS IS A MUST HAVE ON DVD.I DONT UNDERSTAND WHY THE BONUS FEATURES ARE NOT LISTED ABOVE SO HERE THEY GO:VINTAGE ADVERTISING GALLERY,AUDIO COMMENTARY:ZEMECKIS,GALE,RUSSELL, OUTTAKES,RADIO @ TV PROMOS,PRODUCTION NOTES AND A COOL THING FOR TRUE FANS OF RUSSELL,A TV AD FOR THE ACTUAL CAR LOT,WITH THE REAL OWNER INTRODUCING RUSSELL WHO THEN GIVES A SALES PITCH FOR A CAR ON THE LOT!

one of my favorite movies
"well i don't wanna look inside". "ohhh, just get in the motherf_ckin car". i lose it everytime that part comes on. this movie is such a riot. if you havent seen it, check it out.

Hilarious Movie - Great DVD
Where do I start? "Used Cars" is one of those "movies for guys who love movies". I have watched it who knows how many times, but I still get a kick out of certain scenes almost 25 years later. But there is an added bonus now if you buy the DVD, an hilarious commentary track with director Bob Zemeckis and actor Kurt Russell along with Bob Gale, who co-wrote the screenplay with Zemeckis.

The movie features Russell as Rudy Russo, a used car salesman with absolutely no morals (OK, most used car salesman don't have morals, but Russo takes it to another level). Jack Warden takes on dual roles as twin brothers trying to win the battle of used car lots at the same corner. Garret Graham plays Russell's sidekick Jeff who tries to help Rudy move the cars through illegal television commercials, which are absolutely hilarious. Other performances of note are those of Deborah Harmon, the daughter of one of the twins who wins Rudy's heart, Joe Flaherty from Second City as an unscrupulous lawyer and Michael McKean and David Lander (of Lenny and Squiggy fame) as techno wizards who assists Russell and Graham in their illegal activities.

All of the above are great, but the two who steal this movie are Frank McRae, who plays Jim the Mechanic and Toby the Beagle. McRae may say less than 200 words in the whole movie, but he may have the highest laughter to words ratio in movie history. Toby pulls off some funny stunts as well and is a memorable dog in movie history as well.

The movie is great and the DVD commentary of the three principal parties is hysterically funny. I think the three must have stopped at the local brewpub before the taping and slammed a few because they are giddy, but they let you in on on some interesting facts about the movie. There are also some outtakes as well as a real used car lot commercial that Russell shot in Arizona in Russo character.

Rent it or buy it, you won't be sorry. As Rudy Russo would say "Trust Me!" ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Shot back-to-back with Back to the Future II, this final chapter in the series is less hectic than that film and has the same sweet spirit of the first, albeit in a whole new setting. This time, Michael J. Fox's character ends up in the Old West of 1885, trying to prevent the death of mad scientist Christopher Lloyd at the hands of a gunman. Director Robert Zemeckis successfully blends exciting special effects with the traditions of a Western, and comes up with something original and fun. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (50)

The End Of A Brilliant Trilogy
This 1990 sequel was shot back to back with Back To The Future 2. Again, it was directed by Robert Zemeckis, and starred Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd. In this, the third and final chapter in the series, Marty McFly(Fox)is transported, thanks to the delorean, to the year 1885. The Old West. There, he tries to save Doc Brown(Lloyd)who is to be shot and killed by a mad gunmen. Is it any surprise that the guy who is supposed to kill Doc Brown is a relation to Biff?. No, it isn't. But there are a few other problems as well. On his trip to 1885, the delorean gets a hole punctured in the fuel tank. They are trapped there. The other, is that Doc has fallen in love with a sweet school marm(played by Mary Steenburgen). Doc is conflicted between leaving and saving his life, or staying and being with the woman he truly loves, and face the chance of getting shot. The two find a way to gain enough speed to get the delorean in motion and send them back to 1985. If you haven't seen it, I won't say how. This chapter in the brilliant series is a real fun, crowd pleaser. However, it lacks a lot of the punch the first two had. The effects and everything are mild and tame in this one. Not as exciting as the previous ones. Still, it is a wonderfully made and put together film. It is thoroughly entertaining and enjoyable. A very satisfying end to the whole saga. Fox and Lloyd are, as always, top notch. Thomas Wilson as Biff's ancestor is, well, he's still Biff. Would we want him any other way?. Probably not. Steenburgen does the best with what she's given. It's too bad that Lea Thompson, who had such an important and prominent role in the first and second, was relegated to almost 'cameo' status in this one. Oh well. In the end, a good romp for the whole family. Watch and enjoy!!!.

Weak way to end the trilogy but still lots of fun
Picking up right where the second movie leaves us Marty McFly learns that Doc has ended up in the old west of Hill Valley and now its up to Marty to get back to him to save his life. With the help of the Doc of 1955 Marty is able to get to the past and take on an old west thug nammed "Mad Dog" Tannen. Besides taking on that gun slinging criminal , Doc has fallen in love with a school teacher named Clara who he has to tell the truth to about where he is from. If things weren't bad enough, the DeLorean has no gas and now they have to figure out a way to get back to the future again by getting the time machine to 88mph. Its a true wild west romp and it ends the trillogy in a decent mannor.

This movie sorta slows down the pace a bit , and unfortunatly I think a bit to much, when you look back at the two previous to this installment. It lacks the fun and newness of the first and the action and story of the second and pretty much turns into a second rate western with Back to the Future characters in the roles, with them trying to relive the idea of a kid from the 80s trapped in another time period like in the first film, but it just doesn't work for a 1880's setting. Bottom line, while it is a good movie at points, the fun just isn't here as it wants to be.

While not as good as the other two it does have its moments. The fun of seeing Doc's lab at the begining in 1955 which has a lot of the hidden jokes from the first within. Some good western jokes like him taking the name "Clint Eastwood" and a very exciting climax with a huge locomotive pushing the DeLorean on traintracks, all make this movie still worth it and a good one to watch. Just don't expect the fun time traveling and characters that were in the other two. They stay trapped in the west for most of the movie and the amount of things that just seem to not make sense are very high in this movie. A lot of contradictions show up at various points to things that were well established in other movies (IE Not remembering who put Marty in the tacky clothing he winds up wearing). It is still a must have for anyone that is a fan of the Back to the Future series especialy as it just isn't complete without knowing how it ends or even a fan of a good movie to pass the time. Just don't expect to much as it doesn't deliever like the other two did with flying colors. It does end the trillogy on an up note and something that will make you smile and still want more. It will also make you wish they had more going on in 1985 at the end then the quick rushed ending they seem to come up with. A fitting end none the less, just could have done much more then they wind up doing and at times it may even leave you unfullfilled.

a fitting end to a wonderful trilogy
A film by Robert Zemeckis

"Back to the Future Part III" is the third and concluding chapter to the "Back to the Future" trilogy. For many years this was my least favorite film in the trilogy, but watching it again for the first time in years I have new appreciation for it. "Back to the Future Part III" is a satisfying and worthy end to this trilogy.

At the end of the second movie the DeLorean is struck by lightening (which we already know provides the necessary 1.21 gigawatts of energy required for time travel) and Doc Brown (Christopher Lloyd) is sent somewhen in time. Marty (Michael J Fox) is stuck in 1955 Hill Valley, but just after Doc and the DeLorean disappears a letter arrives for Marty. The letter is from Doc and was written in 1885. It was left as the post office with the instructions to be delivered on that particular date at that particular time. The letter says that Doc is alive and well in 1885 and under no circumstances is Marty to try to go back and rescue him.

Marty returns to the 1955 Doc Brown and enlists his help to recover the DeLorean which was left in a cave for 70 years. While recovering the DeLorean Marty discovers a tombstone with Doc's name on it...and the date that Doc died was only a week after he wrote the letter! The tombstone reads "shot in the back by Buford Tannen (Thomas F Wilson) over a matter of $80". There is no way Marty is going to let this happen, so he puts gas in the DeLorean and travels back in time to 1885 to help Doc. Of course, if it was that simple, we wouldn't have much of a movie, so complications evolve. The DeLorean ruptures its gas line, so that it leaks gas and can no longer be driven under its own power. Part of the movie is Doc and Marty trying to get the DeLorean back up to 88 miles per hour, but there is also the matter of Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen who still intends to shoot Doc over that matter of eighty dollars...or will history change and will Marty's name on that tombstone? This final installment also introduces a love interest for Doc Brown in the person of Clara Clayton (Mary Steenburgen), the new school teacher with an interest in science.

This movie is much more of a straight forward action/adventure/comedy (whatever) movie. The time travel serves to get Marty in the past and back to the present, but there isn't as much playing around with time travel as there is in the second movie. I still think this might be the weakest of the movies, but it is a very fun ride. While this movie will never reach the "classic" status that I feel the first one will, this is a very enjoyable movie and is a fitting end to the trilogy. Good stuff.

The Best of the Back to Future Films
This is the best of three in the Back to the Future trilogy. It was set in the past and in the west during the times of cowboys, indians and especially gun sliggers. I loved all of the reference to past events, and the humor it brought to the film. This is a film I can watch over and over again, unlike the first in the trilogy. Unlike the second film in the trilogy this film kept my attention, and wasn't so off-the-wall that it was unbelievable. This is one that will be in my home collection.

Love Story?
This is the final part of "Back to the Future" trilogy...now Marty has come back to the year 1955 where is the young Doc who has sent him just back to the year 1985. At first Doc can't believe his eyes when he sees Marty...but after seeing the letter which his older self sent, he understand. He's now...or was in 1885 in old west but then they found a history book where is told that he will be killed just after being a week there. Marty has to go and save Doc's life. He travels again with time machine and finds Doc...but then he must fight with Tannen, who is a bad boy...they have to get 88 mph somehow but how? Well, watch this film, the same actors again...but there's also a teacher Clara Clayton who has a great role in this story...a happy end or...? ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Robert Bolt's successful play was not considered a hot commercial property by Columbia Pictures--a period piece about a moral issue without a star, without even a love story. Perhaps that's why Columbia left director Fred Zinnemann alone to make A Man for All Seasons, as long as he stuck to a relatively small budget. The results took everyone by surprise, as the talky morality play became a box-office hit and collected the top Oscars for 1966. At the play's heart is the standoff between King Henry VIII (Robert Shaw, in young lion form) and Sir Thomas More (Paul Scofield, in an Oscar-winning performance). Henry wants More's official approval of divorce, but More's strict ethical and religious code will not let him waffle. More's rectitude is a source of exasperation to Cardinal Wolsey (Orson Welles in a cameo), who chides, "If you could just see facts flat on without that horrible moral squint." Zinnemann's approach is all simplicity, and indeed the somewhat prosaic staging doesn't create a great deal of cinematic excitement. But the language is worth savoring, and the ethical politics are debated with all the calm and majesty of an absorbing chess game. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (92)

A longtime favorite
One of the greatest English language films ever made about one of the greatest men who ever lived. St. Thomas More was a man of extraordinary conviction and through the years has proven to be a great inspiration to me, personally. When Sir Thomas is asked to endorse Henry VIII's petition for annulment from his marriage to Catherine of Aragon, he's fully aware of the consequences of his refusal. Nevertheless, he did what he knew and felt was right and he paid the ultimate price. A true martyr in every sense of the word and a film that makes the viewer question his own value system and sense of passion and integrity. Paul Scoffield's brilliant and profound characterization of Sir Thomas is still a wonder to behold. He imbues this larger than life person with such quiet dignity and grace that it belies the reality of his existence. This is not a man worried about dying. This is a man worried about living without the courage of his convictions, knowing that he supported something he truly abhorred and knew was wrong. Robert Shaw's performance as Henry VIII is equally wonderful, as are Susannah York, Dame Wendy Hiller and Orson Wells. I never tire of watching this film or reading the play; incidentally, also one of my favorites.

A well-crafted film...
I first saw "A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS" in 1966 when it first came out. I was a senior in high school, and since this was the pre-hippie era, everyone was gung-ho about Sir Thomas More's duty, integrity, etc. There's no question that Fred Zinnemann crafted a masterpiece on the tiny budget allowed him by Columbia, since all the studios were losing money on talky, period pieces.The acting is incomparable, a perfect ensemble centering around the unflinchingly confident performance of Scofield (he'd done the role hundreds of times on stage). The costumes won an Oscar, and were certainly beautiful, though they were so bulky it looked really difficult for the characters to get close to each other. It won an Oscar for Cinematography, too, though the film really is somewhat of a filmed play (I thought the filming of "Hawaii" and "The Sand Pebbles",also nominated, was more breath-taking). Though these are minor problems, they are soon forgotten when one pays attention to the incredible screenplay of Robert Bolt.Loaded with passion and strong character development, it's also a valid history lesson. Don't watch this if there are any distractions (kids, company, etc.) since its maximum appreciation requires concentration. I'm also wondering why the DVD is substantially higher-priced than most others, since there are absolutely NO extras of any kind. This film is notable also for Vanessa Redgrave's unbilled film debut as Anne Boleyn, on screen for only a few minutes, but an absolutely riveting film moment. Everyone should see ths film, but I'd hesitate to recommend you buy it if only due to the unreasonable price.

"Seasons" offers poignancy, pause
Paul Scofield's quiet, dignified portrayl of Sir Thomas More is one of the most riveting performances one will ever find.

With a determined, yet not brash or unseemly stance against Henry VIII (Robert Shaw, in all his young glory), More creates a devastating question for the viewer: how long do our principles remain dear to us. To discomfort? To imprisonment? To death?

Perhaps one of the most endearing qualities of More's character is that he does not waver. It is a quality that is only universal in the sense that it is respected by all men and possessed by very few.

In the end, perhaps the only validation More is given is the dignity of his death, his detractors exposed as dishonest, biased men. Is that enough? Certainly More was able to change little of history by the manner of his death. It did not stop the divorce OR the Anglican church. Perhaps the only prize integrity has is itself. Certainly More himself believed a much higher reward awaited him. After watching this movie, regardless of religion, you will find yourself hoping he was right.

The Most Interesting of Six Thomases
This period in English history and then the Elizabethan era which follows have always interested me. You thus can understand my appreciation of Derek Wilson's book In the Lion's Court: Power, Ambition, and Sudden Death in the Reign of Henry VIIII. Wilson focuses his primary attention on six Thomases: Wolsey, More, Cromwell, Howard, Wriothesley, and Cramner. Henry's VIII's relationships with all six serve as the basis of Wilson's narrative. By the way, there really were lions in London at that time ("the King's Beasts") housed in the Tower menagerie and a major tourist attraction. More once compared the king's court to a lion pit "in which the magnificent and deadly king of beasts held sway." Of the six, More interests me the most. His rectitude threatens and infuriates Henry, and eventually results in More's execution. Thus presented, More is a tragic but noble political victim and religious martyr, later canonized by the Roman Catholic Church. He is no less admirable as portrayed by Wilson but, in my opinion, is much more complicated than Bolt and others suggest. For years, More skillfully navigated his way through a court ("a lion pit") characterized by what Wilson refers to as its "seamy realities": "The royal entourage was a vicious, squirming world of competing ambitions and petty feuds, guilty secrets and salacious prudery. Courtiers, vulnerable to threats and bribes, could be induced to perjure themselves, to exaggerate amorous incidents which were innocent in the context of stylised chivalric convention, to indulge personal vendettas....Over all these momentous happenings looms the larger-than-life figure of Henry VIII, powerful and capricious yet always an enigma."

People still disagree about Robert Bolt's characterization of More in the play and then in the film for which Bolt received an Academy Award for best adapted screenplay. I agree with others who insist that More was less noble than Bolt suggests. No one, however, disputes the fact that More courageously accepted decapitation rather than compromise his religious faith. Cynics suggest that More was already a dead man...and knew it. He had an estate to protect and family obligations to accommodate. I am unqualified to speculate or even comment further on More's motives even as I marvel at his survival skills when drawn into "the lion's court."

Paul Scofield received and deserved his Academy Award for best actor in a leading role. The film and director Fred Zimmermann also received Academy Awards. The cast is exceptionally talented, especially Nigel Davenport (Duke of Norfolk), Wendy Hiller (Alice Cromwell), John Hurt (Richard Rich), Leo McKern (Thomas Cromwell), Vanessa Redgrave (Ann Boleyn), Robert Shaw (Henry VIII), Orson Welles (Cardinal Wolsey), and Susannah York (Margaret More). Unlike many stage productions later filmed, this one derives substantial benefit from Ted Moore's cinematography, especially the exteriors shot throughout and beyond royal residences. Moore also received an Academy Award for his work.

Those with an especially keen interest may wish to examine The Last Letters of Thomas More as well as several solid biographies of him by Peter Ackroyd, J.A. Guy, Richard Marius, and Gerard B. Wegemer.

A film for all viewers
Without a doubt, this is one of my top ten films of all time, mainly because there is so much that can be drawn from.

Zinnemann's adaptaion of the Robert Boltman play was done on a low budget, and whilst it takes artistic license slightly further, the film remains a historical masterpiece. Paul Schofield as More is magnificent, combining a stoical adherence to truth on the one hand, with a dry wit on the other, and this is an accuracy of depiction that could not have been drawn from the words of the script. Robert Shaw as Henry is also fantastic, showing the viewer both the very personal side of the monarch, when he is disappointed at More's non-attendence at the wedding to Anne Boleyn; and the aggression of a lion as he shouts (in full hearing of all party guests) - "I ask you, do they take me for a simpleton?" The swift change from an amiable friend to a dominating absolute monarch is brilliantly played by Shaw, and though it is a marked contrast to the plain More, the performances are equally great.

In October 2000, John Paul II made Thomas More the Patron of politicians (he was already the unofficial patron of Catholic lawyers in the UK). Both positions indicate what a great man he was. A scholar of great learning, a man of letters, a liberal in an autocratic age. His character was perhaps best displayed as his end, in his words to the executioner - "Pluck up thy spirits, man, and be not afraid to do thine office; my neck is very short; take heed therefore thou strike not awry, for saving of thine honesty." The combination of humor and greatness, even in the face of death, povide a role model for all.

If you enjoy the film, read the play and 'The Life of Sir Thomas More' by William Roper, his nephew. Although it bears relation to a specific incident, this popular poem of the time is a fitting epitaph for this great man -
When More some time had Chancellor been
No more suits did remain.
The like will never more be seen,
Till More be there again. ... Read more

Amazon.com

A box-office hit when released in 1994, this sprawling, frequently overwrought familial melodrama may get sillier as its plot progresses, but it's the kind of lusty, character-based epic that Hollywood should attempt more often. It's also an unabashedly flattering star vehicle for Brad Pitt as Tristan--the rebellious middle son of a fiercely independent Montana rancher and military veteran (Anthony Hopkins)--who is routinely at odds with his more responsible older brother, Alfred (Aidan Quinn), and younger brother, Samuel (Henry Thomas). From the battlefields of World War I to his adventures as an oceangoing sailor, Tristan's life is full of personal torment, especially when he returns to Montana and finds himself competing with Alfred over Samuel's beautiful widow (Julia Ormond), whose passion for Tristan disrupts the already turbulent Ludlow clan. Under the wide-open canopy of Big Sky country, this operatic tale unfolds with all the bloodlust, tragedy, and scenery-chewing performances you'd expect to find in a hokey bestselling novel (in fact, it's based on the acclaimed novella by Jim Harrison), but it's a potent mix that's highly entertaining. Not surprisingly, John Toll won an Academy Award for his breathtaking outdoor cinematography. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (122)

Legend of the Fall
Family values, brotherly love, Legend of the Fall is an epic which depicts every side of both.
Watching this film, it is easy to believe that Brad Pitt, Aidan Quinn and Henry Thomas are brothers and the sons of Anthony Hopkins. The love-hate relationship between Tristan, Alfred and Samuel is almost too realistic. The iron hand of a domineering father who only knows the army way leads to desparate struggles for independence and identity.
Tristin (Brad Pitt) is the middle son, favored by the father (Anthony Hopkins) because of, as well as inspite of, his wild nature. Alfred(Aidan Quinn) is the eldest son. He feels he should be most privilaged, and since he can't get honor and respect from his father, he struggles his entire life to acheive success and out do his brother. Samuel is the youngest son who is looked after by all the family. It is Samuel who brings the woman into the picture.
The struggles of life and death, love and hate weave their way in and out of the story.
Edward Zwick did an excellent job of blending the story with the talents of the actors.
Legend of the Fall is an emotional dramatic ride. The scenery of the remote wildernes is the perfect back drop to support the legend as it unfolds.
I would recommend this film to anyone who wants a good emotional drama with all the twists and turns of real life.

A Movie That Almost Lives Up to Its Grand Title
This is one of the most moving films I have seen in a long time. Believe me, unless you have a heart of stone, you will cry long and loud over the anguish of the two main characters, played beautifully by Brad Pitt and Aidan Quinn. Family values are at the root of this anguish, and there are many powerful and engaging scenes. I wanted to give this movie five stars, but it didn't quite live up to the implications of its grand title. The ending was a bit of a letdown as well, although it's an appropriate one for Pitt's character.

Legendary
This movie seriously kicks ass. It's been my favorite movie for years and it makes me cry everytime.

Love It
I love this movie its a wonderful love story, you can watch with your boyfriend, and he'll actually like it!It has just enough action in it and plenty of romance. If you can get it in the Target store its a few dollars cheaper BUY IT ITS GREAT

Melodrama at its finest
When people ask me about my favorite movies I give them a quick run down of my top ten: 1. The Godfather and The Godfather part II (tie), 3. The Shawshank Redemption, 4. One Flew Over the Cukoo's Nest, 5. Schindler's List, 6. The Silence of the Lambs, 7. Amadeus, 8. The Princess Bride, 9. Legends of the Fall, 10. Goodfellas. I am always surprised when they laugh at the 9th movie on my list. I can't understand why people think this movie is a joke. Yes, it's melodramatic but it works beautifully. Let me also say that I am not the biggest fan of Brad Pitt. His acting pales in comparison to some of the other fine actors of his generation (ie. Ralph Fiennes, Gary Oldman, Sean Penn). That said, he is perfectly cast in this movie. His ruggedness and wildman image were established in 1992's A River Runs Through It and his role as Tristan in LOTF seems almost like an extension of his role in River. I've heard that Johnny Depp, an actor whose talents I find superior to Pitt's, was originally offered the role of Tristan. I'm glad he turned it down for no one other than Brad Pitt could have BEEN Tristan.

I've always appreciated great acting. To me, there is nothing more entertaining than watching a De Niro, Pacino or Nicholson work his magic. There is only one truly great actor in Legends of the Fall - Sir Anthony Hopkins. In my opinion, he should have won an Oscar for this supporting role. A lot of reviewers criticized the second half of his performance (after the stroke) as being a bit excessive. I thought it was necessary in this type of film.

It was because of Legends of the Fall that I took an interest in acting. Not because of Anthony Hopkins...i know I could never be half as good as he. LOTF taught me that it doesn't take great actors to make a great movie. I thought Aidan Quinn, a talented but by no means gifted actor, was brilliant in the film as the tortured victim of unrequited love. It's my opnion that Quinn delivered a top-notch performance in the film, second only to Hopkins. The scene in which Alfred (Quinn) redeems himself in his father's eyes is particularly endearing. Also, the casting of Julia Ormond as Susannah was a stroke of genius. She has such classic beauty and is wonderful at conveying emotions without speaking a word. I often wonder where the hell she disappeared to.

Finally, I cannot say enough about James Horner's breathtaking score. I first became a fan of Horner's when I saw this movie and I believe him to be the top composer in the film-scoring business (yes, even better than the great John Williams).

Don't listen to the critics. This movie is amazing. They just don't make 'em like this anymore. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The classic Ernest Hemingway novel about man battling nature and the demons within himself is adapted admirably in this 1958 film starring the legendary Spencer Tracy. Playing the fisherman who goes on an intense and futile quest as he contemplates his own nature, Tracy turns in a spellbinding performance of understated power. He plays an itinerant Cuban fisherman whose luck at catching his prey has been poor of late, until he becomes embroiled in an intense pursuit of a giant marlin and in the process must confront his own frailties. Though the visual aspect of the film seems dated, Tracy is more than enough reason to see this effort at bringing one of the modern classics of literature to life on the screen. --Robert Lane ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Spencer Tracy gives a great performance.
In these times where ignorance (high school high is an example) is produced for the public to consume, and special effects are the driving force in many movies, it is very pleasing to watch a movie where the message is positive. The old man & the sea is a story of an aged fisherman living in Cuba who finds himself not only chasing a giant Marlin, but himself. He has reached a point in his life where he has almost lost hope in himself and in life. The ironic point is that although he landed and brought the fish back to shore, it was devoured by a group of sharks. He showed people his luck did not wear out, only that persistence (hard work) pays does pay off. If only he had a bigger boat... If you are interested in another great performance, see "Going My Way" starring Bing Crosby who won an academy award for best actor for the movie.

Eighty-Four Straight Days Without A Fish
Santiago is an aged Cuban fisherman who has not caught any fish for eighty-four straight days. Because he is considered unlucky by the other villagers, the young boy who usually assists Santiago is told by his parents to join a luckier boat which has recently been catching some fish.

On the eighty-fifth day Santiago sets out alone and after a while he hooks a huge marlin. Most of the rest of the movie is about Santiago's struggle with the marlin and his battles with attacking sharks which are trying to eat the big fish. The story is also about Santiago's relationship with the boy who cares for the old man both before and after his epic voyage. The boy is indebted to Santiago for all that he has learned from him about fishing. Santiago is a widower and childless.

Much of the film shows Santiago alone at sea struggling with the marlin. In other words the movie is mostly focused on Spencer Tracy who does an excellent job of holding the viewer's interest.

In spite of Tracy's great performance, however, I still think that Anthony Quinn would have been a better choice for the role of Santiago - except for the fact that Quinn was fifteen years younger than Tracy.

The script closely follows Hemingway's novel which makes the movie even more remarkable.

A mythical cycle!
Hemingway decide to make an apparent simple story when in reality , he would write one of his most emblematic and passionate works.
Santiago is a simple man . In all his life nothing has happened , a flat life in the middle of this fisher community.
Suddenly the fate's call comes for him . 84 days in the sea Ñ twelve weeks without getting any important piece.
This means the unavoidable journey , the invisible conflicy between the man and the nature . You have to realize that the sea has been for this single fisherman a friend and a silent lover and witeness of his miseries and hopeless.
Suddenly he catchs a gorgeous piece; a beauty blue needle fish. His triumph deserved all the hunger since three months he left his home. This means the epic fight. But the long arm of the fate smiled him just for a brief moment , the sharks will appear and the tragedy begins .
Now Santiago has to fight to preserve his piece . The fight is inhuman and awful , he must leave that zone and keep the fish .
More than a fish you've killed a man replies in loud voice our simple man.
When our hero arrives to the coast he's another man . He won the combat and no matter there were no witeness . The life in many times it's capricious , but you must never give up . You must follow your bliss , no matter how high be the prize you pay.
Spencer Tracy made a top knotch performance with this one.
The film keeps its inner force and the spirit of the original novel, since its release forty six years ago.
Watch this movie . It goes far beyond than a simple entertaining !
Dazzling direction and obviously who can fail with a script like this one?
A cult movie !

the old man and the sea review
Ernest Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea is a story about an old sea fisherman and his struggle with a greatest fish he has ever seen. The story takes place on the coast of Cuba in a small fishing village. Due to the fact he has not caught a fish in eighty-four days, his young apprentice is forced to go fish in a more prosperous boat. Although the book seems to have a simple plot, there is a lot of symbolism and the ending was interesting.
Some criticize The Old Man and the Sea for dragging on, but the character development only makes it more interesting to find out what happens. The main character, Santiago, is modest and keeps up hope despite his circumstance. His willingness to keep on, even despite his outcome, is moving.
Hemingway's style of writing also creates a detailed environment. The plot may be too straightforward but what it lacks, it makes up for rich detail. The way Hemingway depicts man's battle with nature makes it a good book to read.
The symbolism in the book is hard to read at first. As the book goes on, Hemingway uses more and more words that link Santiago to Christ and are very hard to miss. During the old man's battle with the fish, fishing cable cuts his palms. When carrying a mast across his shoulders in the village, images of Christ's march to Calgary can be related.
I would suggest this book to almost anyone over fifteen. The book is short (around a hundred pages) and straightforward. Although it has such a simple plot, the symbolism is a little more difficult to understand. Writing in short declarative sentences, Hemingway's style of writing makes it harder to read.

First Movie with a Saving The Planet Message.
When I first saw this movie, I thought this was an early save the planet movie. Well In addition to Spencer Tracy's powerful performance as a fisherman trying to catch the Marlan, there is also a lot of natural/wildlife photography in it that serves as the background for the movie and it's quite extensive for a 1958 film. I heard that Hemmingway really enjoyed the outdoor world, well this movie certainly had plenty of the natural world to show of. ... Read more

Amazon.com

1995 had already seen the box-office success of sword-wielding heroes in Rob Roy and Braveheart when along came this glossy revision of the Arthurian legend, in which Lady Guinevere (Julia Ormond) is torn between her love for the noble King Arthur (Sean Connery) and the passionate knight Sir Lancelot (Richard Gere). As the story opens, Guinevere's lands are under attack by the evil knight Malagant (Ben Cross), and she must choose between marriage to Arthur and the security of Camelot, or encouraging the affections of Lancelot, who has heroically rescued her from a potentially lethal attack. Anyone looking for meticulous medieval authenticity won't find it here, but director Jerry Zucker (Ghost) keeps the action moving with exuberant spirit and glorious production values. Even if you don't completely believe Richard Gere as a somewhat too-contemporary Lancelot, the performances of Ormond and especially Connery are effortlessly appealing. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (114)

A few complaints...
This is the heart of Camelot, not these stones, not these timbers, these palaces and towers. Burn them all and Camelot lives on, because it lives in us. Camelot is a belief that we hold in our hearts.
-King Arthur

Prince Malagant (Ben Cross), a rebel knight from the Round Table, seeks to expand his empire and take over the lands of Guinevere (Julia Ormond). With her subjects at the mercy of Malagant's evil forces, Guinevere leaves her home to marry King Arthur (Sean Connery) and ask for his help and protection. But en route to Camelot, Guinevere's escort is ambushed and though Guinevere is almost carried away to Malagant, she is rescued by Lancelot (Richard Gere). A loner who lives by his sword, Lancelot is attracted to the soon-to-be queen, and Guinevere too feels herself drawn to him. What follows is the tale of a forbidden love which will bring about terrible consequences which might affect the outcome of the battle between good and evil.

*PLOT* - For those who love anything to do with Arthurian legends, this is a great film. But for those who are finicky about details, this is NOT the film for you! Besides having the legend of Arthur completely altered, none of the other famous characters besides Arthur, Lancelot, and Guinever from the stories of Arthur are present! Where's Merlin, Morgan La Fay, Mordred, Sir Galahad, Lady of the Lake, etc.? And though the Knights of the Round Table are listed in the credits (example Sir Gawaine, Sir Gareth, etc.), after watching the movie you won't be able to put names with the faces of any of the knights! This is in fact one of my biggest complaints with the movie, one of the few movies featuring the Knights of the Round Table and we're not even given a chance to know any of them! And on top of everything, the plot surrounding the romance between Lancelot and Guinevere was a bit too predictable! Lancelot starts lusting after her immediately after their meeting, and throughout the movie there's no real romance! I just felt that it was just a bit too unbelievable. Why in the world would Guinevere 'fall in love' with a man who even admits he has no real honor?

*ACTING* - Sean Connery is the real star of the film. With his Scottish brogue, great acting, and in general possessing the air of a king, casting Sean Connery as King Arthur was simply perfect. (a little trivia, Sean Connery also played a famous king in history when he played the uncredited role of King Richard in Kevin Costner's "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves"). Whenever I finish watching "First Knight", I can't help but think Guinevere a fool to betray Arthur's love. I certainly have no complaints with Julia Ormond's acting. I thought she was marvelous, and she also has a lovely British accent which complemented her role as Guinevere. Unfortunately, as I said before, the romance didn't fall right. And Richard Gere doesn't quite fit the bill as Lancelot. Too American and too modern, and besides that, his acting wasn't top notch. Plus, I couldn't believe he was really in love with Guinevere because love requires respect. Besides not respecting Guinevere's wishes for him to leave her alone, he also doesn't respect that she is engaged to King Arthur. I also thought that the whole thing surrounding his promise that 'Guinevere will someday as him to kiss her' was stupid.

*ACTION* - Ah, the action is what really saves this film from being a total waste of time for movie lovers! Lots of excitement, "First Knight" is full of exuberant energy! The battles are well done, and the swordplay is loads of fun to watch! Though epic battle scenes and swordplay from the "Lord of the Rings" cannot EVER be beaten, "First Knight" is still enjoyable. Best fight is definitely the last part, especially between Lancelot and Malagant.

*PG-13 RATING* - The movie is rated PG-13 for violence and some innuendos. The violence is nothing too gory since the battle scenes are pretty quick. But the fight between Lancelot and Malagant might make some people a bit squeamish. The same can be said about the innuendos, though not bad at all compared to more recent films, the dialogue is obvious and suggestive at times. There is one scene though towards the beginning where parents might want to skip for younger audiences.

*OVERALL & RECOMMENDATIONS* - Overall, what you can expect from "First Knight" are loads of action and some nice swordplay. Unfortunately, don't expect too much to learn more about the Arthurian legends or find a beautiful and believable romance. Other movies I can recommend are:

-LADYHAWKE- (1985) One of the best medieval movies ever made! A wonderful tale with better action and a more beautiful love story. Director Richard Donner and starring Matthew Broderick, Rutger Hauer, and Michelle Pfeiffer. PG-13
-MERLIN- (1998) TV miniseries with a stellar cast follows the life of the famous wizard, Merlin. A much more accurate look of the legend of Arthur. Director Steve Barron and starring Same Neill, Helenna Bonham Carter, Miranda Richardson, and Martin Short. NR
-LOTR: FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING & THE TWO TOWERS- (2001-2002) An epic movie of grand proportions, the best battle scenes ever put on film. And when "The Return of the King" comes out in 2003, that will also be highly recommended I'm sure! Director Peter Jackson and starring Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen, Ian McKellan, and Christopher Lee. PG-13

A good love story...
First Knight isn't faithful at all to the story of Arthur and the costumes, lighting, and settings were all terribly modern, but the story itself was well done enough that the movie makes up for the rest of it.

It follows the story of Arthur, Guinevere, and Lancelot and thier journey from the time Quinevere and Lancelot meet by chance as her carraige is ambushed on her way to marry Arthur, through some more kidnappings, a wedding, and a knighthood, to the death of Arthur. Lancelot, who begins as a mercenary, grows a great deal as a character, while Guinevere's struggle to control her feelings for him is painfully clear. Sean Connery's Arthur is the kind of king one would expect of Arthur, kind, understanding, with a rigid set of morals that he cannot break even for his queen. Julia Ormond makes it clear that Guinevere loves both men and Richard Gere's sensitive performance and longing looks tug the heartstrings.

In essense, it is the acting and the love story that make this movie enjoyable. It is a remarkably un-historically accurate movie and there is not much in common, aside from the names, with the traditional Arthur legends, but these old stories are made to be interpreted. The romance of the movie is what makes it worth watching...that a Richard Gere looks really, really good.

Just Plain Bad
This is one of the most historically inaccurate movies I have ever seen. It is certainly the worst King Arthur movie that I have seen. I can not believe how bad this film is. King Arthur was a fairly young to middle age guy, but Sean Connery is in his 70's and looks like it too. The other Knights of the Round Table were also about the same age as King Arthur, but in this movie they
are of wildly different ages. The acting is generally poor with several of the actors being just plain wooden. The script is pretty bad too.

One of the worst aspects of this movie is the costumes and acting. All of the clothes look brand new and there are a number of instances where clothes that get dirty in a battle suddenly and mysteriously get clean again even though the characters are still on the battlefield. Evidently the actors could not stand wearing dirty clothing. Back in the days of King Arthur, knights wore chain mail instead of plated armor.

The final word: avoid this flick at all costs.

Accentuate The Negatives
The legendary story of Camelot and King Arthur has been told, and retold in various incarnations, over the years. Some of them, like Excalibur, and the television mini-series Merlin, were excellent in the way they handled aspects of the the tale. These examples are among the very best and have stayed with me. While I would like to put First Knight in the same league, I cannot, thanks to an annoying bit of casting.

Lancelot (Richard Gere) is a rogue with no ties, no enemies, and no fear-until he meets Lady Guinevere of Leonesse (Julia Ormond). She has promised to marry King Arthur (Sean Connery), not only because his armies can protect her country from evils like Knight Malagant (Ben Cross), but because she truly loves him. But her chance encounter with Lancelot as she prepared to enter Camelot stirs conflicting and powerful emotions within her. Arthur welcomes both into his city with an open heart, little foreseeing how his great capacity for love and trust opens the doors for his own betrayal.

First Knight marks the second time that director Jerry Zucker has traded in the laughs of Airplane! and The Naked Gun films for something a bit more dramatic. His first, was a little "mega hit" called Ghost, therefore his limited track record in the genre was off to a fine start. To be honest though, the main draw for me in the film, was the prescence of Connery, whom I have always liked and Julia Ormand. She made quite a name for herself in Legends Of The Fall. I knew both of these actors could make the most with the material. It's too bad that Gere had to be in the film. He must have went to the same school on how to use a bad surfer dude accent, as Kevin Costner did. This is not something that's easy to forget. It is so bad that it brought everything else down in the process. He makes it difficult to get into the film, without thiking that maybe Zucker is making a comedy after all. As usual Connery saves the day--commanding every scene he's in. Connery, Ormond, and Cross, who makes a good bad guy, are reasons to watch.

The DVD lacks extras. But you have the option of watching the film, in either the fullscreen or widescreen formats.

utter contempt for source material...
This film is an insult to the viewers intelligence and the Arthurian tradtion. I can not believe how awful this film is. Wooden acting, contempt for the source material, some of the worst period costumes and armour ever seen in a film and a scrip to bad they could use it for torture sessions... ... Read more

Reviews (357)

Thoroughly satisfying
One of my favourite ways to spend two and a half hours is to watch this excellent film over and over again. I can't remember any science-fiction film after 2001: A Space Odyssey to be this thought-provoking, and while Contact is not quite as profound a statement as the aforementioned opus, it still has quite a lot to say for itself. Jodie Foster plays an earnest scientist who spends her whole life searching for extra-terrestrial life and finds vindication when a message is received from outer space. Naturally, it throws the world into a huge frenzy, and despite the efforts of kitschy bad guy Tom Skerritt and military operations-head James Woods, she gets to go on a journey to the heart of the universe and see whether or not she can find the answers she's looking for. Perhaps it's a little hokey, but I found myself totally captivated throughout the whole film, and the adventure Foster goes through in the last third of the picture is one of the most thrilling sequences in the films of 1997 (not the least because Foster, surrounded by all these new worlds she's viewing, can act the scene to pieces, which is amazing considering the fact that we know she really sat in front of a blue-screen for two weeks). Truly moving.

One of my favorite DVDs!
I feel like Contact is a gift to humanity from astronomer Carl Sagan. It's an incredibly moving story about a scientist who lives out a scenerio that has played out in the minds of real life dreamers like myself. The ultimate "what if...?". Indeed, what if THEY (E.T.'s) contacted US (Earthlings). Director Zemeckis does an excellent job of transferring novel to screen. "Too long" say some critics. No way! Perfect. Things play out quite well. The "backing into space" opening sequence is probably my personal favorite of all time. I'm thrilled to live in a time when movie makers can create such magic. It's worth the price alone to see the first few minutes of this film.

The cast is very good with Jodie Foster and John Hurt standouts. Foster is as good in this as she was in SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. She has moments of pure magic...I get misty eyed. And John Hurt's "Wanna take a ride?" is my favorite character.

The DVD transfer is one of the best in my collection. The picture and sound are excellent. If you're into 2001 A Space Odyssey and the like, then Contact should be on your shelf.

One of my favorite movies
One of my favorite subjects as I was growing up and into my early 20s, was backyard skywatching and astronomy. I believe this movie accurately portrays the emotional aspects of science in general and astronomy in particular: the sense of awe and beauty when confronted with infinity, and the sense of lonliness felt by everyone with an idealistic passion.

If you have ever read Carl Sagan's books, you'll see that this movie touches upon the usual staples of a Carl Sagan read: the foundation of religion vs. the foundation of science, the mutual misunderstanding and struggle between those governed by curious optimism versus those governed by primal fear, and a demonstration of the dangers of a world that depends on science which is filled with so many people who do not understand it.

Some have argued that they find Contact to be "preachy." I don't really see much of a foundation in that assessment of the movie. Just like in real life, the ultimate philosophical answers are left wide open at the end of this movie, leaving it open to many different interpretations. And I think it's refreshing to see a movie that doesn't follow the contemporary pattern of avoiding any serious discussion about morality and philosophy. These are some of the conversations the human race will be forced to have with itself if we want to survive the coming centuries. Recent events since this movie was released and Carl Sagan's death only accentuate the importance of facing this fact.

I love this movie. From the beautiful computer-generated opening sequence, through the middle sequences detailing the main character's relentless and passionate quest for scientific knowledge and exploration, to the adventurous surreal climax, I felt that I had a personal connection with almost every aspect of this movie.

Read the book, ignore the movie.
The themes of this movie were better told in 2001; A Space Odyssey, this movie with it's bad script and cliched love story, made both boring, predictable, and very preachy. Zemmeckis should be ashamed of himself. Then again he is a Spielberg wanna be.

A movie about relationships
This is one of the most layered, thought provoking, dramatic, and moving films I have seen in years. On the surface, it is a great space adventure film, but look deeper, and it takes all of our wonder about the meaning of existence, and boils it down to how we learn about ourselves through our relationships...work, family, and love. See it. See it. See it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

It seemed like a good idea in 1973: a musical scored by Donovan about the life and times of St. Francis of Assisi, the passionate ascetic who expressed love for God by loving nature. But the finished product was something else. Filmmaker Franco Zeffirelli (Endless Love) makes a decorous effort at communicating the ideals of Francis and even tweaking the character toward flower-power relevance. But the result is feel-good fluff, a boring movie that doesn't penetrate its subject as much as reinvent him toward a modern bias. Graham Faulkner is entirely forgettable in the lead, and Donovan's songs on this project aren't exactly first-rate, either. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (115)

Vivid religious parable for 'youth' audience
BROTHER SUN SISTER MOON (UK/Italy 1972): The early life of St. Francis of Assisi (Graham Faulkner), the son of a wealthy merchant who underwent a spiritual conversion following his experiences in the crusades and later renounced his worldly goods before establishing a holy order separate from traditional Church teachings.

Conceived and executed in much the same visual manner as his ultra-popular ROMEO AND JULIET (1968), Franco Zeffirelli's BROTHER SUN SISTER MOON attempts to draw parallels between the work and philosophy of St. Francis and the ideology which underpinned the worldwide hippy movement throughout the 1960's and early 70's. Hence the ragged-but-lyrical cinematography (by Ennio Guarnieri), fractured editing (by Reginald Mills), and the use of contemporary - but strangely timeless - folk songs written and performed by Donovan, all of which conjures the requisite mood of spiritual awakening whilst simultaneously dating the movie quite firmly within its period. Cynics will hate it, while others will embrace Zeffirelli's defiant romanticism. Daringly, Zeffirelli's script (co-written by Suso Cecchi d'Amico and Lina Wertmuller) contrasts Francis' piety and virtue with the bloated pomp of official Church doctrine, weighed down by internal politics and social indifference, though it's difficult to gauge if this represents a veiled attack on Christian orthodoxy or is simply a reflection of Francis' dismissal of outdated customs in favor of a return to Nature.

Lovingly crafted by Lorenzo Mongiardino (art direction) and Danilo Donati (costumes), the movie is toplined by a cast of gifted newcomers and screen veterans, including Judi Bowker (one of the most beautiful actresses of her generation), Leigh Lawson, Kenneth Cranham, Valentina Cortese and Alec Guinness. But the film derives much of its visual strength from Faulkner as the young, battle-scarred nobleman laid low by his wartime experiences, who emerges from the horrors of conflict with a completely new and spiritual outlook on life. Faulkner was one of a handful of young actors (including FELLINI-SATYRICON's Hiram Keller and LISA AND THE DEVIL's Alessio Orano) who emerged from European cinema in the 1970's, handsome and talented in equal measure, to burn brightly and briefly before disappearing into relative obscurity. Here, Faulkner's intense beauty and fresh-faced innocence are illuminated by Guarnieri's worshipful camera and Zeffirelli's attentive direction, which places him center-stage throughout (there's even a generous, PG-level nude scene halfway through the movie). This was Faulkner's cinematic debut, and while Zeffirelli couldn't have made a better choice for such a crucial role, the director later described him as being slightly aloof from his fellow actors, which may explain his subsequent disappearance from the movie scene. But here, his grace and dignity are displayed in abundance, and it's hard not to fall in love with him, every time he appears on-screen.

Picture quality on Paramount's DVD is grainy in places and vivid in others, but overall, this is a huge improvement over previous video incarnations, all hideously cropped from the original hard matte widescreen version presented here. Sadly, there are no extras whatsoever, not even a trailer! It would have been nice to see footage from the Italian cut (FRATELLO SOLE SORELLA LUNA), which runs approximately 14 minutes longer and replaces Donovan's music with a fully orchestral score by Riz Ortolani. The film's editor, Reginald Mills, produced a 16mm documentary in 1973 entitled FRANCO ZEFFIRELLI A FLORENTINE ARTIST, compiled from footage shot during the making of the movie and featuring a lengthy interview with the director himself. Running a mere 51 minutes, it provided an invaluable insight into Zeffirelli's working methods and the thinking which gave rise to the finished product, and its absence from Paramount's disc is hugely disappointing. It's nice to have the film on DVD in its present form, but the lack of extras reeks of missed opportunity.

120m 56s
1.75:1 / Anamorphically enhanced
DVD soundtrack: Mono 2.0
Theatrical soundtrack: Optical mono
Optional English subtitles and closed captions
Region 1

A movie that changed my outlook on life
This film with all its historical inaccuracies and its poor account of St. Clare and Bishop Guido has however the spirit of Franciscanism at its heart and its message is a relevant today as it was in the 13th century. Faulkner is brilliant, he captures the simple, pure humility of St.Francis. What ever happened to him after the movie? Donovan's music is outstanding and fits in perfectly with the simple and humble atmosphere permeating throughout the movie. To learn a more accurate account of the life of St. Francis I must recommend a book called 'St. Francis of Assisi, The Legend and the Life' by Michael Robson OFM Conv.

Pax et Bonum, A young Irish Secular Franciscan.

Inspirational
Dated; yes, but boring? . . . Never. Maybe if you're looking for action instead of inspiration. I've watched this movie countless times and have never failed to find its anti-materialist message inspirational. If it contains historical inaccuracies; show me a movie or book about a 13th century character that doesn't. Yes, it is dated to the '70s in places, but what of it? This is a movie with an essential message told well: i.e. The glory of war and possessions can't ultimately satisfy. And while I may hesitate to recommend this movie to anyone, say, under 40; if you want to know how it feels to leave the pursuit of yet another crummy dead-end job, for inner peace, Brother Sun Sister Moon may just do the trick.

Wonderful
The editorial review by Amazon.com (Tom Keogh) should stop after the first sentence. Tom's review is "a decorous effort" to tweak his ego and impress readers who enjoy uppity reviews more than good movies. I don't know why Amazon would even allow their review to discourage sales, for one thing. More importantly, this is a beautiful movie, to a different tempo, with lovely music and spiritual significance for the gentle recipient.

Spirit of Francis
This movie was a major inspiration in my life as a Franciscan. It captures the spirit of Francis of Assisi, the joy, the freedom, the devotion to Christ. It is true that it is "ahistorical" which is NOT to say unhistorical, but rather creative fidelity to the spirit of the saint. All of Zeferelli's work has a quality of caricature, but faithful even though exaggerated. Many people have used those songs by Donavan as well, as they are quite moving and joyous. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video