Amazon.com

To call Pearl Harbor a throwback to old-time war movies is something of an understatement. Director Michael Bay's epic take on the bombing that brought the United States into World War II hijacks every war movie situation and cliché (some affectionate, some stale) you've ever seen and gives them a shiny, glossy spin until the whole movie practically gleams. Planes glisten, water sparkles, trees beckon--and Bay's re-creation of the bombing itself, a 30-minute sequence that's tightly choreographed and amazingly photographed, sets the action movie bar up quite a few notches. And in updating the classic war film, Bay and screenwriter Randall Wallace (Braveheart) use that old plot standby, the love triangle--this time, it's between two pilots (Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett) and a nurse (Kate Beckinsale) who find themselves stationed at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, during what they thought would be a nice, sunny tour of duty. Then, of course, history intervened.

For the first 90 minutes of the movie, Affleck and Beckinsale find a nice, appealing chemistry that plays on his strengths as a movie star and hers as a serious actress--he gives her glamour, she gives him smarts. Their truncated romance--the beginning of which is told in flashback so we can get right to the point where he has to leave her to go to England--works, thanks to their charm. They're no Kate and Leo from Titanic (a strategy the film strives hard toward), but they're pretty darn adorable in their own right. Hartnett, as the not entirely unwelcome third wheel, squints bravely but makes only a slight dent in the film. Everyone else in Pearl Harbor--from Cuba Gooding Jr.'s brave navy seaman to Jon Voight's able impersonation of FDR--is pretty much a glorified walk-on, taking a backseat to the pyrotechnics and action sequences that keep the three-hour film in fairly constant motion. But when that action does take hold, Pearl Harbor is quite a thrilling ride. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (1812)

'Pearl Harbor' a big misfire
From up to its pretty exciting 15-minute sequence as the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor, 'Pearl Harbor' is a lumbering, barely involving film, which gives us a love triangle between two hunkish World War II fighter pilots, Josh Harnett and Ben Affleck and pretty nurse Kate Beckinsale.

'Pearl Harbor' tries to capture the atmosphere and engaging set up of 1997's better "Titanic" by setting up three star-crossed lovers, instead of the usual two. It fails terribly, but it's mostly scripter Randall Wallace's fault, which tries to balance three to four subplots by compromising the film's integrity and intelligence.

This 3+ hour film is obviously meant as a tribute to the people who died December 7, 1942 and has pretty nice cinematography, but the film itself is a shoddy-made puzzle in which all the pieces don't quite fit together.

The characters wallow in sentimentality and the film unsuccessfully tries to create atmosphere, romance and humor, but the film's bottom drops out in the final third, not only to reveal a plot full of holes, but a incomprehensible story told in bad faith.

Sorry, Bruckheimer. Nice try but no cigar.

September 11, 2001: Another "date that will live in infamy!"
"Pearl Harbor" is a movie of far greater importance after the terrorists attacks of September 11. We are now at war against ideologues committed to destroying our nation. Americans only a few months ago considered "Pearl Harbor" as merely a depiction of a bygone tragic era, but not particularly relevant to our present
concerns. Needless to add, this mindset is no longer embraced by the majority. Jon Voight brilliantly portrays President Franklin D. Roosevelt. You will have a difficult time remaining stoic and tearless when Voight gives tongue to Roosevelt's famous radio speech to the American people after the Japanese treacherous
December 7, 1941 assault on Pearl Harbor. "We are at war," declared the President and "we have been described as weaklings and playboys" unwilling to overcome formidable obstacles, and too cowardly to fight. Does this rhetoric sound familiar? History has been repeated, and once again we are challenged to bravely confront our enemies.

The cast that includes Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale, Cuba Gooding Jr, Josh Harnett, Alec Baldwin, and Jon Voight are fantastic. Michael Bay should be congratulated for directing this work of art. The lengthy battle scene ranks among the best of all time. Every moral person should also be taken aback by the scene
where a wounded seaman curses a Japanese-American physician who comes to his aid. Racial and ethnic bigotry was wrong in 1941, and must be wholeheartedly rejected today when some less than admirable individuals are tempted to blame their fellow Americans of Arab descent for the horror of just a few weeks ago. The
United States courageously and ethically faced its enemies over fifty years ago. We must do so once again.

The very fact that this film's creators relied so extensively on focus groups to guide the making of this film was a serious mistake. Both Liberal and Conservative commentators used this as an excuse to blast "Pearl Harbor" immediately upon its initial release. Many wrongly concluded that these marketing studies might be dismissed as a mere cynical attempt by the producers to increase their profits. I strongly disagree with this assessment, and instead strongly recommend that every citizen view this film at least once. It may very well be your duty to so.

Awesome deleted scenes
This is the DVD to get, it has the deleted scenes of the love affair between Doolittle (played by Baldwin) and Beckinsale - the child Beckinsale carries was actually Doolittle's, not Josh Harnett's - in this restored, original version

good but not THAT good
This is a good movie but not great. It's way too long and the actors are not really that good. The special effects are amazing to look at but it gets boring after a while. Jennifer Garner had a very small role in the movie. Why didn't she got a bigger part is beyond me. This unrated version is not that special only has a lot more gore/violence. Why did I waste time and money on this one I really don't know. If you love violence movies buy this now if now avoid it at all costs.

Pearl Harbore, and inaccurate
I must say that, when I saw this film. I was expecting a high intensity build towards the ultimate climax of the attack itself. Instead, we get the usual Hollywood love fest, Hollywood liberties on the truth (though I am not bothered by the liberties themselves, but sometimes the liberties are too ridiculous!) For example, some of the ships used in the movie to be hit by torpedoes are woefully modern, IE not of WWII time period. The Doolittle Raid, look at the aircraft carrier, it shows an angle that only modern nuclear ACC's have, back then the ACC's were long rectangler shaped vessels.

Lastly, I just found it boring and it was like the director was attempting to do a Titanic style story with fictional characters caught in a love triangle all the while the story builds towards the attack as a secondary mentioning. Just way too much Hollywood liberties taken against one of the darkest times for America, and I can't help but feel that the veterans, especially those who were there, should have been given something that respected them more.

I will say though, the attack itself is stunning, why I give it two stars... other than that this movie falls flat for me. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

The latest testosterone-saturated blow-'em-up from producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Michael Bay (The Rock, Bad Boys) continues Hollywood's millennium-fueled fascination with the destruction of our planet. There's no arguing that the successful duo understands what mainstream American audiences want in their blockbuster movies--loads of loud, eye-popping special effects, rapid- fire pacing, and patriotic flag waving. Bay's protagonists--the eight crude, lewd, oversexed (but lovable, of course) oil drillers summoned to save the world from a Texas-sized meteor hurling toward the earth--are not flawless heroes, but common men with whom all can relate. In this huge Western-in-space soap opera, they're American cowboys turned astronauts. Sci-fi buffs will appreciate Bay's fetishizing of technology, even though it's apparent he doesn't understand it as anything more than flashing lights and shiny gadgets. Smartly, the duo also tries to lure the art-house crowd, raiding the local indie acting stable and populating the film with guys like Steve Buscemi, Billy Bob Thornton, Owen Wilson, and Michael Duncan, all adding needed touches of humor and charisma. When Bay applies his sledgehammer aesthetics to the action portions of the film, it's mindless fun; it's only when Armageddon tackles humanity that it becomes truly offensive. Not since Mississippi Burning have racial and cultural stereotypes been substituted for characters so blatantly--African Americans, Japanese, Chinese, Scottish, Samoans, Muslims, French ... if it's not white and American, Bay simplifies it. Or, make that white male America; the film features only three notable females--four if you count the meteor, who's constantly referred to as a "bitch that needs drillin'," but she's a hell of a lot more developed and unpredictable than the other women characters combined. Sure, Bay's film creates some tension and contains some visceral moments, but if he can't create any redeemable characters outside of those in space, what's the point of saving the planet? --Dave McCoy ... Read more

Reviews (1140)

"Armageddon" is GREAT entertainment!
I recently saw "Armageddon" for the first time on DVD and thought it was a fantastic example of movie entertainment. It's an excellently-produced science fiction/action/adventure movie. The special effects are top-notch and truly breathtaking. Script and character development are above average for this type of film--but of course, this is NOT "Othello"! The storyline is extremely interesting and the movie's pacing is packed with edge-of-your-seat suspense, with just enough deadpan comedic relief. I found no fault with the actor's performances--Bruce Willis does his usually-good "John Wayne" and considering this is sci-fi, the others gave FAR less wooden performances than, say, would be seen on ANY episode of "Star Trek: The Next Generation." The movie could've done without the dumb Aerosmith tunes in the soundtrack, but that's a minor criticism.

Since I thoroughly enjoyed the film, I was dismayed to see a lot of negative comments by Amazon.com reviewers who appear (in my opinion) to be "cinema snobs." And after "reading between the lines" of these reviews, I see a pattern of thought--which I thoroughly disagree with.

The underlying "theme" of "Armageddon" is simply that for the most part, Americans--in addition to American values and technology--save the world. The attributes that Americans (although certainly not exclusively) are known for--courage, heroism, patriotism, both stubborn individuality AND one-for-all/all-for-one team determination--are very much a part of this story.

I wonder if many of the negative reviewers were put off by the "Rah-Rah USA!" tone of the film. There is a certain type of liberal/artsy, anti-American, anti-NASA, anti-patriot attitude that would loathe a movie like "Armageddon"--and such a mindset would probably color such a reviewer's comments. That's unfortunate, because although "Armageddon" is very much an "American" story, it also exhilaratingly examines some of the very BEST elements of the all-inclusive human spirit.

A Bruckheimer/Bay space dud
We all love sci-fi disaster movies. It's a guilty pleasure. I can tolerate disaster movies as long as there was effort involved to make it as entertaining as possible. This movie was watchable, but it was not an entertaining experience. "Armaggedon" is a movie that is bombastic, nonsensical, cliched, ridiculing, and is an insult to a moviegoer's intelligence. The Jerry Bruckheimer/Michael Bay team is the worst Hollywood duo next to Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich. Sure, "mindless fun" can have its moments, but "Armageddon" pushes this way too much.

The summary in a heartbeat: An asteroid "the size of Texas" is on its way towards Earth, and the US government hires oil drillers to drill into the asteroid's center to nuke it internally. The writers seemed to reach for some undesired effect here. So what if the asteroid is the size of Texas? You don't need an asteroid that size to wipe out Earth. A city-sized asteroid is all it would take. Were the filmmakers paranoid that the movie will lose flavor if the asteroid were only the size of Seattle? And despite it's size, an asteroid does not have the same gravitional pull that the Earth or even the Moon does, yet the astronauts walk on the asteroid as if they're strolling through the city park.

"Armageddon" plays like a montage on steroids. It just does not know how to enjoy the scenery. Camera angles shift and change so fast like an MTV-style music video, as if the filmmakers wanted to prevent you from taking a better look. It felt like the film was going to short-circuit on me. This is not stylish filmmaking, it's just a gimmick to toy with the audience. The disaster scenes are among the worst ever filmed. Closed-up shots so that the audience can't comprehend the mayhem is an insulting film gesture. On top of that, I thought I was going to get an epileptic seizure. Bruckheimer and Bay need a slap in the face.

The script is one that is completely dry of original ideas. The usual world in peril and average Americans have to save it. The usual sentimental farewell of the sacrificial hero. The usual love complications. The usual fumbling of high authorities. There's a scene in the movie where the nuke is turned on and the crew must disable it. What do you need for suspense? Duh, a timer! In reality, what purpose would timers have? If the nuke was successfully planted inside the asteroid, who would stay and watch the time run out? And of course for this scene to end with a bang, there must be an edge-of-your-seat moment where the so-called "bomb expert" has to decide whether to cut the red or blue wire. This movie ridicules everybody, and it's not done in good taste. It ridicules NASA. It ridicules the President. It ridicules Russians. It ridicules average citizens. Everybody is a half-witted pawn for the plot's progression. The movie lovingly sets up human beings for doom as if they're too stupid to know what's coming. There are a number of scenes were the filmmakers decided "Hey, let's insert a disaster here!"

What's with this love story phenomenon in disaster movies? This one serves no purpose for the plot. Liv Tyler is cast only for her to show off skin and serve as the angsty daughter of Bruce Willis (Harry). Ben Affleck (AJ) is Liv Tyler's love interest, and this little fiasco serves as the personal center for the three main characters. What for? At the end of the movie, Harry says to AJ, "I've always thought of you as a son." Right. At the beginning of the movie, he was chasing him around the oil rig with a shotgun.

The movie is littered with other kinds of nonsense. The nuke is about blow in less than a minute, but Harry takes his time to talk about his determination. The asteroid is about to hit the zero barrier mark, but Harry takes his time to say a final goodbye to his daughter. The world is about to end, for crying out loud. Giving lengthy banal eulogies seems more important to the director.

"Armageddon" is an ugly, frantic, burdening experience and is a movie that makes you wonder if the filmmakers even went through any edits in the screenplay. Another asteroid movie "Deep Impact", while not great, still wipes the floor with this one. Hopefully this movie will serve as an example of what NOT to do with making disaster films.

Exceptionally well-crafted story line
For me, this is an incredibly difficult movie to review and critique. I feel that the movie did a phenomenal job of developing the story; however, the acting in the movie left something to be desired.

In case someone has not seen the movie, I do not want to give much of the story away. An asteroid, classified as a global killer (a global killer meaning that if it impacts earth, there will be total destruction of life), is on a collision course with earth. NASA comes up with the idea of landing on the asteroid, drilling a hole, and dropping a nuclear weapon in the hole and blowing up the asteroid with the intent of splitting it in two and altering its path so it misses earth.

While it is a simple story, the movie does an exceptional job developing the plot into a 2-hour movie. The movie incorporates a "gloom and doom" plot with a second story of love, romance, and hope. The first plot is about an oil driller and his band of misfits attempting to work with a group of highly educated astronauts and military pilots to drill a hole on the asteroid (and of course the work together as well as Worcestershire sauce and ice cream). The second story line involves one of the oil drillers falling in love with the owners daughter. The relationship reminds me of a terrible "teen-age" relationship with the seemingly perfect love that young people share coupled with a resentful father who seems to not want to lose his daughter.

It is difficult to explain how well the two story lines integrate without ruining the movie for someone who has not seen it. While the plot is superb, the acting in the move is just so-so. I thought the acting of the three headline actors (Bruce Willis, Ben Affleck, and Liv Tyler) was weak at best; they had their great moments, but mostly their acting seemed almost emotionless. I did think a couple of the lesser known actors (mainly Michael Clarke Duncan as "Bear" and Peter Stormare as the Russian astronaut) were incredible in this movie.

Personally, due to the overwhelming depressing plot about the end of the earth, I don't think this is a movie I would cuddle with on the couch with a new date. However, I nonetheless think the plot is excellent and I do highly recommend seeing this movie. I give the movie 5 stars for how the movie integrates the two story lines together and develops them into a great plot, not the acting in the movie.

I love this movie!!!
Okay, there's a reason that we go to the movies...to escape everyday life and just enjoy some good old fun for a couple of hours and this movie does it. I don't know, maybe I'm just a Bruce Willis fan, but this movie did entertain me and it's on cable right now and I'm watching it, which is what compelled me to write and defend this fun movie because everyone else is trashing it!

Dull
I enjoy most Jerry Bruckheimer movies. There almost always just plain fun, like "Beverly Hills Cop" or "The Rock." I somehow missed "Armageddon" in the theaters, so I rented it as soon as I could.
Despite all the popularity it got, I wasn't dazzled by it like so many others. The story is about a gigantic asteroid racing towards earth. If it hit, every human on the planet would die. So the U.S. government, led by a NASA administrator (Billy Bob Thornton) hire an oil-drilling team to take a space shuttle out into space, land on the asteroid, and blow it up with a nuclear bomb. Easy, right? The team is led by a guy named Harry (Bruce Willis), and includes such actors as Ben Affleck, Owen Wilson, Steve Buscemi, Will Patton, and Michael Clarke Duncan. Then we get assaulted with Bruckheimer/Bay's trademark action sequences: loud and mesmerizing.
Except that in "Armageddon," I didn't buy any of the action. The special effects, which were awesome in some parts, were horrible looking in others. Willis' and Affleck's performances were awful; most of them were. I realize that a mindless blockbuster like this one doesn't matter if the acting is bad, but it was so bad here that I just couldn't take it. Actually, the best performances came from Owen Wilson (who died in the middle) and Peter Stormare as a Russian cosmonaut. I also thought that when Willis sacrificed himself, all those shots of his daughter (Liv Tyler) were unnessecary. Too much gloss for me.
No, this movie isn't very good. "The Rock" was just so much better. Heck, I even enjoyed "Pearl Harbor" more. ... Read more

Amazon.com

To call Pearl Harbor a throwback to old-time war movies is something of an understatement. Director Michael Bay's epic take on the bombing that brought the United States into World War II hijacks every war movie situation and cliché (some affectionate, some stale) you've ever seen and gives them a shiny, glossy spin until the whole movie practically gleams. Planes glisten, water sparkles, trees beckon--and Bay's re-creation of the bombing itself, a 30-minute sequence that's tightly choreographed and amazingly photographed, sets the action movie bar up quite a few notches. And in updating the classic war film, Bay and screenwriter Randall Wallace (Braveheart) use that old plot standby, the love triangle--this time, it's between two pilots (Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett) and a nurse (Kate Beckinsale) who find themselves stationed at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, during what they thought would be a nice, sunny tour of duty. Then, of course, history intervened.

For the first 90 minutes of the movie, Affleck and Beckinsale find a nice, appealing chemistry that plays on his strengths as a movie star and hers as a serious actress--he gives her glamour, she gives him smarts. Their truncated romance--the beginning of which is told in flashback so we can get right to the point where he has to leave her to go to England--works, thanks to their charm. They're no Kate and Leo from Titanic (a strategy the film strives hard toward), but they're pretty darn adorable in their own right. Hartnett, as the not entirely unwelcome third wheel, squints bravely but makes only a slight dent in the film. Everyone else in Pearl Harbor--from Cuba Gooding Jr.'s brave navy seaman to Jon Voight's able impersonation of FDR--is pretty much a glorified walk-on, taking a backseat to the pyrotechnics and action sequences that keep the three-hour film in fairly constant motion. But when that action does take hold, Pearl Harbor is quite a thrilling ride. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (1812)

'Pearl Harbor' a big misfire
From up to its pretty exciting 15-minute sequence as the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor, 'Pearl Harbor' is a lumbering, barely involving film, which gives us a love triangle between two hunkish World War II fighter pilots, Josh Harnett and Ben Affleck and pretty nurse Kate Beckinsale.

'Pearl Harbor' tries to capture the atmosphere and engaging set up of 1997's better "Titanic" by setting up three star-crossed lovers, instead of the usual two. It fails terribly, but it's mostly scripter Randall Wallace's fault, which tries to balance three to four subplots by compromising the film's integrity and intelligence.

This 3+ hour film is obviously meant as a tribute to the people who died December 7, 1942 and has pretty nice cinematography, but the film itself is a shoddy-made puzzle in which all the pieces don't quite fit together.

The characters wallow in sentimentality and the film unsuccessfully tries to create atmosphere, romance and humor, but the film's bottom drops out in the final third, not only to reveal a plot full of holes, but a incomprehensible story told in bad faith.

Sorry, Bruckheimer. Nice try but no cigar.

September 11, 2001: Another "date that will live in infamy!"
"Pearl Harbor" is a movie of far greater importance after the terrorists attacks of September 11. We are now at war against ideologues committed to destroying our nation. Americans only a few months ago considered "Pearl Harbor" as merely a depiction of a bygone tragic era, but not particularly relevant to our present
concerns. Needless to add, this mindset is no longer embraced by the majority. Jon Voight brilliantly portrays President Franklin D. Roosevelt. You will have a difficult time remaining stoic and tearless when Voight gives tongue to Roosevelt's famous radio speech to the American people after the Japanese treacherous
December 7, 1941 assault on Pearl Harbor. "We are at war," declared the President and "we have been described as weaklings and playboys" unwilling to overcome formidable obstacles, and too cowardly to fight. Does this rhetoric sound familiar? History has been repeated, and once again we are challenged to bravely confront our enemies.

The cast that includes Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale, Cuba Gooding Jr, Josh Harnett, Alec Baldwin, and Jon Voight are fantastic. Michael Bay should be congratulated for directing this work of art. The lengthy battle scene ranks among the best of all time. Every moral person should also be taken aback by the scene
where a wounded seaman curses a Japanese-American physician who comes to his aid. Racial and ethnic bigotry was wrong in 1941, and must be wholeheartedly rejected today when some less than admirable individuals are tempted to blame their fellow Americans of Arab descent for the horror of just a few weeks ago. The
United States courageously and ethically faced its enemies over fifty years ago. We must do so once again.

The very fact that this film's creators relied so extensively on focus groups to guide the making of this film was a serious mistake. Both Liberal and Conservative commentators used this as an excuse to blast "Pearl Harbor" immediately upon its initial release. Many wrongly concluded that these marketing studies might be dismissed as a mere cynical attempt by the producers to increase their profits. I strongly disagree with this assessment, and instead strongly recommend that every citizen view this film at least once. It may very well be your duty to so.

Awesome deleted scenes
This is the DVD to get, it has the deleted scenes of the love affair between Doolittle (played by Baldwin) and Beckinsale - the child Beckinsale carries was actually Doolittle's, not Josh Harnett's - in this restored, original version

good but not THAT good
This is a good movie but not great. It's way too long and the actors are not really that good. The special effects are amazing to look at but it gets boring after a while. Jennifer Garner had a very small role in the movie. Why didn't she got a bigger part is beyond me. This unrated version is not that special only has a lot more gore/violence. Why did I waste time and money on this one I really don't know. If you love violence movies buy this now if now avoid it at all costs.

Pearl Harbore, and inaccurate
I must say that, when I saw this film. I was expecting a high intensity build towards the ultimate climax of the attack itself. Instead, we get the usual Hollywood love fest, Hollywood liberties on the truth (though I am not bothered by the liberties themselves, but sometimes the liberties are too ridiculous!) For example, some of the ships used in the movie to be hit by torpedoes are woefully modern, IE not of WWII time period. The Doolittle Raid, look at the aircraft carrier, it shows an angle that only modern nuclear ACC's have, back then the ACC's were long rectangler shaped vessels.

Lastly, I just found it boring and it was like the director was attempting to do a Titanic style story with fictional characters caught in a love triangle all the while the story builds towards the attack as a secondary mentioning. Just way too much Hollywood liberties taken against one of the darkest times for America, and I can't help but feel that the veterans, especially those who were there, should have been given something that respected them more.

I will say though, the attack itself is stunning, why I give it two stars... other than that this movie falls flat for me. ... Read more

Reviews (167)

Wild and Hilarious
It took them 8 years, but Will Smith and Martin Lawrence are back for Bad Boys II taking on the evil Cuban Ecstasy cartel and BOY does 8 years make a difference.

THE STORY

Miami P.D. cops Marcus Burnett (Lawrence) and Mike Lowrey (Smith) return to the big screen to take down a Cuban Ecstasy distribution ring. In between raising havoc on the streets of Miami and dealing with some personal issues (Mike's too much of a loose cannon and Mark's getting too old for this stuff) the boys, like in the first movie, wind up in some pretty hilarious situations.

THE COOL STUFF

The action is awesome and the comedy is still as sophomoric and hilarious as ever (that's a GOOD thing). Eight years makes a BIG difference in the terms of special effects and Bad Boys II has taken some pages out of the Matrix, CSI and Fast and Furious in terms of FX and action. The result as the Boys would say is some real COOL [stuff].

Best Scenes

1. The Freeway CHASES

2. Rat Hunting (Hilarious!!!)

3. The Video Store Scene (HILARIOUS!!!!)

4. The Morgue scene (gross, but funny)

THE CRITIQUE

The one MINOR critique with the film is its length!!! At a whopping 2 and half hours this thing is long but thankfully doesn't drag. The action is so intense it's a literal whirlwind ride. The movie DOES take a page from Pearl Harbor though in that JUST when you think the movie is about to end a new plot development opens up and continues for another half hour. The movie may very well have been better to have cut just a half hour earlier but the action in the last half hour, while feeling tacked on, was just as solid as anything else.

THE DVD EXTRAS

Well, not only do you get a stacked movie, but you also get a STACKED set of extras. So much, in fact, that they needed to put it on a whole extra disk.

Among the goodies we get are:

1. 8 theatrical trailers

2. Seven deleted scenes

3. Six sequence breakdowns

4. 19 production diary featurettes

5. A Jay-Z video

Waaay too much to get into but if you're an extras fiend you've got a whole extra disk of it to go through.

THE VERDICT

This is your prototype modern day action flick: pounding soundtrack, TONS of guns, TONS of cars and some pretty wicked street humor to go along with it. Whether you buy it or rent, it's a solid film to watch and a solid addition to your collection if you're into it.

GRADES

The Movie: 5 stars
The Extras: 5 stars
Overall: 5 stars

Highly Recommended

The Quality of DVD Authoring = Bad
Bad Boys II was a great movie to watch, full of action humor. Some of the camera work for this movie was truly amazing, and a lot of original ideas were explored. but the intent of this short review unfortunately isn't all praise.

While I liked the movie, the DVD itself was disappointing. The Second disc is loaded with cool extra features that didn't disappoint. However, the main feature was flawed. Chapters 10 through 14 (From Phat's Electronics until the chapter when Smith and Lawrence pick up the KKK guy from jail and put him in the trunk) are interlaced, which is really odd. It's hard encoded 3-2 interlacing, 3 progressive frames followed by 2 interlaced ones. Watching on a normal TV, you wouldn't notice at all, as they display interlaced images. However, on any HIgh definition system (Including a computer), these 4 chapters will look like utter crap. On my home theater system which includes a High-Def Projector with a built in Ti deinterlacer, these 4 chapters still looked bad. So, in short,

IF YOU HAVE A HIGH DEFINITION SYSTEM, DO NOT BUY THIS DVD!

I think this was simply an authoring mistake, but it is one which really annoys me. I haven't seen this information posted anywhere, so I felt the need for a review. Hope this was helpful for some.

mindless
Modern movie action, not much of a story. All special effects and crazy car chases.

cvsnxdf
a very good action movie. a lot of great car chases and shootouts. also a funny movie. the exta features are not very good.

Long Film But Funny Nonetheless
I actually liked this one better than the first! Could've done without all the language though. Even the Lethal Weapon films didn't have all that cursing but other than that.

Don't get me wrong, I ain't bashing that part of it. It has it place but a lot of times they were just cursing just to be doing it it seemed. Still a great film overall and a nice touch adding the incredible Gabrielle Union to the mix! ... Read more

Amazon.com

A cheerfully over-the-top action film, Bad Boys is notable chiefly for the rapport between its two stars, Will Smith and Martin Lawrence, as two Miami cops on the trail of a drug kingpin as they try to protect a witness (Tea Leoni). Smith is the swinging bachelor and Lawrence the family man, and both must juggle their personal lives as they baby-sit the one chance they have to recover a stolen drug shipment, save their jobs, and take down the drug dealer. While the film is almost always implausible and its story is something seen many times before, director Michael Bay (The Rock) keeps things moving stylishly and at a feverish pace, as Smith and Lawrence prove themselves a terrific comic pairing. Their odd couple banter flies at a faster clip than the bullets and explosions, and becomes the best reason to see this hyperbolic but entertaining action flick. --Robert Lane ... Read more

Reviews (80)

"Lawrence and Smith Are The Bad Boys of Comedy"
Hilariously enjoyable as any black comedy and full of fast paced action, "Bad Boys," as a 'slick flick,' stars Martin Lawrence as Marcus Burnett and Will Smith as Mike Lowrey playing two cops who fall on to the trail of millions of dollars of Heroin stolen by a criminal mastermind named Fouchet (Tcheky Karyo) and try to recover it as well as rescue Julie Mott (Tea Leoni) who is also involved. Personal matters appear to Marcus Burnett who is obsessed with getting "quality time" with his wife Theresa (Theresa Randle) and almost loses his marriage when he is forced to switch names and use Mike Lowrey in front of Julie. The comedy works unmistakeably well, however, the only mistakes I find in here are the heavy profanity and the violence used. But I keep saying this to myself, how can you pardon the profanity if it works well with the script? Oh well. Don Simpson-Jerry Bruckheimer Films/Columbia Pictures, 1995, Rated R for intense violent action and persuasive strong language.

The first film in hopefully a trilogy and bruckheimer's best
Don Simpson and legendary action producer Jerry Bruckheimer who almost surpasses Joel Silver in what he put's on the screen,
and at this time first time director Michael Bay who also helmed
the much bigger and from the looks badder sequel Bad Boys 2.Get's
down and dirty for Bad Boys the first flim of this series wich
teams Will Smith and Martin Lawrence.100 million in confiscated
heroin has been hijacked from Miami Police the pride bust of DEA
and Narc agent's Mike Lowry(Will Smith)who is a stylish single
and full of money and his partner Marcus Burnett(Martin Lawrence)
,a family man who want's quality family time could not be any more
oppisite , but if they don't work together to find out about the
whereabouts of the missing heroin it will shut down the narcotics
of the Miami Police Department but when a drug kingpin played by
Tcheky Karyo kills a freind of Mike Lowry's with a witness spying
on the murder it becomes personal for Mike.But they must do all
they can to protect Julie(Tea Leoni) before she is killed by the
kingpins henchmen even if Mike Lowry and Marcus Burnett trade
places to protect her but they will also have to fight a drug war
in order for them to recover the stolen drugs and save Julie's life.

An explosive first entry in the series in hopfully a trilogy wich would be very weird on Bruckheimer's part of taking the
advantage of making his first trilogy.Explosive action , car
chases , unbeleivable stunts and the like wise teaming of Will
Smith and Martin Lawrence who without there chemistry added to
the film would be no sequel and just and ordinary action film
but there Mel Gibson and Danny Glover like appeal makes this film set afire as one of the best films Bruckheimer has made
Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer would only team one more
time for The Rock before Simpson's untimely death , the highly
anticipated bigger and badder sequel is due out this friday
an awsome action film.

Love this movie
I love this movie. It is funny and action-packed. I just wish two could have copied the same formula. It had too much action. It made me dizzy.

Nevrer seen
I have never seen this movie so it will get 4 stars need to get my boycott across to show this point

Something Old, Somthing New
By the mid-nineties, the buddy cop action flick was not a new idea. Starting with 48 Hours and continuing with movies like Beverly Hills Cop and Lethal Weapon, the "cat and dog in a barrel" concept had been fairly played out. However, in 1995, a new director and some rising stars teamed up with the movie veterans behind Top Gun to create a new breed of action movie.

In Bad Boys, wild card narcotics officers Marcus (Martin Lawrence) and Mike (Will Smith) are in a bind. Their career dope bust has just been robbed from the station, and their only hope of finding it is the witness to a murder. However, circumstances get complicated when the two are forced to switch roles, and family man Marcus has to become swinging bachelor Mike for 72 hours.

The plot of the movie is fairly weak, centering around the drug bust and the cops' efforts to protect the witness, find the dope, and (shock and awe) keep Internal Affairs off their backs. However, the plot is not the reason to see the movie. For the reason, just look to the stars.

The same spirit of banter and hen-pecking that made the Lethal Weapon series so enjoyable is given a fresh coat of paint, and a couple of fresh voices. Will Smith and Martin Lawrence snap, crackle, and explode on screen, whether their shooting the bad guys or just firing pot shots at each other. While Lethal Weapon showed us the friction between a fresh pair of partners, Bad Boys shows us two cops who have been together six years, and know just how to get on each other's nerves.

But even with the snappy humor that Lawrence and Smith bring to the screen, the movie rides on wheels of action. Micheal Bay has become synonymous with action movies, and Bad Boys is the reason why. In his directorial debut, Bay uses swift camera moves, scenic pans, and judicious slow motion, fusing elements of John Woo and MTV to create a fresh take on gunplay and car chases. Although he lacks Woo's finesse in creating bullet ballets, Bay definitely knows how to keep a film's pace going, and Bad Boys does just that.

Sure, the movie's not perfect. The plot is sometimes laughably flawed, and the real Miami PD wouldn't put with half the crap that Smith and Lawrence pull, but the movie is enjoyable nontheless, focusing on character conflict and balls-out adrenaline to keep the audience entertained. Combined with a solid cast of character actors (Joe Pantoliano ROCKS), and Bad Boys is summer entertainment at its funnest. ... Read more

Description

Hollywood superstar Sean Connery (FINDING FORRESTER) joins Academy Award(R)-winner Nicolas Cage (1995 Best Actor -- LEAVING LAS VEGAS) in the action-packed thriller of the year, THE ROCK! All of San Francisco is taken hostage when a vengeful general (Ed Harris -- A BEAUTIFUL MIND) seizes control of Alcatraz Island, threatening to launch missiles loaded with deadly poison gas! With time running out, only a young FBI chemical weapons expert (Cage) and a notorious federal prisoner (Connery) have the skills to penetrate the island fortress and defuse the lethal situation! Edge-of-your-seat suspense and unstoppable action explode off the screen in this must-see motion picture event! ... Read more

Reviews (256)

Break into "The Rock"
...But be sure the neighbors aren't home! This DVD (with the possible exception of "Apollo 13") has been the closest thing to the movie theater experience in the genre. My home theater system was BOOMING. A great digital transfer complements and showcases this action thriller.

You've read the synopsis so I won't bore you with my critique of the screenplay and acting. However, superb casting, a twinge of reality play by Nick Cage, a captivating Ed Harris and the evergreen suave presence of Sean Connery carries the cookie-cutter script playfully and effectively.

I came short of giving the film five stars only because of the "Die Hard" formulaic aspect of the film; a collection of hostages, weapons-savvy terrorists and the everyday Joe who saves the day. Otherwise, the movie is chock-full of memorable special effects, one-liners (Connery's annecdote of the "prom queen" is spectacular) and Director Michael Bay's talented use of atmosphere to tell the story. All of these aspects make "The Rock" a welcome addition to my DVD library.

Get Ready to Rock
Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage face incredible odds in the action-packed hit "The Rock". A rogue US general and his team seize control of Alcatraz and threaten the city of San Francisco with poison gas rockets. Now the lives of millions rest in the hands of a FBI chemical weapons specialist (Nicolas Cage) and a former Alcatraz escapee (Sean Connery). "The Rock" is a thrilling, edge-of-your-seat spectacle from start to finish. Director Michael Bay has gain success with such films as "Armageddon" and "Bad Boys" but "The Rock" still remains as the director's finest work. Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage have great onscreen chemistry and further drive the film's story. Director Michael Bay stages amazing action sequences including a fierce car chase within the streets of San Francisco.

If you weren't impress with the previous release then upgrade to "The Rock - Criterion Collection". The movie is presented in enhanced widescreen format. The DVD contains a stunning and flawless picture quality with vibrant color and sharpness. The Dolby Digital sound is certainly impressive and offers more aggresive surround effects than the DTS audio track. This 2-Disc Criterion Edition features audio commentaries by cast and crew, FX and action scenes featurettes, outtakes, trailers and the movie's premiere on Alcatraz. "The Rock" is non-stop fun and this Criterion Collection DVD earns an "A".

excellent film with great extra features
This review is for the Criterion Collection DVD edition of the film.

In this director approved Criterion Collection release, we are treated to some excellent materials.

The film follows the story of Francis Hummel (Ed Harris), a retired marine who takes hostages on Alcatraz island. His demand is that the families of soldiers killed in covert operations be given compensation. He treatens to launch VX nerve gas into the city of San Francisco if his demands are not met. A navy SEAL team is sent in to neutralize the threat. Helping out is Stanley Goodspeed (Nicholas Cage), a chemical weapons expert, and John Patrick Mason (Sean Connery), the only man to have escaped from Alcatraz.

The film has great acting and there are some good laughs in the film also. There are many action packed scenes including a car chase through the streets of San Francisco and the cars are often airborne when they go on the hills.

The Criterion DVD has many special features and is on a deouble disc set.

Disc 1 contains the movie with optional audio commentary by Director Michael Bay, Producer Jerry Bruckheimer, Technical advisor Harry Humphries, and actors Nicholas Cage and Ed Harris.

Disc 2 contains a theatrical trailer and TV spots, a video interview with producer Jerry Bruckheimer, a blooper reel, a special about the film's premiere on Alcatraz, scenes from a TV special "Secrets of Alcatraz" that contains interviews with actual former inmates and a history of the island from Native American times to modern times.

There is a special "Dos and Don'ts of Hollywood Gunplay" with the film's technical advisor Harry Humpries and Marshall Teague. This specail contains depictions of errors made in action films regarding the use of guns it emphasises saftey and common mistakes including gun drawing techniques that don't "work" such as the "gangster grab" or the "wyatt earp pull".

There are also 2 features on the films special effects. One is on the dive sequence and the other is on other effects, like the cable car crash. There are also storyboards, production stills and drawings.

This is a must biy for fans of the movie as well a fans of the Criterion Collection.

Fun film, but why on Criterion?
The Michael Bay - Jerry Bruckheimer formula, like that for the James Bond films, is pretty well set: lots of stuff blowing up, lots of bodies flying through the air, a cast dominated by strong male leads, women are very secondary, a very dramatic music score, lots of foul language and a very right of center political outlook (the military are always the heroes and anyone who questions the heroes' judgment are pansies or some other leftwing radical type). However, the James Bond films always had a sly sense of humor about themselves. Bond might save the American Space program, Fort Knox, Miami and the planet Earth, but there was always an underlying message: This is just for fun folks. The Bay-Bruckheimer films, however, have the delusion that they're actually fighting the battles depicted on screen. There's a lot of overwrought music, emotional scenes between the characters and slow motion closups of the hero(es) walking or running towards their battle with evil. The Rock, in this way, is no different. A team of marines, led by General Frank Hummell (Ed Harris) and disgusted with the way the U.S. Government has neglected the families of those soldiers killed in illegal missions abroad, has taken 81 hostages on Alcatraz, threatening to lauch nerve gas rockets into San Francisco unless reparations are paid to those soldiers' survivors. Heavy, heavy stuff.
However, injected into this serious mix is none other than the best James Bond himself -- Sean Connery. Even in the more serious early Bonds, Connery always managed to convey to the audience that they were supposed to have fun during these films. Bruckheimer and Bay do their best to elevate what is essentially Saturday morning action serial material into Wagnerian opera. But there is Connery, putting all the action into perspective by not taking anyting too seriously and grounding the material by recognizing what it really is: sheer entertainment.

Bay, Bruckheimer and company keep trying to push the fact that Ed Harris' desperate General Hummell is a man of honor, a real hero, etc., etc. Anyone who questions his judgment, like the hapless, simpering Presidential Chief of Staff at the first briefing scene, is shot down as a liberal wimp who would never make the sacrifices that Harris' character made for America and should shut up before one of the real men in the room shoot him (I wonder what George McGovern, Daniel Inouye and other liberals who fought for and were decorated for fighting for their country think of this kind of portrayal). Never mind that the General threatens to kill thousands of San Franciscans with nerve gas. Bay-Bruckheimer have stacked the deck by having the great Ed Harris play General Hummell, giving the character an inherent integrity that can't help but make him sympathetic. Fox News isn't this slanted.

In walks Connery who, in his big confrontation scene with Harris, gets right to the heart of the matter in a few lines. He correctly says that he doesn't see how "you cherish the memory of the dead by killing another million" and sums up Hummell's actions as "an act of lunacy." In one fell swoop, Connery slaps the collective message of the film across the face and shows that terrorism is terrorism, no matter if it's done by decorated U.S. soldiers with a legitimate gripe against the government. It's fairly certain that Connery, an executive producer of the film, purposely torpedoed Bay-Bruckheimer's testosterone toned view of the world.

In The Rock, Connery proves, once again, that an actor with a strong enough presence and a large amount of talent doesn't need to scream and shout to give a great performance. Nicholas Cage, Connery's co-star, bellows and shouts like he's on fire most of the film ("How, in Zeus' BUTTHOLE did you get out of your cell?!?!?!?!?!?" -- god, give it a rest, Nick!). Cage certainly isn't alone -- the rest of the cast buys into Bay-Bruckheimer's "this film is the most important thing you'll ever watch" mentality. However, Sean Connery, with his charm, wit and grace, throws a bucket of cold water over the entire proceedings and reminds everyone that the film is what it is and nothing more: a technically superb action film that exists merely to entertain ... period.

A final note: Criterion has always produced the finest quality DVD's loaded with many, many interesting extras. Most of the films Criterion has released are classics: Notorious, Roshamon, Ikiru, Yojimbo, Charade, Rebecca, etc. I enjoyed The Rock, but why did Criterion deem it good enough to rank with the other films they've released on DVD? Criterion has been selective in its releases and The Rock lowers the bar.

Connery Elevates the Entire Film
The Michael Bay - Jerry Bruckheimer formula, like that for the James Bond films, is pretty well set: lots of stuff blowing up, lots of bodies flying through the air, a cast dominated by strong male leads, women are very secondary, a very dramatic music score, lots of foul language and a very right of center political outlook (the military are always the heroes and anyone who questions the heroes' judgment are pansies or some other leftwing radical type). However, the James Bond films always had a sly sense of humor about themselves. Bond might save the American Space program, Fort Knox, Miami and the planet Earth, but there was always an underlying message: This is just for fun folks. The Bay-Bruckheimer films, however, have the delusion that they're actually fighting the battles depicted on screen. There's a lot of overwrought music, emotional scenes between the characters and slow motion closups of the hero(es) walking or running towards their battle with evil. The Rock, in this way, is no different. A team of marines, led by General Frank Hummell (Ed Harris) and disgusted with the way the U.S. Government has neglected the families of those soldiers killed in illegal missions abroad, has taken 81 hostages on Alcatraz, threatening to lauch nerve gas rockets into San Francisco unless reparations are paid to those soldiers' survivors. Heavy, heavy stuff.

However, injected into this serious mix is none other than the best James Bond himself -- Sean Connery. Even in the more serious early Bonds, Connery always managed to convey to the audience that they were supposed to have fun during these films. Bruckheimer and Bay do their best to elevate what is essentially Saturday morning action serial material into Wagnerian opera. But there is Connery, putting all the action into perspective by not taking anyting too seriously and grounding the material by recognizing what it really is: sheer entertainment.

Bay, Bruckheimer and company keep trying to push the fact that Ed Harris' desperate General Hummell is a man of honor, a real hero, etc., etc. Anyone who questions his judgment, like the hapless, simpering Presidential Chief of Staff at the first briefing scene, is shot down as a liberal wimp who would never make the sacrifices that Harris' character made for America and should shut up before one of the real men in the room shoot him (I wonder what George McGovern, Daniel Inouye and other liberals who fought for and were decorated for fighting for their country think of this kind of portrayal). Never mind that the General threatens to kill thousands of San Franciscans with nerve gas. Bay-Bruckheimer have stacked the deck by having the great Ed Harris play General Hummell, giving the character an inherent integrity that can't help but make him sympathetic. Fox News isn't this slanted.

In walks Connery who, in his big confrontation scene with Harris, gets right to the heart of the matter in a few lines. He correctly says that he doesn't see how "you cherish the memory of the dead by killing another million" and sums up Hummell's actions as "an act of lunacy." In one fell swoop, Connery slaps the collective message of the film across the face and shows that terrorism is terrorism, no matter if it's done by decorated U.S. soldiers with a legitimate gripe against the government. It's fairly certain that Connery, an executive producer of the film, purposely torpedoed Bay-Bruckheimer's testosterone toned view of the world.

In The Rock, Connery proves, once again, that an actor with a strong enough presence and a large amount of talent doesn't need to scream and shout to give a great performance. Nicholas Cage, Connery's co-star, bellows and shouts like he's on fire most of the film ("How, in Zeus' BUTTHOLE did you get out of your cell?!?!?!?!?!?" -- god, give it a rest, Nick!). Cage certainly isn't alone -- the rest of the cast buys into Bay-Bruckheimer's "this film is the most important thing you'll ever watch" mentality. However, Sean Connery, with his charm, wit and grace, throws a bucket of cold water over the entire proceedings and reminds everyone that the film is what it is and nothing more: a technically superb action film that exists merely to entertain ... period. ... Read more

Reviews (256)

Break into "The Rock"
...But be sure the neighbors aren't home! This DVD (with the possible exception of "Apollo 13") has been the closest thing to the movie theater experience in the genre. My home theater system was BOOMING. A great digital transfer complements and showcases this action thriller.

You've read the synopsis so I won't bore you with my critique of the screenplay and acting. However, superb casting, a twinge of reality play by Nick Cage, a captivating Ed Harris and the evergreen suave presence of Sean Connery carries the cookie-cutter script playfully and effectively.

I came short of giving the film five stars only because of the "Die Hard" formulaic aspect of the film; a collection of hostages, weapons-savvy terrorists and the everyday Joe who saves the day. Otherwise, the movie is chock-full of memorable special effects, one-liners (Connery's annecdote of the "prom queen" is spectacular) and Director Michael Bay's talented use of atmosphere to tell the story. All of these aspects make "The Rock" a welcome addition to my DVD library.

Get Ready to Rock
Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage face incredible odds in the action-packed hit "The Rock". A rogue US general and his team seize control of Alcatraz and threaten the city of San Francisco with poison gas rockets. Now the lives of millions rest in the hands of a FBI chemical weapons specialist (Nicolas Cage) and a former Alcatraz escapee (Sean Connery). "The Rock" is a thrilling, edge-of-your-seat spectacle from start to finish. Director Michael Bay has gain success with such films as "Armageddon" and "Bad Boys" but "The Rock" still remains as the director's finest work. Sean Connery and Nicolas Cage have great onscreen chemistry and further drive the film's story. Director Michael Bay stages amazing action sequences including a fierce car chase within the streets of San Francisco.

If you weren't impress with the previous release then upgrade to "The Rock - Criterion Collection". The movie is presented in enhanced widescreen format. The DVD contains a stunning and flawless picture quality with vibrant color and sharpness. The Dolby Digital sound is certainly impressive and offers more aggresive surround effects than the DTS audio track. This 2-Disc Criterion Edition features audio commentaries by cast and crew, FX and action scenes featurettes, outtakes, trailers and the movie's premiere on Alcatraz. "The Rock" is non-stop fun and this Criterion Collection DVD earns an "A".

excellent film with great extra features
This review is for the Criterion Collection DVD edition of the film.

In this director approved Criterion Collection release, we are treated to some excellent materials.

The film follows the story of Francis Hummel (Ed Harris), a retired marine who takes hostages on Alcatraz island. His demand is that the families of soldiers killed in covert operations be given compensation. He treatens to launch VX nerve gas into the city of San Francisco if his demands are not met. A navy SEAL team is sent in to neutralize the threat. Helping out is Stanley Goodspeed (Nicholas Cage), a chemical weapons expert, and John Patrick Mason (Sean Connery), the only man to have escaped from Alcatraz.

The film has great acting and there are some good laughs in the film also. There are many action packed scenes including a car chase through the streets of San Francisco and the cars are often airborne when they go on the hills.

The Criterion DVD has many special features and is on a deouble disc set.

Disc 1 contains the movie with optional audio commentary by Director Michael Bay, Producer Jerry Bruckheimer, Technical advisor Harry Humphries, and actors Nicholas Cage and Ed Harris.

Disc 2 contains a theatrical trailer and TV spots, a video interview with producer Jerry Bruckheimer, a blooper reel, a special about the film's premiere on Alcatraz, scenes from a TV special "Secrets of Alcatraz" that contains interviews with actual former inmates and a history of the island from Native American times to modern times.

There is a special "Dos and Don'ts of Hollywood Gunplay" with the film's technical advisor Harry Humpries and Marshall Teague. This specail contains depictions of errors made in action films regarding the use of guns it emphasises saftey and common mistakes including gun drawing techniques that don't "work" such as the "gangster grab" or the "wyatt earp pull".

There are also 2 features on the films special effects. One is on the dive sequence and the other is on other effects, like the cable car crash. There are also storyboards, production stills and drawings.

This is a must biy for fans of the movie as well a fans of the Criterion Collection.

Fun film, but why on Criterion?
The Michael Bay - Jerry Bruckheimer formula, like that for the James Bond films, is pretty well set: lots of stuff blowing up, lots of bodies flying through the air, a cast dominated by strong male leads, women are very secondary, a very dramatic music score, lots of foul language and a very right of center political outlook (the military are always the heroes and anyone who questions the heroes' judgment are pansies or some other leftwing radical type). However, the James Bond films always had a sly sense of humor about themselves. Bond might save the American Space program, Fort Knox, Miami and the planet Earth, but there was always an underlying message: This is just for fun folks. The Bay-Bruckheimer films, however, have the delusion that they're actually fighting the battles depicted on screen. There's a lot of overwrought music, emotional scenes between the characters and slow motion closups of the hero(es) walking or running towards their battle with evil. The Rock, in this way, is no different. A team of marines, led by General Frank Hummell (Ed Harris) and disgusted with the way the U.S. Government has neglected the families of those soldiers killed in illegal missions abroad, has taken 81 hostages on Alcatraz, threatening to lauch nerve gas rockets into San Francisco unless reparations are paid to those soldiers' survivors. Heavy, heavy stuff.
However, injected into this serious mix is none other than the best James Bond himself -- Sean Connery. Even in the more serious early Bonds, Connery always managed to convey to the audience that they were supposed to have fun during these films. Bruckheimer and Bay do their best to elevate what is essentially Saturday morning action serial material into Wagnerian opera. But there is Connery, putting all the action into perspective by not taking anyting too seriously and grounding the material by recognizing what it really is: sheer entertainment.

Bay, Bruckheimer and company keep trying to push the fact that Ed Harris' desperate General Hummell is a man of honor, a real hero, etc., etc. Anyone who questions his judgment, like the hapless, simpering Presidential Chief of Staff at the first briefing scene, is shot down as a liberal wimp who would never make the sacrifices that Harris' character made for America and should shut up before one of the real men in the room shoot him (I wonder what George McGovern, Daniel Inouye and other liberals who fought for and were decorated for fighting for their country think of this kind of portrayal). Never mind that the General threatens to kill thousands of San Franciscans with nerve gas. Bay-Bruckheimer have stacked the deck by having the great Ed Harris play General Hummell, giving the character an inherent integrity that can't help but make him sympathetic. Fox News isn't this slanted.

In walks Connery who, in his big confrontation scene with Harris, gets right to the heart of the matter in a few lines. He correctly says that he doesn't see how "you cherish the memory of the dead by killing another million" and sums up Hummell's actions as "an act of lunacy." In one fell swoop, Connery slaps the collective message of the film across the face and shows that terrorism is terrorism, no matter if it's done by decorated U.S. soldiers with a legitimate gripe against the government. It's fairly certain that Connery, an executive producer of the film, purposely torpedoed Bay-Bruckheimer's testosterone toned view of the world.

In The Rock, Connery proves, once again, that an actor with a strong enough presence and a large amount of talent doesn't need to scream and shout to give a great performance. Nicholas Cage, Connery's co-star, bellows and shouts like he's on fire most of the film ("How, in Zeus' BUTTHOLE did you get out of your cell?!?!?!?!?!?" -- god, give it a rest, Nick!). Cage certainly isn't alone -- the rest of the cast buys into Bay-Bruckheimer's "this film is the most important thing you'll ever watch" mentality. However, Sean Connery, with his charm, wit and grace, throws a bucket of cold water over the entire proceedings and reminds everyone that the film is what it is and nothing more: a technically superb action film that exists merely to entertain ... period.

A final note: Criterion has always produced the finest quality DVD's loaded with many, many interesting extras. Most of the films Criterion has released are classics: Notorious, Roshamon, Ikiru, Yojimbo, Charade, Rebecca, etc. I enjoyed The Rock, but why did Criterion deem it good enough to rank with the other films they've released on DVD? Criterion has been selective in its releases and The Rock lowers the bar.

Connery Elevates the Entire Film
The Michael Bay - Jerry Bruckheimer formula, like that for the James Bond films, is pretty well set: lots of stuff blowing up, lots of bodies flying through the air, a cast dominated by strong male leads, women are very secondary, a very dramatic music score, lots of foul language and a very right of center political outlook (the military are always the heroes and anyone who questions the heroes' judgment are pansies or some other leftwing radical type). However, the James Bond films always had a sly sense of humor about themselves. Bond might save the American Space program, Fort Knox, Miami and the planet Earth, but there was always an underlying message: This is just for fun folks. The Bay-Bruckheimer films, however, have the delusion that they're actually fighting the battles depicted on screen. There's a lot of overwrought music, emotional scenes between the characters and slow motion closups of the hero(es) walking or running towards their battle with evil. The Rock, in this way, is no different. A team of marines, led by General Frank Hummell (Ed Harris) and disgusted with the way the U.S. Government has neglected the families of those soldiers killed in illegal missions abroad, has taken 81 hostages on Alcatraz, threatening to lauch nerve gas rockets into San Francisco unless reparations are paid to those soldiers' survivors. Heavy, heavy stuff.

However, injected into this serious mix is none other than the best James Bond himself -- Sean Connery. Even in the more serious early Bonds, Connery always managed to convey to the audience that they were supposed to have fun during these films. Bruckheimer and Bay do their best to elevate what is essentially Saturday morning action serial material into Wagnerian opera. But there is Connery, putting all the action into perspective by not taking anyting too seriously and grounding the material by recognizing what it really is: sheer entertainment.

Bay, Bruckheimer and company keep trying to push the fact that Ed Harris' desperate General Hummell is a man of honor, a real hero, etc., etc. Anyone who questions his judgment, like the hapless, simpering Presidential Chief of Staff at the first briefing scene, is shot down as a liberal wimp who would never make the sacrifices that Harris' character made for America and should shut up before one of the real men in the room shoot him (I wonder what George McGovern, Daniel Inouye and other liberals who fought for and were decorated for fighting for their country think of this kind of portrayal). Never mind that the General threatens to kill thousands of San Franciscans with nerve gas. Bay-Bruckheimer have stacked the deck by having the great Ed Harris play General Hummell, giving the character an inherent integrity that can't help but make him sympathetic. Fox News isn't this slanted.

In walks Connery who, in his big confrontation scene with Harris, gets right to the heart of the matter in a few lines. He correctly says that he doesn't see how "you cherish the memory of the dead by killing another million" and sums up Hummell's actions as "an act of lunacy." In one fell swoop, Connery slaps the collective message of the film across the face and shows that terrorism is terrorism, no matter if it's done by decorated U.S. soldiers with a legitimate gripe against the government. It's fairly certain that Connery, an executive producer of the film, purposely torpedoed Bay-Bruckheimer's testosterone toned view of the world.

In The Rock, Connery proves, once again, that an actor with a strong enough presence and a large amount of talent doesn't need to scream and shout to give a great performance. Nicholas Cage, Connery's co-star, bellows and shouts like he's on fire most of the film ("How, in Zeus' BUTTHOLE did you get out of your cell?!?!?!?!?!?" -- god, give it a rest, Nick!). Cage certainly isn't alone -- the rest of the cast buys into Bay-Bruckheimer's "this film is the most important thing you'll ever watch" mentality. However, Sean Connery, with his charm, wit and grace, throws a bucket of cold water over the entire proceedings and reminds everyone that the film is what it is and nothing more: a technically superb action film that exists merely to entertain ... period. ... Read more

Amazon.com

To call Pearl Harbor a throwback to old-time war movies is something of an understatement. Director Michael Bay's epic take on the bombing that brought the United States into World War II hijacks every war movie situation and cliché (some affectionate, some stale) you've ever seen and gives them a shiny, glossy spin until the whole movie practically gleams. Planes glisten, water sparkles, trees beckon--and Bay's re-creation of the bombing itself, a 30-minute sequence that's tightly choreographed and amazingly photographed, sets the action movie bar up quite a few notches. And in updating the classic war film, Bay and screenwriter Randall Wallace (Braveheart) use that old plot standby, the love triangle--this time, it's between two pilots (Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett) and a nurse (Kate Beckinsale) who find themselves stationed at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, during what they thought would be a nice, sunny tour of duty. Then, of course, history intervened.

For the first 90 minutes of the movie, Affleck and Beckinsale find a nice, appealing chemistry that plays on his strengths as a movie star and hers as a serious actress--he gives her glamour, she gives him smarts. Their truncated romance--the beginning of which is told in flashback so we can get right to the point where he has to leave her to go to England--works, thanks to their charm. They're no Kate and Leo from Titanic (a strategy the film strives hard toward), but they're pretty darn adorable in their own right. Hartnett, as the not entirely unwelcome third wheel, squints bravely but makes only a slight dent in the film. Everyone else in Pearl Harbor--from Cuba Gooding Jr.'s brave navy seaman to Jon Voight's able impersonation of FDR--is pretty much a glorified walk-on, taking a backseat to the pyrotechnics and action sequences that keep the three-hour film in fairly constant motion. But when that action does take hold, Pearl Harbor is quite a thrilling ride. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (1812)

'Pearl Harbor' a big misfire
From up to its pretty exciting 15-minute sequence as the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor, 'Pearl Harbor' is a lumbering, barely involving film, which gives us a love triangle between two hunkish World War II fighter pilots, Josh Harnett and Ben Affleck and pretty nurse Kate Beckinsale.

'Pearl Harbor' tries to capture the atmosphere and engaging set up of 1997's better "Titanic" by setting up three star-crossed lovers, instead of the usual two. It fails terribly, but it's mostly scripter Randall Wallace's fault, which tries to balance three to four subplots by compromising the film's integrity and intelligence.

This 3+ hour film is obviously meant as a tribute to the people who died December 7, 1942 and has pretty nice cinematography, but the film itself is a shoddy-made puzzle in which all the pieces don't quite fit together.

The characters wallow in sentimentality and the film unsuccessfully tries to create atmosphere, romance and humor, but the film's bottom drops out in the final third, not only to reveal a plot full of holes, but a incomprehensible story told in bad faith.

Sorry, Bruckheimer. Nice try but no cigar.

September 11, 2001: Another "date that will live in infamy!"
"Pearl Harbor" is a movie of far greater importance after the terrorists attacks of September 11. We are now at war against ideologues committed to destroying our nation. Americans only a few months ago considered "Pearl Harbor" as merely a depiction of a bygone tragic era, but not particularly relevant to our present
concerns. Needless to add, this mindset is no longer embraced by the majority. Jon Voight brilliantly portrays President Franklin D. Roosevelt. You will have a difficult time remaining stoic and tearless when Voight gives tongue to Roosevelt's famous radio speech to the American people after the Japanese treacherous
December 7, 1941 assault on Pearl Harbor. "We are at war," declared the President and "we have been described as weaklings and playboys" unwilling to overcome formidable obstacles, and too cowardly to fight. Does this rhetoric sound familiar? History has been repeated, and once again we are challenged to bravely confront our enemies.

The cast that includes Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale, Cuba Gooding Jr, Josh Harnett, Alec Baldwin, and Jon Voight are fantastic. Michael Bay should be congratulated for directing this work of art. The lengthy battle scene ranks among the best of all time. Every moral person should also be taken aback by the scene
where a wounded seaman curses a Japanese-American physician who comes to his aid. Racial and ethnic bigotry was wrong in 1941, and must be wholeheartedly rejected today when some less than admirable individuals are tempted to blame their fellow Americans of Arab descent for the horror of just a few weeks ago. The
United States courageously and ethically faced its enemies over fifty years ago. We must do so once again.

The very fact that this film's creators relied so extensively on focus groups to guide the making of this film was a serious mistake. Both Liberal and Conservative commentators used this as an excuse to blast "Pearl Harbor" immediately upon its initial release. Many wrongly concluded that these marketing studies might be dismissed as a mere cynical attempt by the producers to increase their profits. I strongly disagree with this assessment, and instead strongly recommend that every citizen view this film at least once. It may very well be your duty to so.

Awesome deleted scenes
This is the DVD to get, it has the deleted scenes of the love affair between Doolittle (played by Baldwin) and Beckinsale - the child Beckinsale carries was actually Doolittle's, not Josh Harnett's - in this restored, original version

good but not THAT good
This is a good movie but not great. It's way too long and the actors are not really that good. The special effects are amazing to look at but it gets boring after a while. Jennifer Garner had a very small role in the movie. Why didn't she got a bigger part is beyond me. This unrated version is not that special only has a lot more gore/violence. Why did I waste time and money on this one I really don't know. If you love violence movies buy this now if now avoid it at all costs.

Pearl Harbore, and inaccurate
I must say that, when I saw this film. I was expecting a high intensity build towards the ultimate climax of the attack itself. Instead, we get the usual Hollywood love fest, Hollywood liberties on the truth (though I am not bothered by the liberties themselves, but sometimes the liberties are too ridiculous!) For example, some of the ships used in the movie to be hit by torpedoes are woefully modern, IE not of WWII time period. The Doolittle Raid, look at the aircraft carrier, it shows an angle that only modern nuclear ACC's have, back then the ACC's were long rectangler shaped vessels.

Lastly, I just found it boring and it was like the director was attempting to do a Titanic style story with fictional characters caught in a love triangle all the while the story builds towards the attack as a secondary mentioning. Just way too much Hollywood liberties taken against one of the darkest times for America, and I can't help but feel that the veterans, especially those who were there, should have been given something that respected them more.

I will say though, the attack itself is stunning, why I give it two stars... other than that this movie falls flat for me. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

The most accurate Documentary I have seen.
I am a Pearl Harbor historian and I bought a copy of this great documentary on DVD. It is 100% accurate and has footage never before seen. The "Survivors" that were interviewed gave excellent recounts of what it was like to be there. Never before have I seen extra footage of the bombing of the Arizona from a Japanese plane. Scott Freund and Tim Csabyani have done an excellent job. The quality and quantity of this DVD is something I would have expected from A & E or the History Channel. ... Read more

Reviews (80)

"Lawrence and Smith Are The Bad Boys of Comedy"
Hilariously enjoyable as any black comedy and full of fast paced action, "Bad Boys," as a 'slick flick,' stars Martin Lawrence as Marcus Burnett and Will Smith as Mike Lowrey playing two cops who fall on to the trail of millions of dollars of Heroin stolen by a criminal mastermind named Fouchet (Tcheky Karyo) and try to recover it as well as rescue Julie Mott (Tea Leoni) who is also involved. Personal matters appear to Marcus Burnett who is obsessed with getting "quality time" with his wife Theresa (Theresa Randle) and almost loses his marriage when he is forced to switch names and use Mike Lowrey in front of Julie. The comedy works unmistakeably well, however, the only mistakes I find in here are the heavy profanity and the violence used. But I keep saying this to myself, how can you pardon the profanity if it works well with the script? Oh well. Don Simpson-Jerry Bruckheimer Films/Columbia Pictures, 1995, Rated R for intense violent action and persuasive strong language.

The first film in hopefully a trilogy and bruckheimer's best
Don Simpson and legendary action producer Jerry Bruckheimer who almost surpasses Joel Silver in what he put's on the screen,
and at this time first time director Michael Bay who also helmed
the much bigger and from the looks badder sequel Bad Boys 2.Get's
down and dirty for Bad Boys the first flim of this series wich
teams Will Smith and Martin Lawrence.100 million in confiscated
heroin has been hijacked from Miami Police the pride bust of DEA
and Narc agent's Mike Lowry(Will Smith)who is a stylish single
and full of money and his partner Marcus Burnett(Martin Lawrence)
,a family man who want's quality family time could not be any more
oppisite , but if they don't work together to find out about the
whereabouts of the missing heroin it will shut down the narcotics
of the Miami Police Department but when a drug kingpin played by
Tcheky Karyo kills a freind of Mike Lowry's with a witness spying
on the murder it becomes personal for Mike.But they must do all
they can to protect Julie(Tea Leoni) before she is killed by the
kingpins henchmen even if Mike Lowry and Marcus Burnett trade
places to protect her but they will also have to fight a drug war
in order for them to recover the stolen drugs and save Julie's life.

An explosive first entry in the series in hopfully a trilogy wich would be very weird on Bruckheimer's part of taking the
advantage of making his first trilogy.Explosive action , car
chases , unbeleivable stunts and the like wise teaming of Will
Smith and Martin Lawrence who without there chemistry added to
the film would be no sequel and just and ordinary action film
but there Mel Gibson and Danny Glover like appeal makes this film set afire as one of the best films Bruckheimer has made
Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer would only team one more
time for The Rock before Simpson's untimely death , the highly
anticipated bigger and badder sequel is due out this friday
an awsome action film.

Love this movie
I love this movie. It is funny and action-packed. I just wish two could have copied the same formula. It had too much action. It made me dizzy.

Nevrer seen
I have never seen this movie so it will get 4 stars need to get my boycott across to show this point

Something Old, Somthing New
By the mid-nineties, the buddy cop action flick was not a new idea. Starting with 48 Hours and continuing with movies like Beverly Hills Cop and Lethal Weapon, the "cat and dog in a barrel" concept had been fairly played out. However, in 1995, a new director and some rising stars teamed up with the movie veterans behind Top Gun to create a new breed of action movie.

In Bad Boys, wild card narcotics officers Marcus (Martin Lawrence) and Mike (Will Smith) are in a bind. Their career dope bust has just been robbed from the station, and their only hope of finding it is the witness to a murder. However, circumstances get complicated when the two are forced to switch roles, and family man Marcus has to become swinging bachelor Mike for 72 hours.

The plot of the movie is fairly weak, centering around the drug bust and the cops' efforts to protect the witness, find the dope, and (shock and awe) keep Internal Affairs off their backs. However, the plot is not the reason to see the movie. For the reason, just look to the stars.

The same spirit of banter and hen-pecking that made the Lethal Weapon series so enjoyable is given a fresh coat of paint, and a couple of fresh voices. Will Smith and Martin Lawrence snap, crackle, and explode on screen, whether their shooting the bad guys or just firing pot shots at each other. While Lethal Weapon showed us the friction between a fresh pair of partners, Bad Boys shows us two cops who have been together six years, and know just how to get on each other's nerves.

But even with the snappy humor that Lawrence and Smith bring to the screen, the movie rides on wheels of action. Micheal Bay has become synonymous with action movies, and Bad Boys is the reason why. In his directorial debut, Bay uses swift camera moves, scenic pans, and judicious slow motion, fusing elements of John Woo and MTV to create a fresh take on gunplay and car chases. Although he lacks Woo's finesse in creating bullet ballets, Bay definitely knows how to keep a film's pace going, and Bad Boys does just that.

Sure, the movie's not perfect. The plot is sometimes laughably flawed, and the real Miami PD wouldn't put with half the crap that Smith and Lawrence pull, but the movie is enjoyable nontheless, focusing on character conflict and balls-out adrenaline to keep the audience entertained. Combined with a solid cast of character actors (Joe Pantoliano ROCKS), and Bad Boys is summer entertainment at its funnest. ... Read more

Reviews (80)

"Lawrence and Smith Are The Bad Boys of Comedy"
Hilariously enjoyable as any black comedy and full of fast paced action, "Bad Boys," as a 'slick flick,' stars Martin Lawrence as Marcus Burnett and Will Smith as Mike Lowrey playing two cops who fall on to the trail of millions of dollars of Heroin stolen by a criminal mastermind named Fouchet (Tcheky Karyo) and try to recover it as well as rescue Julie Mott (Tea Leoni) who is also involved. Personal matters appear to Marcus Burnett who is obsessed with getting "quality time" with his wife Theresa (Theresa Randle) and almost loses his marriage when he is forced to switch names and use Mike Lowrey in front of Julie. The comedy works unmistakeably well, however, the only mistakes I find in here are the heavy profanity and the violence used. But I keep saying this to myself, how can yo