Amazon.com essential video

It's not Blazing Saddles, but there are some chuckles to be found in Mel Brooks's 1993 spoof of the Robin Hood legend. Cary Elwes is Robin (with a lighthearted jab at Kevin Costner's bad English accent in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves), while Richard Lewis plays an angst-ridden King John, and Roger Rees a snotty Sheriff of Nottingham. Comic David Chappelle has some good moments as the only black member of Robins's noble thieves, and Brooks does his own spin on Friar Tuck: Rabbi Tuchman. The song-and-dance sequences featuring a chorus line of the Merry Men ("We're men / men in tights") is vintage Brooks, but otherwise the film can't get any traction. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (115)

A spoof for people who hate spoofs.
If you're sick and tired of spoofs, especially the dumb ones of today, like "Mafia!" or "Scary Movie", this is the spoof for you. This movie has all kinds of crazy humor that doesn't offend anyone or go over the top, and has a mess of celebrities in it, like the main star, Cary Elwes, and a great supporting cast consisting of Amy Yasbeck, Dave Chappelle, Isaac Hayes, Megan Cavanaugh, and even Patrick Stewart, under the direction of comedy legend Mel Brooks, who also appears in the movie. This movie has all kinds of humor, from humor spoofing modern times, to "secret" humor, to metaphorical humor, and to simply wacky humor anyone can laugh at. Like the Monty Python movies and the Naked Gun trilogy, you'd have to be dead not to find this movie funny.

So in short, see this movie! You'll laugh till your sides hurt!

It is not one of Mel Brook's best but there are some laughs
I read that Mel Brook's made this movie because he is facinated with the Robin Hood legend (In particular the Errol Flynn version) Remember "When things were rotten" back in the seventies. He did this movie to poke fun at the Kevin Costner version "Prince of thieves". Apparently Kevin Costner refused to wear tights and as far as Mel Brooks was concern Robin Hood wore tights. I remember one line in which Rabbi Tuckman said to Robin Hood. Robin Hood you just won the heart of the princess YOU PRINCE OF THIEVES YOU!"

Robin Hood is played the versitile actor Cary Elwese, who has done both comedy and drama. One of his most memorable lines in this movie was "Unlike other Robin Hoods, I have a British accent."

My main complaint his that many of the Jokes are recycled from previous Mel Brook's movies. The scene with Dom De Louis as a Godfather like character was funny. It was a pretty good immitation of Marlon Brando.

The actor who played hangman in this movie was also the Hangman in Blazing Saddles.

Of course Mel Brook's always played a character in his movies. He played Rabbi Tuckman who made money by going to differevt villages performing circumcisions.

Funny?
I saw this when it was released in theaters. I had hopes for quite a few laughs. Instead there were just a few. Very few. Ever see a "comedy" where you keep waiting for the funny stuff to happen, but it never does? That's what happens with "Robin Hood-Men In Tights".

A Classic Brooks Adventure!
"Robin Hood: Men in Tights" was the first of Mel's movies that I saw. It was also one of the movies that sealed me as a Brook's fan! Cary Elwes was the classic Robin, with fun pokes at all the various others who had been in the role. The merry men were the funniest group gathered on one screen and the raps that began and ended the movie were a different idea, but still really cool. This movie should be given more credit as a hilarious comedy. In fact, when my school did the musical "Brigadoon' (which takes place in Scotland), a bunch of the guy actors did a parody of "Robin Hood" as a school broadcast commerial. They changed the words of the famous song "We're men in tights!" to "We're men in Kilts". It was classic! If you are looking for a good film, this is it!

Where is the DVD?
This is one of the funniest movies ever made. If Dracula: Dead and Loving It can make it to DVD, then why not this? Not only that, but it is available in Europe and Australia but not in the US. What are they waiting for? ... Read more

Reviews (1926)

The force is strong with this one.
Star[]Wars! The series has come back into full swing with 'Attack of the Clones.' Everything that 'Phantom Menace' tried to be and more, we return to the rollicking space adventure that made the first three classics. Don't pay attention to the negitive reviews, aside from a little cheese covered romance the goods are delivered in great fashion. 'Attack..' is packed with extremely well lensed action set pieces that remind the viewer of the summer of 1980. The acting is decent and works for the material provided...I mean, this is Star Wars not Shakespere and lines are delivered with intended monotonality; lightsabers speak louder than words and emotion a Jedi does not crave. I found this film to be better than 'Return of the Jedi' due to its return to the swashbuckling action/adverture of the first two movies sans cute little talking kid friendly creatures that help generate mechandise sales for the toddler marketing target group. The special effects are outstanding of course, and the sound effects were really cool. The story was decent enough to get you to care what happens to the heroes and dislike the villians (finally, villians. That seemed to be missing from episode one save Darth Maul who was way underused). All around an excellent chapter in the saga and a great movie in itself. This film makes you look forward to the next installment and the man himself-Darth Vader. Thanks, George for reigniting the magic that was, and is, Star Wars.

the best of the star wars movies
in this one,yoda fights.this is truly awesome.anakan is growing up.he goes to get his mom from slavery but shes been killed by these nasty little monsters.so he goes genocidal on them all.ben is tring to teach anakan but hes learning way faster than normal and is quite the showoff.the kids will like it.it is the last full length movie of the set.there is an animated short film after this part called clone wars.the last one is due out next summer.just anybody bwill like it.the chick is a young teen ans ends up being anakans girlfriend.i dont know what you heard but this is an all time great.the special effects are cool.this movie is a classic!

Big Trouble In Little Greece: Attack Of The Kung Fu Robots
If I were a movie director and for some reason I decided to undertake the project of making the most grotesque parody and mockery ever made of the original Star Wars trilogy, I would do the following:

First, I would open the movie where the main character of the movie -The Jedi- freefalls some 10,000 stories in a sprawling metropolis, all the while narrowly missing multitudes of careening hovercrafts which literally filled the sky, only to finally land safely inside one of them just in the nick of time, nanoseconds before he was about to slam into the ground.

Secondly, I would include the most bland, personality-less, emotionally-uninspiring actors and actresses I could find. Also, I would incorporate pseudo-Greek cultural and archeological elements throughout the movie (which had no relevancy to the sci-fi theme of the movie) so as to confuse the viewer as to what planet...or planets the movie was taking place in...or what universe and epoch(s) for that matter. I'd include several pseudo-romantic scenes where there wasn't an iota of emotion or chemistry between the two love birds and whose forced, stimulated 'romantic scenes' seemed to serve no purpose, either.

I would then attempt to completely destroy...annhilate the original Star Wars's sacred notion of the force -as being stimulated and channeled by spirituality and mind over matter- and any drama associated with it as well. MY notion would be that the measure of one's force can be determined by analyzing mitochondrial DNA samples to tally the number of antibodies present in the protoplasm.

Next, I would blow away the concept of the original Star Wars's wimpy 2-jedi battle scenes with an epic magnitude-12 mega battle scene which consisted of 10,000 jedis and 100,000 jedi foes engaged in flipping-through the-air somersault kung fu moves that render the likes of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" and all '70s special-effects-laden Chinese kung fu flics obsolete. You thought that Luke Skywalker jumping 10 feet out of a carbon freeze container was cool? Could Luke Skywalker stay airborne for 10 seconds all the while throwing barrages of backroundhouse kicks and punches? Screw that punchless Luke Skywalker single-blade lightsaber. Behold, I introduce the double-edged light saber which all jedis are equipped with. FULLY FUNCTIONAL AND OPERATIONAL. Only an elite and intelligent class of human being can be a jedi? Not anymore. Any living, crawling, oozing intelligence-devoid parasite, wingless bat or orc -of any gender-can be a jedi.

Finally, I would end the movie with Kung Fu/Force-Master Yoda defeating the Master Evil Jedi with triple and quintuple cartwheel backroundhouse kicks and punches, while airborne, and lightning-fast Tae Kwan Do slaps and curled finger combinations that would put Jackie Chan to shame. The very last scene of the movie would end with the Evil Jedi Master becoming so angry, because of his defeat, that his head grew to the size of a large balloon, then exploded with the force of 20 grenades. Maybe I'd include that scene only in the UNCUT version.

The result: The sci-fi sequel to "Big Trouble in Little China" -Big Trouble in Little Greece: Attack Of The Kung Fu Robots...or as some people may prefer to call it -Star Wars II: Attack Of The Clones.

My Take on Mr. Lucas
OK, here's my rant. I'll keep it brief (unlike some other reviewers)

Best Parts:
1. Phantom Menace - Pod Race, Darth Maul
2. Attack of the Clones - Yoda's lightsaber flight

That's it. Everything else in these films is an utter joke. I could go on for many paragraphs, but I'll spare you. You gotta realize that there was a reason George didn't direct Empire or Jedi. He's an awful director. He has no ear for dialogue. The newer digital film process looks really awful. Only good ol' George could manage to waste the talents of Christopher Lee, Sam Jackson, Ewan McGregor, and Natalie Portman. And I think Hayden Christensen is the only other actor who possesses Keanu Reeves' atrocious wooden technique. His Anakin doesn't possess darkness, just stupidity. I hope Lucas gets a tumor in that fat double chin of his. If you don't like it, sue me. He's destroyed the meaning of my childhood favorites, so the hell with him. Do you really think the next film is going to make up for it? Only if it's about four hours long and is directed by someone else.

Star Wars is Star Wars-No matter what anyone thinks
I am writing on behalf of all the Star Wars movies. Sure the prequals aren't life changing but they still make the cut worthy of the title Star Wars.Back in the 70s/early 80s America needed a major facelift. We had nothin to look foward to anymore and just went by living. The movies out back then were dark and dreary. our common mythology had faded into the closet. Then came Star Wars. It was just supposed to be another space family film that would eventually be forgotten about. We were decieved. What George Lucas put on this Earth was meant to be. He dragged us out of the gutter and gave us something to talk about. People had a place to escape to and run away from there troubles. It wasn't like your average cowboy movie where you know the outcome and the setting. It was a strange galaxy with weird looking creatures and strange spaceships. It was all so real and lifelike. It was the total opposite of Star Trek. It was cool. People wanted more. They got two more. Each delivering there own set of memories. The lines became legendary. The sound of a light saber instantly recognizable. Movies nowadays are always borrwing lines and plots of other movies. Star Wars only borrowed one thing. Creativity. The Star Wars story was pulled out of mid-air. It wasn't like George Lucas said he wanted to make a space movie kind of like an old western. He created the idea of A Space Saga Trilogy. He's the one who threw us into this exciting new world called Star Wars. Fans wanted more. They got comics and books. then Star Wars movies were no more. They were still in the movies. Oter movies had borrowed lines and plots for their own. Thats why Star Wars is pop culture ICON. That is what the prequals lack. When someone comes up yo you with a stick in one hand and is waving it around they don't say "Watch out Count Dooku". They say watch out Darth Vader. The prequals are good movies but they aren't life changing like the Classics. If the prequals came first people wouldn't be walking around saying Look A destroyer droid. They don't have the trademark line like they do in the Classics. They didn't create new famous lines, they just took them from the old ones. As a movie I would give Phantom Menace and AOTC a 4 Star award. As a Star Wars film I would give it 2. The negative two is for lack of creativity. The OT is so popular because of what it was nd what it was created as. George did'nt give us that sense of story and herics like he did with the OT. George didn't create the OT because he wanted to tell a story for himself. He made it for us. For Episode one we weren't thrown into this new world with weird craetures and memorable charecters. In a sense of story The prequals fit nicely with the OT. But for a regular movie It gives us nothing to remember and say over and over again and to instantly recognize as Star Wars. I know it is hard to repeat what happened in the 70s/80s but there was nothing George Lucas could do about it. The Prequals are out in a world where evereything has already happened and didn't ignite the flame as the OT did. The Phantom Menace just continued in the name of Star Wars. The OT are just such good movies in themselves and it just doesn't matter which one you see first. They are all memorable. Don't get me wrong, the prequals are good movies and definantly worthy in the name of Star Wars but they are just thrown in with all the other movies which were created around one movie-Star Wars. Other movies wouldn't be the same without there Star Wars moment. That is why when in the movie Just Married Sarah(Brittany Murphy) asks Tom(Ashton Kutcher) if he ever dreamed of anything more glorious in his childhood than his wedding night, he flashes back to when he was playing lightsabers on the playground with other kids to the famous tune that Changed The World. Da da da DAAAA daa-you know the rest!
"Remember, the Force will be with you, Always" ... Read more

Amazon.com

This lovely, 1991 adaptation of Elizabeth Von Arnim's novel has a superb cast and a tone so mellow you can feel your pulse get slower. Josie Lawrence and Miranda Richardson play a pair of unhappily married women who rent an Italian villa for a month, sharing the rent with a crusty Englishwoman (Joan Plowright) and a lonely aristocrat (Polly Walker). Sun, rest, sinking into the green grass for long naps--they all have a soulful effect on the quartet, and then on the men in their lives who make a surprise visit. Mike Newell (Into the West) directs with seeming effortlessness, and it is impossible not to be swayed by the promise of restoration for these burdened characters--or for anyone alive. Wonderful performances all around, including a particularly sensitive one by Alfred Molina and a very funny one by Jim Broadbent. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (77)

A Rare Gem
This is the kind of movie that American studios loathe to make. It has too much charm. It was made on a shoestring budget and the major American studios seem to salivate at only the big budget type films. It's a story about women. It's a love story with no sex. It's a remarkable movie, deftly directed by Mike Newell, with no major stars, yet it shines.

Each of the actors, from Alfred Molina to Joan Plowright to the little known but charming Josie Lawrence, give fine performances. Based on the Elizabeth von Arnim novel, two repressed English women seek adventure and find it when they vacation in an Italian villa. The villa seems to change everyone's mood and outlook in life. It's similar in theme to "A Room With A View".

Shot on what had to be a shoestring production, the story, the actors and the camerawork more than make up for any limitations of budget. The film tops off with a satisfying ending that will leave you in a mood quite the opposite of what most films do today. When was the last time that happened?

Wisteria and Sunshine
Enchanted April is simply a wonderful film, filled with quiet romance and the mystery of life, and love. Watching this film is like watching a beautiful flower bloom from the most miniscule bud, wet with the dew of love. There is a charm and warmth found here that is sadly missing in film today.

When an ad is placed in the paper offering a vacation of wisteria and sunshine at a castle by the sea in Italy, two Englishwomen, Lottie (josie Lawrence) and Rose (Miranda Richardson), who are friends from church, leave their mates behind to join two other women for an April to remember. Hesitant at first, everything changes on their first morning there when Lottie opens her bedroom shutters upon the most beautiful vista she has ever seen. She is flooded with love and seems to have a deeper understanding of the human heart than ever before.

Sharing the villa and its enchantment are an older woman with quite a past, and a stunning socialite tired of being pawed at by men. Joan Plowright is delightful as the elderly Mrs. Fisher, who begins to live again under the spell of wisteria and sunshine. But it is beautiful Polly Walker's portrayel of Caroline Hester, with her magic eyes and Louise Brooks look, that nearly steals the show.

The internal musings of Lottie and Rose prompt both women to do the unthinkable and send for their husbands, bringing humorous and unexpected events to this April on the Riviera. Each will begin to find inner happiness and a rebirth of love. Even Caroline, who wanted to be alone, will discover love and beauty beyond her appearance.

Few films have the depth to sooth the soul and leave you feeling good about life like this magical film. Take your own enchanted holiday by picking this up as soon as you can.

The most unusual
While some may say this is a "chick flick" I couldn't disagree more. The form, casting, story, and, well, everything is just so unusual. The cast is superb with Polly Walker and Joan Plowright coming out on top. And the photography and settings are the best. But what I liked most about it was the lack of a formulaic approach. The movie starts out with dissonances and then does nothing but resolve itself slowly so that by the time you're at the end, you feel like YOU'VE been on vacation. This isn't a movie; it's a work of art.

For Rent: Peace of Mind
This is a great movie, it is more of a "Chick Flick" so to speak, but if you are in the mood for a chick flick that you don't really need kleenex for, this is the one. An unhappily married woman is running her errands on a blustery rainy day when on the back of someones news paper she sees an add for a castle in Italy for rent for the month of April. She tells her friend about it, they pool their money, find 2 other women to go in on the expenses with them, and life unfolds before their very eyes. They make realizations about themselves, their lives, and the men in their lives. At some point in everyones life, they need to find this kind of an add... It is heart warming, life affirming, and just a really great movie.

I was enchanted AND I laughed
There's a lot of humor in this film, much of the humor is subtle, and some of it is obvious. For example, some intellectual humor where the simple-minded but endearing Lottie asks the stuffy old woman if she knew Keats, a poet who had been dead for over a hundred years! Or the scene where she's trying to get permission from her husband to go to Italy with her friend.. that whole scene is priceless, very funny. As far as obvious humor, one example would be her husband having a rather... explosive... accident while he's taking a bath!... and then he comes out half-naked and charred only to be met by the old woman!! You'll laugh :)

AS you can imagine, this film is a satire or lampoon of the attitudes and mores of the 1930s which is when this story takes place. But don't worry, it's not a stuffy old boring period piece--far from it! This is an immensely enjoyable and accessible film that will really delight you. Very easy to follow and enjoy, very amusing and funny.

David Rehak
author of "Love and Madness" ... Read more

Reviews (283)

A long time ago, in a cinema far, far away...
A long time ago, in a cinema far, far away, a certain film called STAR WARS was released. Now, George Lucas' first installment in the hugely popular STAR WARS franchise is generally regarded as the greatest movie ever made. Why? Well, what's not to like? From the opening shot of the Blockade Runner accompanied by that great theme tune by John Williams, you know you're in the unique world of the STAR WARS universe. Before George's action-packed THE PHANTOM MENACE and ATTACK OF THE CLONES, A NEW HOPE was known only as STAR WARS. Audiences had never seen anything so original and amazing. Now, the series has entered into the fanboy culture all over the world. In comparison, Episode 4 seems somewhat tame compared to ATOC, but it's still an astounding adventure filled with great characters, great action set-pieces and strident theatrical music.

From Hero Luke Skywalker's symbolic journey from his home Tatooine to the moment of victory at the finale, we are greeted with a myriad of fantastic characters, especially Han Solo, played by a pre-Indy Harrison Ford and his buddy Chewbacca, flying around in their Millenium Falcon. And the ultimate incarnation of evil, Darth Vader. British veteran actors Alec Guiness and Peter Cushing are excellent as a wise yet ageing "Old Ben" Kenobi and Vader respictively. And that, more than anything, is what made TPM so hollow. While the action was good, the lack of good characters was disappointing. But AOTC has regained much of the sense of adventure that this film started off.

Lucas' grand vision illuminates the entire film, with inventive creatures and events. Several scenes that are my favorites are Obi Wan's conversation to Luke about the Clone Wars and Vader, Solo's disposal of Greedo, Obi Wan and Vader's last battle and the destruction of the death star. The prominant influences that left their creative mark on the film range from westerns to Akira Kurosawa's Samurai pictures. The influence the film itself had on cinema (it invented the Summer Blockbuster) is astounding, with everything from figurines to frisbees from the hysteria over the film's captivating originality and subsequent zeitgeist. One of my all-time favorite films, STAR WARS is THE great adventure.

Do I really have to Say anything?
It's what? Going on 30 years since "A New Hope' was released to massive success (and even again in 1997)? You bet, and it still looks fresh and feels right. The film has an attitude to it. A little arrogant and a little sarcastic, but still thrilling and and made the foundation for almost every action and fantasy movie to follow. Only the recent release of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy has had near that much impact (which I consider this generation's Star Wars).

George Lucas was at his creative peak in the "Hope," and it shows. The special effects are used to help paint the world in which the characters live. They don't distract and they don't take away from the actors' performances. The trench run with the Death Star can still live today with modern special effects laden scenes. And the actors are so convincing in their roles, unlike some in the prequels. Alec Gunniess leads the cast with his Shakesperian wisdom, and the cool Harrison Ford is just , well, cool. Also Mark Hamill is great, as is Carrie Fischer as princess Leia. And who can forget Chewie? Star Wars still delivers, watch and enjoy.

It's Star Wars!
If you have seen this movie, then no words need to be said. But if you haven't, come out from under that rock and watch it!
This movie just has to be seen!
By the way, just skip the prequels. Those ones suck.

Yes, Han Shoots First!
Ah, c'est la vie, the best movie of the trilogy, followed closely by "The Empire Strikes Back". "Star Wars" is a classic tale of friendship, loyalty, and bravery. Full of action. Ah, and this version has no CGI Jabba. Han shoots first. Jawa scene where they unload R2 and 3PO. A lot better than Lucas' pile of dog sh*t the so-called Special Editions. Go, original theatricals. Nothing stops these movies in their 1977, 1980 and 1983 debut.

Hard on the eyes - I must disagree with the fans
I much rather want to think about the great theme music by Meco (for which I am giving the 2 stars) than the almost painful visual roller-coaster ride of a movie it came with. The special effects may have been ground breaking, but they were a bit much to watch. I was 15 and could handle such things much better than I could today -- I'd just walk out! Princess Leah was beautiful, but I liked her much better on SNL doing the Beach Scene with Frankie & Annette (Gilda & Bill).** ... Read more

Amazon.com

"I have a bad feeling about this," says the young Obi-Wan Kenobi(played by Ewan McGregor) in Star Wars: Episode I, The PhantomMenace as he steps off a spaceship and into the most anticipated cinematic event... well, ever. He might as well be speaking for thelegions of fans of the original episodes in the Star Wars sagawho can't help but secretly ask themselves: Sure, this is StarWars, but is it my Star Wars? The original elevatedmoviegoers' expectations so high that it would have been impossible forany subsequent film to meet them. And as with all the Star Warsmovies, The Phantom Menace features inexplicable plot twists, afistful of loose threads, and some cheek-chewing dialogue. Han Solo'sswagger is sorely missed, as is the pervading menace of heavy-breatherDarth Vader. There is still way too much quasi-mystical mumbo jumbo,and some of what was fresh about Star Wars 22 years earlierfeels formulaic. Yet there's much to admire. The special effects arestupendous; three worlds are populated with a mélange of creatures, flora, and horizons rendered in absolutedetail. The action and battle scenes are breathtaking in theircomplexity. And one particular sequence of the film--theadrenaline-infused pod race through the Tatooine desert--makes the chariot race inBen-Hur look like a Sunday stroll through the park.

Among the host of new characters, there are a few familiar walk-ons. Wewitness the first meeting between R2-D2 and C-3PO, Jabba the Hutt looksyounger and slimmer (but not young and slim), and Yoda is as crabby asever. Natalie Portman's stately Queen Amidala sports hairdos that makePrincess Leia look dowdy and wields a mean laser. We never bond withJedi Knight Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson), and Obi-Wan's day is yet to come. Jar Jar Binks, a crossbetween a Muppet, a frog, and a hippie, provides many of the movie's lighter moments, while Sith Lord DarthMaul is a formidable force. Baby-faced Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd) looks too youngand innocent to command the powers of the Force or wield a lightsaber (much less transmute into the future Darth Vader), but hisboyish exuberance wins over skeptics.

Near the end of the movie, Palpatine, the new leader of the Republic,may be speaking for fans eagerly awaiting Episode II when hepats young Anakin on the head and says, "We will watch your career withgreat interest." Indeed! --Tod Nelson ... Read more

Reviews (2449)

5 stars for DVD quality, 3 stars for the movie
I'm reviewing only the DVD, and not the movie itself, which was a bit of a stinker, in my opinion. Well produced, beautifully filmed, but very poorly written.

Anyway - this is an awesome and incredibly well done DVD. Lots and lots of extras. Great commentary by Lucas, the producer, the sound man, etc. Interview with the composer. Lots and lots and LOTS of background materials on the making of the film, and the entire process of putting it together from initial writing to final production, and the making of the DVD itself.

The image of the movie is *very* crisp and clean. The deleted scenes are a nice addition to the movie. I am very impressed (and surprised, to be cynical about it) that Lucas has given us the full-featured DVD the first time out, and not offered us one scaled down DVD version, only to offer us a better version in a year, and then the full-scale one a year after that, like he's constantly done with the VHS versions of his movies. Thank you, Lucas, for taking care of your fans this time, and not trying to pad your pockets a few times before giving the fans what they *really* want.

Quality-wise, this is absolutely one of the most loaded, best-featured DVDs I have in my collection.

(as a p.s. - after hearing Lucas' commentary, and talking about some things coming up in the next movies, I have realized that a few things I criticized about this movie actually make sense oin terms of the upcoming story-line. However, I still think that, overall, the writing for this movie was only a cut above old b-movies)

OK Movie, Great DVD
The Phantom Menace was probably the most heavily anticipated movie in history. It was the prequel to the original Star Wars series and George Lucas was taking the helm as director for the first time since Star Wars in 1977. The film was hyped incessantly and, of course, the final product failed to live up to the expectations. The Phantom Menace is not a bad film. It actually is absolutely amazing to look at and the special effects are incredible. The problem with the film is the plot. It seems disjointed as it bounces around from scene to scene. It seems that Mr. Lucas was to preoccupied with getting the film to look right than the actual story (which is what made the first Star Wars so great). Many people weren't happy with the casting of several roles, especially Ewan MacGregor as Obi Won Kenobi, but he does a decent job in an undeveloped role. Liam Neeson is commanding as Qui Gon Jin and Natalie Portman is quite good as Queen Amadala. The biggest complaint that most people had with the film was with the character of Jar Jar Binks and I won't disagree with most of what's been said about the annoying character. Mr. Lucas has previously shunned the DVD arena (American Graffiti is the only one of his films to appear in the format), but he goes about this release with a vengeance. The extras, including seven deleted scenes, are worth buying this DVD alone. Mr. Lucas spent an additional four million dollars on them and the money is well spent.

prequel?
in this one,there is a council of jedis who rule everything and keep the peace.yoda,ben,some black dude and on like that.a younger ben finds a little kid-who is called anakan and later vadar.that kid wins his freedom with bens help in a very cool pod race.ben recognizes the force in the little one and decides to train him as a jedi.the bad guy is darth maul who has a double bladed light saber-very cool.hes the coolest looking character yet.i think peple came down too hard on jar-jar.hes a dork but there have been a lot worse.the kids will like it.it is the 4th part but the first episode.everybody should go see this one because just anybody will like it.anakans mom was pretty nice if she cleaned herself up.this movie isnt as good as the tv says but they blow everything all out of proportion anyway.this movie is abselutely incredible though.i think the black dude may be in the matrix too.its good too.the special effects are good.after this there is one more.then there is an animated short film.there is also another one on the way next summer.

To Lucas: Eye of the Tiger, Man!!
To quote the famous lines by Apollo Creed from Rocky III, "You lost for all the wrong reasons, you lost your edge. Eye of the tiger, man!"
A good analogy when you think of it...

When Lucas made the first trilogy he was a relativly unknown up-and-comming writer/director full of desire and well, "hunger" to make his mark. That drive lead to the masterpieces of pop culture we know as ANH and ESB. By ROTJ his edge was already waning but thankfully it was the last one... or so we thought.

By the time TPM came out he lost it completely and produced a quite mediocre if at best ordinary film. Living like a king for the past 20+ years made him not "hungry and full of desire" but fat and content. He lost his edge.

Peter Jackson's LOTR Trilogy is so much better than Lucas' last 2 efforts for this same reason. Jackson has the "eye of the tiger"!

Lucas HAS to get his edge back. Most agree AOTC is better than TPM but not by much. Will episode 3 prove that Lucas got it back??

If only reality played out like the fantasy of Rocky III and Lucas brings home a REAL winner....

What drug was George Lucas on?
I love Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi. I think that George Lucas should have stopped there. The two movies: The Phantom Menace and the Attack of the Clones....SUCK! What was George Lucas thinking? Jar Jar Binks needs to tossed off the face of the earth, and Hayden Christansen (while hot), needs to take some acting lessons. Not enough special effects in the world could make me want to see the third release. Poor acting and writing have made me want to run for cover! Where's the FORCE when you need it? ... Read more

Amazon.com

Jamie Foxx's uncannily accurate performance isn't the only good thing about Ray. Riding high on a wave of Oscar buzz, Foxx proved himself worthy of all the hype by portraying blind R&B legend Ray Charles in a warts-and-all performance that Charles approved shortly before his death in June 2004. Despite a few dramatic embellishments of actual incidents (such as the suggestion that the accidental drowning of Charles's younger brother caused all the inner demons that Charles would battle into adulthood), the film does a remarkable job of summarizing Charles's strengths as a musical innovator and his weaknesses as a philandering heroin addict who recorded some of his best songs while flying high as a kite. Foxx seems to be channeling Charles himself, and as he did with the life of Ritchie Valens in La Bamba, director Taylor Hackford gets most of the period details absolutely right as he chronicles Ray's rise from "chitlin circuit" performer in the early '50s to his much-deserved elevation to legendary status as one of the all-time great musicians. Foxx expertly lip-syncs to Ray Charles' classic recordings, but you could swear he's the real deal in a film that honors Ray Charles without sanitizing his once-messy life. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (276)

Great Job by Jamie Foxx
Jamie Foxx gives a five star, award-winning, performance of a lifetime in this movie filled with drama, romance, humor, drugs, triumph, and quality music. Showing the trials and tribulation of one of the most influential musicians of the 20th century it follows Ray Charles Robinson from the start of his career as he deals with such various obstacles as blindness, racism, his brother's death as a child, and heroin addiction. This film is well rounded with numerous familiar faces but one unknown face deserves just as much recognition as Foxx. This person is Sharon Warren who portrays Ray's strong willed mother who makes his learn to stand up for him self despite his handicap and not to let anyone keep him from what he wants in life. While not being the most glamorous portrayal of a legend it show how strong and utterly amazing the man really was. Laced with the actual music of and by Ray Charles you get the feeling you are really watching the man himself. Highly recommended.

Excellent film...one of the best of 2004
Genre: Bio-Pic Drama/Musical

Genre Grade: A+

Final Grade: A

This was an excellent movie. It was much more serious-toned than I thought it would be, giving a strong glimpse into adultery and drug addiction and also gives a horrific glimpse into Ray's childhood. The movie is also uplifting with the story of Ray finding his own sound, and just all the music in general. Definitely worth seeing (and worth sitting nearly three hours for), and although the conclusion of the movie feels very rushed and unexpected, it has such a strong body and introduction that make it worth it. Jaime Foxx was amazing in it, and I've got my bets on him for taking home the Oscar next year. There were seriously a couple of moments in the movie where it almost seemed like they inserted some old footage with the real Ray Charles in it because he stepped into the role so well. Great movie, see it!

Sheesh...big deal!
Oh please!Enough with all these accolade about Jamie Foxx's performance.All I saw was an IMPERSONATION.He wasnt multidimensional and I didnt see CHARACTER.Acting like Ray Charles is not enough,he should have lived it through the movie.Im not pretending to be an acting expert here (because im not) but Jamie Foxx doesnt deserve all these compliments,seriously.
About the movie,its actually more fitting for HBO but what's good about this movie is that they didnt force the audience to think that Ray Charles was this noble being,unlike other biopics,which portrays the famous characters as if theyre saints.There are lots of holes in the movie and it focused on his music and his womanizing and we can get a glimpse of his childhood with a subplot of him being banned to play in his hometown,other than that,theres nothing else.You should buy this if youre a big fan.But if you just like the music,just rent it.

Superlative Performances Elevate Solid, Episodic Biopic
At this point, it seems superfluous to say Jamie Foxx gives a brilliant, surprisingly nuanced performance as Ray Charles, as he not only mimics the singer's mannerisms flawlessly but also provides texture and depth to the pained man underneath. It's startling to see Foxx perform at the piano in that idiosyncratic spasmodic style that Charles had, as the actor very often becomes indistinguishable from the legend. In the private moments also depicted here, Foxx is amazingly perceptive about the troubled, hard-shelled, often nasty man Charles apparently was in real life. Hardly the image one remembers from the Pepsi commercials or his other frequent, sometimes ridiculous TV appearances...anyone remember he was in several episodes of "The Nanny"?

But the movie is not about the deconstruction of Ray Charles. In fact, director/writer Taylor Hackford and co-writer James L. White have written a literate, often powerful screenplay that makes us understand the complexity behind Charles' genius and the reasons for his inner demons. The challenge is that in order to remain true to his life story, Hackford and White have overstuffed the movie with so many milestone moments that it becomes episodic and sometimes rather wearing, especially when it comes to the film's depiction of Charles' two-decade heroin addiction. The sight of Charles shooting up and denying his addiction becomes almost a repetitive plot device, as if to provide melodramatic filler between the triumphant moments when he conquers musical frontiers that initially meet with resistance. That's not to say there aren't strong, compelling moments, as there are many. Ironically, one of the most memorable has nothing to do with Foxx but depicts a moment in Charles' hardscrabble Georgia childhood when little Ray trips over a chair and screams for his mother. Wordlessly, he picks himself up and becomes attuned to the sounds around him, picking up a cricket and realizing his mother is right in front of him. It's a transcendent moment.

Hackford is not the most subtle of filmmakers (he made the over-the-top "The Devil's Advocate" among others), and unfortunately his exaggerated sense of melodrama creeps in now and then, in particular, the last section when he decides to go for a 1960's movie-style approach to drug rehabilitation and inserts a fantasy scene back to Charles' childhood that provides pat closure to his long-standing issues.It's an oddly surreal Hollywood-style scene that I feel betrays the honesty of what was presented before. But sometimes Hackford's excessiveness works in his favor, as in the supposedly improvised way that classics like "What'd I Say?" and "Hit the Road, Jack" were composed. I also think he does an effective job in making racism an inherent part of the story, not just a pointed plot device, specifically in showing how much of the manipulation Charles experienced in his career was not at the hands of white promoters. The movie also highlights Charles' decision not to play an unsegregated venue in Georgia and revisits that decision in a coda that takes place years later.

Beyond Foxx, there is a gallery of superlative performances, especially by a trio of fine actresses. Kerry Washington is superb as Charles' wife Della Bea providing strength and tolerance in the face of her husband's drug addiction and constant adultery.Regina King plays backup singer Margie Hendricks, Charles' on-the-road mistress, with her requisite sass but with a penetrating desperation. Best of all is Sharon Warren, who portrays Charles' proud mother Aretha in flashbacks that make you understand where Charles got his courage and unbridled fury. Also providing excellent support are C.J. Sanders as the young Ray, who witnesses his young brother's accidental drowning and faces his impending blindness, and Clifton Powell as Charles' right-hand man Jeff Brown. The more well-known figures are played gamely though less memorably by Larenz Tate as an ambitious, very young Quincy Jones; Curtis Armstrong as an overly measured Ahmet Ertegun; and Richard Schiff as an anxious Jerry Wexler. At 153 minutes, the movie is rather long, and because of its episodic nature, stops rather abruptly in 1966 when Charles' personal and private lives seem to gain equilibrium. Regardless, the wondrous Foxx elevates this film biopic into something quite extraordinary.

The two-disc DVD package has several extras worth noting. On the first disc, the chief addition is fourteen scenes deleted in the theatrical version that have been spliced into the version here and notated accordingly. Some provide interesting context to the story, though they sometimes slow the pacing, a problem coupled by the addition of dead pauses that hurt the overall quality of the viewing experience. All told, the extended version clocks in at a staggering 178 minutes. Taylor Hackford's commentary on the alternate audio track is informative but on the perfunctory side (I only wish Foxx could have added his perspective and can only dream what Charles could have contributed had he lived long enough to "see" the film's release.) On the second disc, those fourteen deleted scenes show up individually, and there are also three featurettes. The first is the obligatory making-of short, "A Look Inside Ray", which includes comments by the filmmakers and actors on making the film.The next short, "Walking in His Shoes", is about the meeting between Foxx and Charles before his death and discusses how Foxx got under the skin of the character. The last, "Ray Remembered", is a quick tribute to the spirit of Charles by those who loved and admired him.

The Road Leads Back To You
Most of us under sixty think of Ray Charles as a perpetually smiling, swaying, grayed old man wearing sunglasses, glued to the piano bench who mumbles out "Georgia."What most do not realize is that Ray Charles had been performing since the 1940's until his death in 2004.This film shows Ray as a vibrant young man and opens our eyes to a whole new world that many have never known, a world that includes segregation and the civil rights movement.The movie spans from Ray's childhood up until around 1963.Considering that Ray's career went on for forty years AFTER that is astounding.

Ray Charles was born in Albany, Georgia, in 1930.Growing up in poverty in Florida during the Great Depression, he lost his little brother in a tragic accident that would haunt him the rest of his life.Around age seven, he went blind from glaucoma.Ray honed his knack for music at the state school for the blind and deaf.

Although a true genius and pioneer of jazz, R&B, and even country western, Ray (Jamie Foxx) was not a perfect human being by any means.Ray had learned to be fiercely independent from his fiery and dedicated mother Aretha (Sharon Warren), who died when he was fifteen.Yet he was dependent on a couple of demons - women and heroin.These addictions had tragic consequences.The fact that Bea, his long-suffering wife (Regina King), stood by him all those years is an example of the kind of chemistry and love this man inspired.

The movie reminds me so much of The Temptations (1998) as far as how the plot unfolds, that I would have given "Ray" four stars if it were not for Foxx's and Warren's performances.Foxx won Best Male Leading Actor for his sublime performance of a legend and an icon.Sharon Warren was so intense as Ray's mother.With her visible biceps on a fragile frame, she embodied the plight of all African Americans during Jim Crow.I want to see Warren again in a film.She is absolutely amazing.

The movie has sexuality and drug use, but nothing too graphic.There is no bad language.All of the songs in the film are Ray's original recordings, lip-synched very well by Foxx and the backup girls.When I heard that the songs would be lip-synched, I did not think I would enjoy it, but it works very well and was very entertaining.

The DVD has commentary by the director, and short readable bios of just about all the main and supporting actors in the film.It is a little annoying to have to read the white font and keep scrolling endlessly through each bio.

... Read more

Amazon.com

Sometimes movies are built around a great idea begging for a story, in this case pairing ballet legend Mikhail Baryshnikov with tap great Gregory Hines. The resulting storm of dance in White Nights, as one would expect, is great, but the story is a little forced. Baryshnikov plays (in parallel to his own life) a Russian defector to the U.S. who ends up a prisoner in the motherland after his plane is forced to land in Leningrad during an emergency. Hines is an American expatriate who gets involved with the situation. Director Taylor Hackford (An Officer and a Gentleman) punctuates an escape scenario and relationship dilemmas with as many dance sequences as possible, and the result is a wobbly, unconvincing tale with some furious footwork. Fortunately, performances carry the day, as the two male leads are both very strong as actors, and the supporting cast--Isabella Rossellini, Helen Mirren, and filmmaker Jerzy Skolimowski (Moonlighting)--is terrific.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (29)

It was great when I saw it in high school...
I recently saw this again and sheesh.... it's all about perception. This film is very 80s...very very very '80s. Seeing Mikhail Baryshnikov dancing in tights was worth the experience of the rest of the movie when I saw this back in the carefree days of high school.

Great and convincing acting by Isabella Rossellini, Helen Mirren and Gregory Hines don't save this from being what seems in this day and time to be a ridiculous story. It's easy to forget what a threat the Soviet Union was at the time... and how scary the thought of being trapped in communist Russia really was... neighbor spying on neighbor, eavesdropping equipment everywhere and just cold, dreary days one after another. This is a film best enjoyed by folks who can remember what it was like be around in the 80s w/ the fear of nuclear war. This is hardly a "timeless" piece, but still enjoyable.

Eleven pirouettes!
Baryshnikov does eleven pirouettes straight. What more can you ask for? Anyway, the movie was very good. It was a dark, communist Soviet Union film, with a lot of tension. But most importantly, Gregory Hines and Mikhail Baryshnikov were fantastic. It is superhuman what they can do.

every thing
the beauty,grace, and syncronozation of these two men dancing from such different backgrounds and styles was magnificent. The love, trust, and faith under such difficult situations was indescribable. The story with its action and psychological background kept me riveted to the screen (5 OR SIX TIMES OR MORE!) When do I order my dvd?!!!

Breathtaking!
Wonderful dancing, great story, good music too and Barisnikov back to his roots. Altough the Kirov scenes were filmed in Portugal. Opening scene is lovely.....

Most beautiful!
I love this movie. It's my all time favourite and it's great to see it's out on DVD. Mikhail Barischnikow is of course the greatest dancer and performs his artistry. The storyline is breathtaking. All actors and actresses are simply supreme. It was Isabella Rosselini's first movie role . I saw this movie the first time in the cinema and it was the first time I saw Gregory Hines - who will truely be missed. He was a great actor and step dancer. This movie is one of the greatest but only a few people seem to know ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Steven Spielberg and George Lucas's 1981 resurrection of the Saturday-matinee adventure genre was deservedly popular, and kicked off a successful trilogy.Set in 1936, this first feature introduces Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones, an archaeologist and adventurer whose quests for rare antiquities frequently find him running from one menace or another. Raiders finds Dr. Jones in the middle of a Nazi plot to use the mysterious powers of the Ark of the Covenant to win the war. Karen Allen plays the love interest with an old-fashioned "man's woman" appeal (she can drink anybody under the table and is free with her fists). The constant, cliffhanger appeal of the movie is great fun--one is always wondering how Indy will get out of one scrape after another--and Ford's career got a big boost with his self-effacing but masculine portrayal of the hero. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (134)

One Of Those Movie Classics, "Raiders of the Lost Ark"!
What can I say except that "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is a classic movie gem? With George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, and Harrison Ford contributing to this film, it's one of those movie greats which will always remain as one of my favorites to watch forever.

Harrison Ford is Dr. Henry 'Indiana' Jones, Jr., a college professor but also a renowned archaeologist. The story is set in 1936, with WWII going on. After coming back from a 'trip', Indiana and his friend Dr. Marcus Brody (Denholm Elliott) are visited by some government people who have some very serious news. The Nazi are very close to finding the lost Ark of the Covenant, hoping to use its holy powers to win the war for them. Indiana certainly jumps for the chance of recovering the Ark and agrees to try to find it before the Nazi. But he knows to find out it's whereabouts, he must find the medallion crystal piece which can pinpoint the Ark's exact location. With this knowledge, Indiana travels to look for Marion Ravenwood (Karene Allen), whom he knows has what he is looking for. But the Nazi, along with their French archaeologist Rene Belloq (Paul Freeman), are hot on his trail. It's up to Indiana, Marion, and good friend Sallah (John Rhys-Davies), to recover the Ark of the Covenant.

With plenty of action and adventure, this movie is sure to please anyone. It's a wonder how Indiana Jones can stumble on from one danger into another without getting killed! There's also plenty of wry and witty humor to keep you laughing and smiling. I must also mention the acting which is done superbly. There's Sallah who is faithful and trustworthy and Marion who's hardheaded, strong-willed, and ready to face anything. But the one who really carries the film is of course Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones. He is just PERFECT for the part and I can never, ever imagine anyone else playing the part. He's the perfect hero and adventurer (even if he hates snakes, hee hee!)

A must-see, I can recommend this movie for anyone, though I must agree that it would be pretty scary for younger kids, especially the end. Two other Indiana Jones films are "The Temple of Doom" and "The Last Crusade". In my opinion "The Last Crusade" can measure up to "Raiders of the Lost Ark", with talented actor Sean Connery playing Indiana Jones father. "The Temple of Doom" was so-so. Now when are the DVD's coming out for these three films?

The Action/Adventure Genre At Its Best
Harrison Ford plays Indiana Jones, an archaeologist who travels the world searching for antiquities for museums and universities. In 1936, he goes looking for the Ark of the Covenant, which the Nazis are also seeking, as they believe it has supernatural powers that will help them in their growing war movement. The Nazis have enlisted Indiana Jones' biggest rival, a mercenary antiquity thief who finds relics for money, not for knowledge and public access. Chases ensue as both parties close in on their sacred target.

For Han Solo fans, Indiana Jones will look quite familiar. Harrison Ford is perfect as the lovable, adventurous, intelligent, basically moral, semi-scoundrel. The action is non-stop, as is the tension. There is an abundance of escape-from-imminent death scenes, along with plenty of humor and good scenery (watch for the scene when Indy is confronted, shoot-out style, in the streets of Egypt). The musical score fits the film perfectly as well. The special effects aren't quite up to today's standards, although they're still none too shabby.

Overall, action-adventure movies don't get any better than this.

Instant Hollywood Legend
This was the most popular film in the summer of 1981, and played to packed audiences. It must have resonated with people's emotions as an action film unlike many others. It starts with an adventure - an explorer travels to a savage society in order to steal their wealth (for scientific knowledge of course). He fails when another adventurer expropriates his winnings, but survives to return to his teaching job at a university. The film shows him traveling in a flying Clipper from the 1930s, but not on a railroad.

It is a good action film, as long as you don't question some of the scenes. Could Nazi Germany have military forces in 1936 Egypt? Could German Schmeisser sub-machine guns be found in 1936 Nepal? I don't believe so. I suspect these scenes were copied from the 1940 serials that entertained moviegoers. "Indian Jones" will entertain you as an action adventure story with a multitude of cliches from long-forgotten films. Sliding under the truck recalls Yakima Canute's famous stunt. Some scenes seem far-fetched to me (when you think about it). Could Indiana Jones on a horse overtake a convoy of trucks? The theme music came from the 1948 film "Don Juan" starring Errol Flynn (rarely seen on TV). The chase through the maze of streets reminds me of 1940 cartoons. Other scenes may be derived from other old movies (the truck knocking down scaffolding from "Abbot & Costello Meet the Keystone Kops"). A few sequels were made, but it failed to be translated into a television series. Just like "Jaws".

A wonderful and action-packed film!!!!!!!
If you're a fan of 30's and 40's serials,adventure films,Spielberg's work,or Harrison Ford, this is the movie for you!!!!!! This film has so many amazing scenes your jaw literally drops.the film also has some great acting,especially John-Rhys Davies(Gimli of The Lord of the Rings) as Sallah and Harrison Ford as our hero,Indiana Jones.Overall,you will love this film.It's worth checking out!!!!!!!!!

The Return Of The Great Adventure...
"Either of you guys ever go to Sunday School?" - Indiana Jones brings Eaton & Musgrove's church attendence records into question in "Raiders of the Lost Ark".

From the director of "Jaws" and the creator of "Star Wars" comes the adventure film that all others in its genre are held up to, "Raiders of the Lost Ark". After twenty-three years and counting, I can honestly say that the film has yet to be outmatched (sure there have been good action/adventure films since "Raiders", including its own sequels, but I haven't seen a film that has had an indeliable, definitive impact that "Raiders" has left in a long time, possibly since the original "Star Wars")

Hired by the U.S. Government, archeologist/adventurer, Indiana Jones is on a race against evil to retrieve the lost Ark of The Covenent, the chest that contains the original stone tablets of the Ten Commandments. The ones that Moses brought down from Mount Harab and smashed. When was the last time YOU went to Sunday School!? Along the way Indiana meets up with an ex-girlfriend of his, Marion Ravenwood, outraces and dukes it out with legions of Nazis, and has plenty of close calls including a truck chase, The Well of Souls and its snakes (& Indiana's deathly phobia of them), a slugfest with a mechanic and his flying wing, and the opening of the Ark itself (lets just say GOD isn't to happy when mortals decide to open the Ark & sift through its contents).

An absolute modern-day classic. Why? "Raiders"' opening, from the Paramount logo to the natives chasing Dr. Jones, the bar fight, the basket chase, The Well of Souls, the truck chase (that alone gets 5 stars), the opening of The Ark in all its glory, John Williams' Oscar nominated score, I could go on all day long, but, you get the drift. What gives the film its drive (and where the sequels fail) is the urgency & danger of retrieving the Ark and the competitiveness between Indiana Jones and the Frenchman, Renee Belloq (the film imposes, early on, that these two have been competitors since there college days).

I got this on cassette for Xmas 1984 and I burnt the tape out. Thank God for DVD.

Nominated for 8 Oscars including Best Picture, Director (Steven Spielberg), Original Score and winning 4 of those awards including Best Sound & Visual Effects. The American Film Institute ranks "Raiders" as one of the top 100 films of all-time and Indiana Jones as one of the top cinematic heroes second only to Atticus Finch from "To Kill A Mockingbird".

The truck chase wasn't directed by Spielberg (he did the close-ups afterwards), but was helned by second unit director, Norman Reynolds. Tom Selleck was originally cast to play Jones but had to back out due to contractual agreements with Universal and CBS for "Magnum P.I." (I think it would have been a different film. I saw a "Raiders" screen test with him and Sean Young and he came off very obnoxious). Danny DeVito was offered the role for Sallah but declined due to scheduling conflicts with "Taxi". The scene where the Nazi officer was supposed to shoot Sallah was filmed but couldn't be used, becuase of black smoke from burning tires in one take, and in another actor John-Rhyes Davies getting sick and filling his jallaba (and he didn't care one bit).

"Raiders of the Lost Ark" is one truly great adventure worth taking over & over again. No matter what George Lucas calls it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Kenneth Branagh's four-hour production of Shakespeare's full text for Hamlet is visually lush (shot in 70mm, which is rarely done) and full of fascinating story moments that normally get cut from shorter stage versions. (Your idea of what kind of fellow Polonius is may change quite a bit.) The unexpurgated approach is truly enlightening, and Branagh intermittently succeeds at giving familiar moments in the drama an original cinematic spin, including Hamlet's spooky confrontation with his father's ghost (Brian Blessed). (Branagh also imposes some Hollywood glitter on the proceedings by casting the likes of Robin Williams, Billy Crystal, Charlton Heston, and Jack Lemmon in the smaller parts.) The pre-Titanic Kate Winslet is very good as the doomed Ophelia, and Derek Jacobi delivers a wonderfully nuanced performance as Claudius, whose character is definitely filled out by the restored material. Branagh's own performance is a little revisionist--some viewers have quibbled with it while others seem fine with it. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (211)

Stellar Acheivement
The 1996 film "Hamlet" directed and starring Kenneth Branagh is by far the best film adaption of the play! Even though its 4 hours, you hardly notice it because of how much is going on. His acting job is superb, as are Julie Christies as Gertrude, Derek Jacobi's as Claudius, and Kate Winslet as Ophelia (a role much better than her overrated one in "Titanic'). But what's really amazing is Kenneth Branagh's direction. He is such a genius and everyone involved with the movie should have gotten Oscars. Also, what I liked were the great visuals. Elsinore is so cool, especially the main hall with the mirrored doors and checkered floor. Plus he changes the play very subtlely, such as putting Claudius in a confessional for the praying scene or having him and Polonius watch Hamlet deliver the "to be or not to be" speech from a one-way mirror. I've heard Branagh say that he didn't want his movie to be gloomy and infatuated with death and deciet like the other films are. Instead it's a celebration of life and love, and adventure. END

Superior to all other versions.
Kenneth Branagh's version of Hamlet combines lush and breathtaking visuals with the complete, unabridged text of Shakespeare's masterpiece. In other versions of Hamlet, such as the ill-cast Mel Gibson film, the play is mistakenly cut down to a "more reasonable" two-hours-or-less atrocity. The unexpurgated method allows for the inclusion of important scenes that, if removed, take away from the overall effect of the drama. Despite its length of more than four hours, the film keeps the viewer entertained until the startling last scene. The stunning visuals can be attributed to the rarely used 70mm film on which the play was captured and the exceptional set design involved. The play is actually done in a 19th century motif, a unique departure from other versions of Hamlet. Impressive costume design add to the remarkable images in the film. The star-studded cast includes Derek Jacobi as Claudius, Kate Winslet as Ophelia, and Branagh, himself, as Hamlet, all parts delivered with brilliant authenticity. Other well known actors such as Robin Williams, Charlton Heston, and Billy Crystal also appear in small, but equally well-implemented roles. Some argue that Branagh's execution of the part was overdone, but it fits perfectly within the film and is, therefore, quite believable. The acting is overall a big plus to the end effect of the film. Beautifully executed in an outstandingly well-calculated manner, Branagh's film made Hamlet more accessible to modern viewers and will certainly remain popular for a long time to come.

Excellent Film
Kenneth Branagh's "Hamlet" works so well on the big screen because the guy has a knack for Shakespeare, acting, directing, and knowing what "modern" audiences wanted out of a Shakespearean play. He takes the tale of Hamlet, prince of Denmark, and transports it to more of a modern setting (well, more modern than the 16th century). He assembles an all-star cast that includes Kate Winslett, Charlton Heston, Derek Jacobi, Billy Crystal, Jack Lemmon, Robin Williams among others in this adaptation of Shakespeare's classic.

Although 4 hours in length (mainly because every word in the play is inserted in the script), the stunning effect of the play is extraordinary. The backdrop for the ghost of Hamlet in the opening scene, the mirror used when Hamlet (Branaugh) is making his "To be or not to be" soliloquy, the palace in which Hamlet and Laertes fight, and the snowy landscape in which Fortenbras and his men arrive are all instances of using scenery and directing to update this version of the play.

Although the setting and interpretation of what Shakespeare intended are left in doubt, the movie itself is visually stunning and the acting is great. Although Branaugh hired a few American actors to take on some of Shakespeare's characters (for instance, Robin Williams plays Osric and Billy Crystal plays one of the gravediggers), there "American" accents are hardly noticed in the film.

As an educator, I also think this is a fantastic version to use as a resource for a study of the play. Because the dialogue is accurate to the play, it works well. Also, this version seemingly makes the work of Shakespeare easier to understand. (Although, as a warning, there is one scene with Winslet (Ophelia) and Branaugh (Hamlet) that is definitely "adult" in nature).

Overall, a great gamble by Branaugh to update Shakespeare's work into his own insight. There is also a few extras on the VHS version: interviews with many of the cast members as well as a behind the scenes about the movie.

Also recommended: Hamlet (Mel Gibson version)

Great Film for learning
This film is a great tool to be used within a classroom to reinforce Shakesperian lessons. The film presents one of the best adaptations to Shakespeare's original work. Awesome production!

Good.
This version of 'Hamlet' starring and directed by the one and only Kenneth Branagh is a joy to watch and might be the best version of the famous play. It follows the play word by word, so one has to read it and understand it fully to understand the film. Better than the Mel Gibson 'Hamlet'. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Rebecca is an ageless, timeless adult movie about a woman who marries a widower but fears she lives in the shadow of her predecessor. This was Hitchcock's first American feature, and it garnered the Best Picture statue at the 1941 Academy Awards. In today's films, most twists and surprises are ridiculous or just gratuitous, so it's sobering to look back on this film where every revelation not only shocks, but makes organic sense with the story line. Laurence Olivier is dashing and weak, fierce and cowed. Joan Fontaine is strong yet submissive, defiant yet accommodating. There isn't a false moment or misstep, but the film must have killed the employment outlook of any women named Danvers for about 20 years. Brilliant stuff. --Keith Simanton ... Read more

Reviews (115)

Gothic Greatness
From the opening shots and line about dreaming of a visit to Manderly again, to the final shots of Mrs. Danvers and the flames, Alfred Hitchcock creates a dark, eerie atmosphere that will remain with the viewer every time you see the film. Although Rebecca is never seen, her presence is felt throughout the entire movie. Laurence Olivier, as the late Rebecca's tortured husband is good, although I think his moods and personal torture are played too strongly. Joan Fontaine, never an actress I have especially admired, is surprisingly excellent as Olivier's new, unnamed, naive wife, thrust into a world she is unprepared to deal with. But the greatest performance of the film belongs to Judith Anderson as Mrs. Danvers, Rebecca's housekeeper, and consequently, Fontaine's nemesis. With her daunting profile and posture, and her chilling delivery of lines, she creates one of the most memorable film characters I have ever seen. With its winding plot, terrific performances, and the direction of Alfred Hitchcock creating tension and atmosphere on a Gothic scale, Rebecca is one of the greater suspense films I have ever seen.

Classic Suspense
The Best Picture in 1940 and an adaptation of Daphne du Maurier's famous novel. It is not at all surprising this movie won two Academy Awards and nine other nominations. Through the masterful direction of Alfred Hitchcock, you will be kept in complete suspense. The newly restored version from the original negatives is presented full-frame and has been digitally mastered for optimum picture and sound. The result is a sumptuous black-and-white film that is better than I have ever seen it before. They do say this movie gets better each time you watch it, and I must agree.

The opening scenes convince you that this is going to be quite a forbidding story. A meandering path overgrown with foliage and a ghostly manor (Manderley) appears out of the Cornwall, England mist. The gothic quality is only the stage for a love story haunted by the memory of Rebecca. While this is mostly filled with suspense and mystery, there are a few moments of humor.

While a young woman (Joan Fontaine) is vacationing in the South of France as a ladies companion, she meets a wealthy widower Maxim de Winter (Lawrence Olivier). His wife, Rebecca is said to have died in a boating accident. They fall in love, marry and then he takes her home to Manderley. She is ill prepared for such a position in society and stumbles through her days trying to adapt as best she can.

"Rebecca" is the theme of this movie, yet the heroine is the second rather timid Mrs. de Winter when she rises to the occasion and takes on this ghost who haunts her husband. Mrs. Danvers (Judith Anderson) manages the manor and seeks to keep the first Mrs. de Winter's memory alive in an almost obsessive way. She is cold and has no regard for Maxim's new wife's feelings. Judith Anderson is just magnificent in her role and her character is in a way is Rebecca's ghost personified.

The conclusion is surprising as we find out how Maxim really feels and the story unfolds one detail at a time to finish with a satisfying conclusion. You will never once think these characters are actors, they are their characters from start to finish.

You must watch this movie in complete darkness with just a few candles burning for it to be just slightly scary. One of my all-time favorite movies. Definitely worth owning!

Yummy Classic Movie
I have seen all of Hitchcock's American work. If you are familiar with his movies, you probably agree that, with the exception of "Family Plot", his films are delicious brain food! Rebecca is a beautiful, mysterious and tragic piece. Olivier and Fontaine are at the peak of their talent and beauty. By the way, if you like Joan Fontaine in this film, her performance is equally good in Hitchcock's Suspicion, with Cary Grant. Why aren't most modern actors this good, hmmm? Hey Mr. Soderbergh, please don't remake this one! There's a reason why we call them 'Classic'.

A classic shines.
A stunning transfer from Criterion. "Rebecca" remains one of the finest films of the 1940's, and features Joan Fontaine as the second mistress of Manderley, forever living in the shadow of her mysterious predecessor. Lawrence Olivier is perhaps detached in his performance, but nevertheless embodies the master of Manderley as few others of his generation could. "Rebecca" also contains the paranoia, suspense, and dreamlike mood that would color much of director Alfred Hitchcock's later work. Criterion continues to put the major DVD distributors to shame with its transfers of old films, and once again proves that although higher in price, their DVD's are worth every penny.

"We can never go back to Manderley again"
Joan Fontaine laments as she opens the film, obviously several years removed from her time at the lush, oversized estate, which recalls "Tara" from Gone With the Wind as a residence which is actually also a character in the movie. People remember the houses from these two films almost more than the characters. No coincidence that both films were produced by the ridiculously meticulous David O. Selznick. GWtW was of course the most popular film of all time, so Selznick figured he had the right idea about how to make a film. Details, right down to the last corner.

Alfred Hitchcock had made a career in London making films with complete autonomy. He basically called all the shots. When he got to America, he signed a four movie deal with Selznick. Rebecca is the first and best of the three. (no, not a mistake, I'll explain later) Rebecca was the only film by Hitchcock to win best picture from the Academy, although Hitch did not win best director. The film was basically a tug of war between producer and director. Selznick wanted the book followed religiously, Hitch wanted to take the basic idea of the book and add his own touches. Selznick wouldn't allow it, so Hitch was forced to make the film exactly by the book.

The film stars Fontaine as an unnamed young woman who while working as a paid companion for the unbearable Mrs. Van Hopper (Florence Bates), she meets and falls in love with the brooding Maxim de Winter (Lawrence Olivier). They marry after a quick courtship and go "home" to Manderley, Olivier's mammoth estate. Fontaine is very young and has no idea what she is getting into, especially when it dawns on her that Olivier's late first wife, Rebecca, still dominates the house. Her stationery, napkins, and rituals are still present, and Fontaine feels she has no chance against this woman.

The other problem in the house is the housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers (Judith Anderson),who creeps around the house, showing up at any time to frighten Fontaine. She is still obsessed with Rebecca, still keeps Rebecca's old room the same way, hairbrush at the correct angle on the vanity. She makes Fontaine feel she will never measure up, will never be a great lady of Manderley, something that Mrs. Van Hopper tried to tell her as well. Everyone and everything in the house revolves around this dead Rebecca, so much so that Fontaine almost can't live through it.

Rebecca never appears in the film, yet it is amazing how much of a character she is. When Fontaine tries to dress up for a ball, Danvers suggests a portrait on the wall which is supposed to be a long dead relative of Maxims. Of course, when Fontaine wears the dress, she realizes from Maxim's reaction that the woman and the dress were Rebecca and that she just reminded him of her.

Eventually the film goes into Rebecca's death in some detail. We never know for sure that we know all the details of the death, but it doesn't really matter. By the end of the movie, all the major characters in the film will have been changed. Some will have been destroyed forever.

Criterion has done a great job with this film, giving us a great transfer, as always, along with a superb commentary. The second disc features trailers, interviews with Fontaine and Anderson, making of featurettes, examples of Selznick's letters and his attention to detail, and how maddening it got for the master.

By the way, Selznick got three films out of Hitchcock. They were Rebecca, Spellbound, and The Paradine Case. Well, he really got four, but he gave one of them to RKO studios because he was unhappy with the story and he thought it would interest no one. What was the film Selznick gave away? It was Hitch's best film of all time in my opinion--Notorious. What a waste it would have been had Selznick been allowed to ruin Hitch's masterpiece. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

An affectionate homage more than a spoof of Alfred Hitchcock thrillers, Mel Brooks's hilarious movie is one of the funniest modern comedies around. Brooks plays a psychiatrist with a severe fear of heights who moves to the Bay Area to take over a psychiatric hospital after its former head mysteriously disappears. He must contend with the resident psychiatrist (Harvey Korman) and the twisted resident nurse (Cloris Leachman) as they plot against him, eventually framing him for murder. While on the run, Brooks teams up with the alluring daughter (Madeline Kahn) of the missing doctor to solve the mystery and confront his own fears. Containing some classic sequences and cowritten by Barry Levinson (Rain Man, Wag the Dog), who appears briefly as a too-touchy bellhop in a Psycho-shower-scene takeoff, High Anxiety is a thoroughly enjoyable romp from one of the masters of comedy today. --Robert Lane ... Read more

Reviews (38)

The Master of Comedy meets the Master of Suspense!!!!
This is a hilarious spoof of several Hitchcock films. The film wouldn't be as funny, if you hadn't seen some of hitchcock's films, including Psycho, the Birds, or Vertigo.
It stars Mel Brooks, the director, but the best acting comes from his girlfriend, Madeline Kahn. This is one of Madeline's best roles, as my brother says. She gets the best lines in the entire movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is probably my favorite of the brook's pictures that i've seen, and I highly recommend it to his and hitchcock's fans!!

High Anxiety, you win!
Hilarious Mel Brooks film second to only "Young Frankenstein." I know a lot of Hitchcock movies so I got a lot of the jokes that Mel Brooks is making about him, and since Mel Brooks is such a funny guy, his own stuff is great too. Check out the airport scene where he and Madeline Kahn impersonate the Russian Jews and try not to laugh. (Of course, if you're not a Russian Jew like me you might not laugh so hard.) Or Cloris Leachman's entire character, kinkiness, pointy breasts and all. Or the take on Psycho where Mel is attacked with a newspaper instead of a knife and the ink spilling down the drain serves as the blood.This entire movie is just funny. Rent it or buy it, either way see it!

The greatest comedy never released on dvd.
This is without a doubt , one of the funniest Mel Brooks movies of all time. The cast is hilarious and the hitchcock parodies are a scream. The big question is..when will this movie be released on widescreen DVD? It is certainly, in my opinion, as funny as Blazing Saddles. I hope it will soon be rereleased so it can be discovered by a new generation of movie lovers.

"...That bell-boy ain't gettin' no tip!"
Mel Brooks at his very best. Together with his usual cast of cronies, Brooks spoofs the Hitchcock Thriller genre, delivering hilarious gags about films like "The Birds", "Psycho", "North by Northwest", and of course "Vertigo". A silly plot about a professor from "The Institute" wraps the whole idea into a plausible story. Madeline Kahn, Cloris Leachman and Harvey Korman are scene-stealers, as always. A comedy gem!*****

High Anxiety, You Win!
Certainly a great Mel Brooks classic complete with his usual zany cast with the likes of Harvey Korman, Cloris Leachman and Madeline Kahn who have appeared in many of his other spoofs. Mel Brooks plays chief pshychiatrist Dr. Richard Harpo Thorndyke who had one severe phobia, and that was his fear of heights. Resident phsychiatrist Dr. Charles Montague (Korman) and head nurse Charlotte Diesel (Leachman) take advantage of this phobia, especially when Dr. Thorndyke goes to the phsychiatry convention at the Hyatt Regency in San Francisco; "Seventeenth floor, can't get any higher."

This film is a parody on many of Alfred Hitchcock's thrillers such as "Vertigo" (the main theme), "Psycho", "The Birds" and "The Man Who Knew Too Much". Dr. Thorndyke teams up with Victoria Brisbane (Kahn) who was in search of her father Arthur Brisbane who had been he