Amazon.com

Not much jazz spoken in this 1980 version of the Jolson classic, directed by Richard Fleischer(The Vikings) and starring a very tentative Neil Diamond as a cantor's son who would rather sing commercially than in a synagogue. The soundtrack is tedious, the portrait of L.A.'s music industry preposterous, and Diamond (despite his talents as a singer-songwriter in the real world) can't help but look like a speck on the wall in the presence of Laurence Olivier, who plays his father. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (45)

Diamond's Music, Olivier's Presence, OH MAMMY!
This review refers to the VHS(1989 paramount) edition of this film....
At the 1927-1928 (First) Academy Awards Presentation "The Jazz Singer" starring Al Jolsen picked up a special award for pioneering the "Talkies". Obviously sound has come alooooong way since then and this 1980 modern day remake makes good use of it.
Jess Robinovitch(Neil Diamond)is a 5th generation Jewish cantor,tied to his role in the temple in the lower east side of New York. . His voice is phenominal(of course),he writes his own music, ballads mostly and has a chance to strike out on his own in Los Angeles.
He leaves for L.A. against the wishes of father, the 4th generation cantor(Laurence Olivier), and his wife, who likes things just the way they are.
It will take a while to achieve super stardom(at least a month!), but with the help of his new manager Molly(Lucie Arnaz),it is accomplished!The problem is his family is unhappy with the situation, his wife liked life when it was just them, his father is torn up about his son going against tradtion.Jess is having trouble coming to terms with the downfall of his relationship with his father. Molly feels responsible for the rift. Get your Kleenex ready as they work this out.
Diamond's soundtrack is wonderful. It includes "Love on the Rocks" and "Hello Again".Sir Olivier has not lost his touch, He is still the master. The British legend plays the Jewish cantor steeped in tradtion like he was born to the part, his performance alone is worth the watch.
The VHS is in hi-fi stereo, Dolby Surround, which enhances this musical.
Need a nice cry? This is the one!.......Laurie

For Diamond Music Fans Only
If you are a fan of Neil Diamond's music, then you will no doubt enjoy this movie.

Purely as a movie, however, this isn't very good. Cliched and schmaltzy, most of the scenes seem strung together as an excuse to fill time between musical numbers. The story, as borrowed from the original Jolson film: son of a cantor wants to sing popular music instead of following in his father's footsteps.

Neither Diamond nor Arnaz are going to win Oscars anytime soon -- in fact, Diamond demonstrates that, as an actor, he's a heck of a singer. The only shining performance in this movie is that of the incomparable Olivier, who proves that he can play any role given to him impeccably, no matter how dopey the surroundings.

If you are expecting any meat or substance to this movie, forget it. The music IS good enough to sit through once, which is why it gets two stars from me, but the only reason I own it is because my wife simply adores Diamond's music.

Buy the soundtrack, if you like it, but I would avoid the film itself. The DVD, meanwhile, is nothing special; the print is average at best, and there are no extra features worth discussing.

Luci Arnaz- remove this from your resume
Ugh. Poor plot development and cardboard characters. For example, he loves his wife sooooo much and discards her sooooo easily? Not likely. Lucie Arnaz, a wonderful personality and normally "good" actress is a cartoon character. Who could fall in love with Neil Diamond with all his angst and schmaltzy whining? Not I, that's for sure.

a bad movie with great music
This is not a great adaptation of the Jazz singer,the acting is mediocre,the progress of the plot is unrealistic,but Neil Diamond`s great music makes it worth watching.I used to have the soundtrack to this movie,i enjoyed it a great deal.

WONDERFUL!
I can't understand why this movie was so poorly accepted. It was a well acted, well directed film. ... Read more

Reviews (28)

Mandingo is an Eye Opener
ROOTS was to make viewers sympathize for the plight of the African-American, and MANDINGO was to make viewers cringe and forget that the slavery south ever existed. The film had this viewer wanting to turn it off, but wanting to see what was going to happen next. Therefore, the film had done its job in its manipulation of the senses. The movie boasts an impressive and diverse cast with the respected James Mason, Perry King (Lords of Flatbush, Riptide), Susan George, Paul Benedict (tv's Jeffersons) and boxer Ken Norton. The story revolves around a southern plantation owner Warren Maxwell (James Mason) and his son Hammond (Perry King) and their dealings with the buying and selling of slaves. Hammond beds every young girl slave in the joint while marrying Blanche (Susan George), and at the same time, he wants to buy himself a prize black prospect for fighting purposes... a Mandingo(Ken Norton as Mede). Hammond seems to have some sympathy and care for the black women, and has little interest in his own white wife who takes on the mandingo as a lover to get back at her husband. Some of the goings on are outrageous (i.e. Mason's character trying to get rid of his rheumitsm by transferring it to the soul of a young black boy etc..) The film's portrayal of white southerners is as offensive as the portrayal of the black slaves. However, it is still the black characters that are exploited, especially the scenes of blacks vs. blacks and the name of the game is survival. A lot of kudos goes to the actors who took on roles in this film and a movie like this could not be made today. When this film was made it was a sleeper hit and caused some controversy, Saturday Night Live did a parody sketch called "Mandingo II" and O.J. Simpson, who was the guest host, played the title character. Garrett Morris, Bill Murray and Larraine Newman were also in the bit...it was one of the funniest sketches of the show.

Hollywood style stupidity
Let's face it - Hollywood is a provincial little burg whose movers and shakers know little or nothing about anything outside of the city boundaries - from Hollywood we get amazing takes on, for example, Japanese culture: (Karate Kid part III) - the last scene of the movie looking very un-Japanese and more like a voodoo ceremony - German culture: all Germans are Jew chasing Nazis - and Italian culture: all speak Brooklynese and have Mafia relatives. So it doesn't surprise me that Hollywood would come up with a piece of dreck like Mandingo, produced by someone named Dino De Laurentis - an expert on the South if there ever was one.

I have no doubt that some slave owners, who weren't exactly "gentlemen" slept with their slaves - however, this depiction of what might have happened on a southern plantation was made to appeal to a prurient taste and is imho far removed from reality. On the other hand, I'm in agreement with Gore Vidal on the Sally Hemmings case - a gentleman like Thomas Jefferson would have never slept with a slave due to what it would have done to his reputation. I will, however, give Ms. Hemmings the benefit of the doubt - we don't know for certain, and only DNA will tell the truth.

This movie will appeal to people who don't know or don't want to know historical fact, and those looking for light interracial porn. Unfortunately, our dumb European and other foreign friends, as well as the uneducated and immature in our own country will consider it to be the gospel truth on the beginning of race relations in America.

hot Southern sleaze...but riveting
Part Harold Robbins and part Euripedes, this film has brutal depictions of slavery, abhorrent language, and extraordinary cinematography by Richard Kline.
The imagery of Falconhurst, the huge but decrepit plantation of a cruel and vicious man (James Mason in a strange and brilliant performance) is fantastic; with peeling paint and filthy mosquito nets, winding staircases of gleaming wood, dark steamy rooms, and lush exteriors with drooping wisteria.
The score by Maurice Jarre also adds much to the atmosphere, with Muddy Waters singing "Born in This Time".

Perry King is excellent as Mason's son, broken in body, weak in spirit, knowing what is right and often doing what is wrong; as his wife, Susan George is appropriately annoying and trashy, and as his "wench", Brenda Sykes is lovely. Heavyweight boxer Ken Norton, who won over Mohammed Ali (and broke his jaw) in 1973, made his impressive screen debut as Mede the Mandingo.
This film is a mass of contradictions, which is probably what keeps one glued to the screen. It is manipulative yet unpredictable, gratuitous and raw but thought-provoking; some of it might be absurd, but many of the situations shown did happen.
With all the brutality, nudity, incest, and most of all, the repellent language, this is not a film for the young, or anyone squeamish about violence.
Total running time is 127 minutes.

Great Scenery, Trashy Story
Mandingo depicts the cruelties of slavery in a much more graphic manner than made for tv movies like Roots and Queen ever could. Lots of nudity, sexual situations and sadism. While the movie is highly unsettling, I would recommend it to those who want an un-sentimental look into antebellum southern life. The scenery (Louisiana and Missisippi) is fantastic, and Susan George's hammy performance as the mistress is amusing.

Have we forgotten??? Or do we choose to forget???
As I read these reviews, I have to wonder what is going in in this country today. Have we really been able to wipe out the cruelty of slavery from our history books. As offensive and unpleasant these scenes may be for us to bear, it is nothing compared to the slaves to which this was their day to day reality. It DID happen. To hear so many people state that the movie showed untrue scenes is very disturbing. You know the bible says that the biggest feat that the devil has achieved is to convince us that he doesn't exist! This is a good movie and it is a much watch to get a true depiction of just how cruel and insensitive slaveholders could be. The sexual aspect of slavery is often ignored in the history books - this movie does a great job bringing that part of history to light. ... Read more

Amazon.com

2001: A Space Odyssey took the world on a mind-bending trip toouter space, but Fantastic Voyage is the original psychedelic inner-spaceadventure. When a brilliant scientist falls into a coma with an inoperable bloodclot in the brain, a surgical team embarks on a top-secret journey to the centerof the mind in a high-tech military submarine shrunk to microbial dimensions.Stephen Boyd stars as a colorless commander sent to keep an eye on things(though his eyes stay mostly on shapely medical assistant Raquel Welch), whileDonald Pleasance is suitably twitchy as the claustrophobic medical consultant.The science is shaky at best, but the imaginative spectacle is marvelous:scuba-diving surgeons battle white blood cells, tap the lungs to replenish the oxygensupply, and shoot the aorta like daredevil surfers. The film took home awell-deserved Oscar for Best Visual Effects. Director Richard Fleischer, who turnedDisney's 1954 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea into one of the most rivetingsubmarine adventures of all time, creates a picture so taut with cold-wartensions and cloak-and-dagger secrecy that niggling scientific contradictions(such as, how do miniaturized humans breathe full-sized air molecules?) seemmoot. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (11)

BLOODY GOOD TIME!
When she takes her clothes off, it is apparent to all that Raquel Welch would become a star. The way she unzips is thrilling! I imitate it all the time. The story? Doctors get miniaturized and go into the body of a man to perform inside surgery. They must battle an uncommon array of enemies: leukocytes, T-cells, viruses, etc...all of which attack the submariners with undignified alacrity. Their egress is ingenious, and right in the nik of time. It is hard to believe this film was made in the mid 1960's. The special fx are surprisingly modern - even by ILM standards. The story is strong. And the "Cold War" motiff fits quite nicely. What I find most peculiar is the fact that this film is never shown on television. Not even on cable. I wonder what that's about. And don't forget about that body to die for. And those eyes. We don't have many old movies here, but it's one of our favorites.

Great fun! What a way to escape...
This is a great old flick that keeps you on the edge of your seat. Wonderfully detailed sequences add to the enjoyment of this great story. Although they didn't have the best special effects, they are great for the time period in which this film was made. Definitely worth watching for the Raquel Welch antibody scene!

AWESOME.
Great special effects for his days and awesome captivating storyline.

Great fun for the whole family
"Fantastic Voyage" is certainly worthy of its name, with imaginativeness, creativity and beauty (From Raquel Welch in particular). It also has a rather simple plot, which I shall outline for you. An eastern bloc scientist, who holds the knowledge to perfecting miniaturization warfare, is defecting to the Americans. However, an attempted assignation leaves him with brain damage. The only way to save the scientist's life is to miniaturize a team of surgeons and send them into the body. But they have only one hour to complete the mission and have to face threats such as the body's natural defenses and sabotage from within.

If there are complaints with "Fantastic Voyage", it is in some plot holes (Smart Alecs, in my opinion, should stay away and look elsewhere). Firstly, although it's extremely obvious who the saboteur is (He tries constantly to get the mission aborted and is always frantic), no one on board really seems to suspect him. The ending was also somewhat empty and unsatisfying (We never learn what happens to the scientist). Some will also love pointing out the plot clichés (The people in the control room always seem to know what the Proteus crew is thinking, even with no radio, and the sub crew always finds a way out of a problem). Many will also find scientific inaccuracies (My dad pointed out how well lit the human body was depicted) Then there is the impossibility of shrinking matter and placing it in other matter. Also, in terms of ideals, this film shows age. People in the 1960's believed that the future would be like it was in here and Kubrick's "2001". They thought one-day that humans would have established bases in space and would be able to miniaturize. How could they have known that computers and the World Wide Web would be the tools and thoughts of the future?

Some reviewers have suggested that "Fantastic Voyage" should be remade. I think that is a lousy idea. Sure the special effects and set design would be better. But a new version would be colder, darker, more violent and full of foul language. The heart and joy of the original would be gone. Also, notice that despite being the only woman onboard, Raquel Welch never seems to have interest with anyone else on the sub (Most of them are past her age, anyway). While she may not give the best performance, at least she is professional and knows her priorities. Would that stay the same in a remake?

So, while not without some problems, I wouldn't mind owning this movie. But I would especially love to see a widescreen edition (DVD preferably) released sometime soon.

Another Landmark Science Fiction Movie.
Before 2001 and Star Wars, Director Richard Fleischer made a very well made science fiction movie with Fantastic Voyage. With a cast starring Stephen Boyd, Raquel Welch, Arthur Kennedy,and Edmond O'Brien, a team of scientists are reduced to sub-atomic size and placed aboard a small sub, then injected into a man's body to save his life before it's too late. Oscars were well won for best work in visual and artistic effects. A movie with substance and puts many of today's so called big effects pictures to shame. Also featuring a good musical score by Leonard Rosenman (who would go on to compose the music for the movie; STAR TREK IV; THE VOYAGE HOME). ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Good movie, but might want to wait for the DVD?
A movie in two-parts, really, and Welles' entrance marks an end to the first and begins the second. I found the first half (surprisingly brutal for the 50's) better than the second. The names are changed but this is clearly Leopold and Loeb with Clarence Darrow (Welles) on defense.

One thing that annoyed me... the end when Welles invokes the name of God... Darrow would never speak those words!

My copy of this isn't the best quality. Tops of heads sometimes disappear off the top of the screen. They needed to do this letterbox. Surprising this isn't available on DVD. You can get Ernest Goes to Camp on DVD but you can't get Compulsion? What the hell is wrong with this world?

Falls apart at the end, but still pretty compelling
Dean Stockwell stars in this icky thriller, based on the infamous Leopold-Loeb murder case which shook Chicago in the 1920s. Most of the film features Stockwell and cohort Bradford Dillman, as two wealthy, sadistic criminal dilletantes bound together in a twisted dominant-submissive homoerotic pact, which leads them to kidnap and murder a young boy in their neighborhood -- all just for kicks. Dillman is compellingly grotesque as the ringleader who pushes Stockwell in violence and psychosis, and then delights in taunting the police behind their backs. This prelude is tense and gut-gripping, horrifying, in fact, but the film loses impact after they are caught and brought to trial. Orson Wells does a fine turn as the liberal lawyer who is brought in to defend them, and delivers a dazzling anti-death penalty speech, but the emotional drama of the ending is strangely muffled... Somehow, Wells's character is brought in a little too late, and there's no real interaction between him and his loathesome clients. The relevant points are made, but they don't resonate as effectively as the nauseating buildup -- Stockwell and Dillman remain unlikeable, yet their sickness and its philospohical rationalizations aren't dug into as deeply as they could have been. The confrontation of the character's gayness (and their need to disguise it before the jurors) is fascinating, though -- even though the movie was made thirty-five years after the killing took place, the filmmakers make no judgement about the homophobia involved. Anyway, as psychological thrillers go, this one's a doozy.

BOYS WIL[d] BE BOYS ..........
Based on the sensational Leopold & Loeb case, this very sinister version of the twisted tale is fortunately not graphic and leaves 'those things' to the imagination ....... Oh, the doings of those rich, spoiled kids!

The Cast? Who can possibly fault Orson Wells [in the Clarence Darrow role] with Bradford Dillman and Dean Stockwell as the 'spoiled charges' and the rare DIANE VARSI ["Peyton Place"] as the misplaced 'love interest'? [This was Mr. Stockwell's youthful 'glory period' - followed with "Sons and Lovers", "Rapture", etc. Utter joy to see how this artist is still providing stellar [and sometimes very underrated] performances.]

Killing just for the 'thrill of it'? Who knows, there are numerous theories about this 'liason'. Interesting though to theorize if the boys were 'working-class' instead of 'wealth'.

1991's "Swoon" is another look at this crime [little more graphic and frank about the relationship between the two] - an interesting counterpoint. AND another jagged view? Hitchcock's "Rope" [a fitting twist on this tale].

{NOW, there's also the 'mother's point of view' - "What's the Matter with Helen?" the campy litle gem with Debbie Reynolds and Shelley Winters .....}

BLUEPRINT
A well done film about the true crime that shocked the US at the time it was committed, the murder committed by Leopold and Loeb. Two brilliant young men thought they were invincible and could get away with murder, but despite their brilliance, they became arrogant and careless. They declared their atheism and this was a factor in the film. Although they hired the famous Clarence Darrow in their defence, even he could not convince a jury to find reasonable doubt. Dean Stockwell is excellent in this early role, and SO young. And Orson Welles stars as the attorney who tries to defend the boys. The film tells the story of the crime and of the societal place of Leopold and Loeb and their families and does not really explore the nature of the relationship between Leopold and Loeb, which in more recent films (indie film Swoon) was explored in depth. The film is semi-fictionalised with different character's names, but the story of Leopold and Loeb is the blueprint.

Somewhat dated; some of the best acting in movie history
The defense attorney Clarence Darrow (played with astonishing skill by the brilliant Orson Welles, who is today considered one of this country's finest actors ever) delivers in the last half of this movie one of the finest soliloquies Hollywood has ever offered us, equal to and probably surpassing England's Laurence Olivier in his critically praised "Hamlet" interpretation. The soliloquy by Welles is in itself worth the price of this video.

The hapless prosecuting attorney is played by E.G. Marshall, who recently died but who left us with a legacy of excellence in every picture in which he appeared (especially perhaps in "Twelve Angry Men"). A wonderfully underplayed but very sensitive performance by a master of his craft in films, stage, and television.

Brad Dillman and Dean Stockwell are right on in their portrayals of the villains who are apparently responsible for the compulsive and senseless murder of a young man. The entire cast creates some of the most realistic portrayals of good and evil that Hollywood has ever given us. Everyone in the cast seems to give it their all.

The movie is clearly, however, a product of the neo-Victorian times in which it was produced, sparing the audience the grim realism movies are currently permitted to film today. It could be more powerful if it were re-filmed today, perhaps, but could the cast of a re-make come close to matching the performances in this film?

It is worth owning this movie for its cast and direction and overall excellence...and it could be argued that the lack of the extreme violence which actually characterized the murder doesn't need to be as graphic on-screen as it probably would be if re-made today. By and large we are intelligent people and can jolly well fill in the details for ourselves.

A real treat! ... Read more

Reviews (60)

Great Fifties Vikings Tale!
Ah, a personal wish fulfilled is the re-issuing of this film onto the DVD format. Although I have long had the older VHS version of this classic fifties romantic sword and sorcery trendsetter, I was recently amused to find it now listed in the DVD catalogue. Odin be praised! This was a formative film in my childhood, a monstrously popular box office hit that had all of us pre-adolescents entertaining ourselves for months clashing in back yards using make-shift stick swords and purloined garbage-can covers for shields as we fought out our own imagined action sequences. Indeed, everything about this film is attractive and appealing; the wonderfully photographed sequences along the fjords, the jaunty and majestic music, and the quite authentic long ships and settings.

The cast adds to the fun with a star-packed line-up. Kirk Douglas looks appropriately Nordic (neat trick for the son of Russian Jewish immigrants), and more than acts out the part of the Viking prince, Einar, the eldest son and heir to the barbarian legacy of his outrageously roguish father, Ragnar, played masterfully by a full-bearded Ernest Borgnine. Tony Curtis adds a little blue-eyed soul to the cast as the star-crossed illegitimate heir to the English throne, and the quite lovely Janet Leigh (who at the time was Mrs. Tony Curtis) is the prized after English princess both the male principals have the urge to merge with. The scenes inside the Viking lodges are hilarious; the sequences in which a drunken Douglas has to successfully cut off a lover's braids from twenty yards with a battle axe without decapitating the lady in question to prove she wasn't unfaithful is spell-binding to experience. Terrific vicarious excitement for all of us overgrown kids in the audience.

The bottom line is that although none of it makes a whole lot of sense, just remember; we're talking serious action-adventure here! It is deliciously exciting fun and gives full disclosure of all the rowdy Viking boys having a rousing good time raiding, raping and pillaging, robbing and sinking other ships and finally storming a castle. And we find ourselves going along for the ride. Why not? The cinematography is superb, as is the musical score. Although not terribly accurate historically, the film does give us an intriguing look at primitive lifestyles in terms of different cultures cohabiting not so peacefully in the north Atlantic long ago, circa the fourteenth century or so. It is a great way to spend a couple of hours being entertained by some real Hollywood masters of the genre. Enjoy!

Great action/adventure with Douglas and Curtis
The Vikings is a great historical epic that is just a lot of fun to watch. Viking chief, Ragnar, leads a raid on the British coast and rapes an English woman who births a child, Eric. However, upon his birth Eric is sent away and captured by Vikings where he is brought up as a slave. Flash to 30 years later, with Eric all grown up. After a brief battle with his unknowing half-brother, Einar, the hatred between the two begins to grow. Along the way, the Vikings kidnap the princess of Wales, Morgana, whom both of the men fall in love with. Eric and Einar must fight it out not only for the love of the beautiful Morgana, but must also worry about their attack on the English king, Aella, to avenge the death of Ragnar, the father of both warriors. This movie has a plot that drifts along, but the whole thing is fun to watch. The cast does great, the action scenes are spectacular, especially the Viking attack on the english castle), and the cinematography is beautiful. As well, the Vikings theme by Mario Nascimbene is perfect for the movie with its horns and trumpets. This is a great movie full of action and adventure that should not be missed.

Kirk Douglas gives an excellent performance as the ultimate Viking warrior, Einar. With his blond hair and scarred face complete with milky left eye, Douglas looks and acts like a Viking would have. Tony Curtis is also very good as Viking slave, Eric, who unbeknownst to him is Einar's half-brother. The beautiful Janet Leigh plays Morgana, the woman who is loved by two men who despise each other. Ernest Borgnine is great as Viking chief, Ragnar, the loud, boisterous father of Eric and Einar. While watching the movie, it looks like the cast had a lot of fun making the film. The Vikings also stars James Donald as Egbert, Alexander Know as Father Godwin, Frank Thring as Aella, Eileen Way as Kitala, and Edric Connor as Sandpiper. The DVD offers the widescreen presentation, making of featurette/photo gallery with director Richard Fleischer, and a theatrical trailer. Filmed mostly in the fjiords of Norway, the movie looks great, especially in the letterbox format. For a great action adventure with Kirk Douglas and Tony Curtis, don't miss The Vikings!

Blimey! It's the Vikings!
As many reviewers have observed, the best reaction to this movie is to sit back and enjoy it. Douglas and Borgnine are just great as comic-strip Vikings. Why Tony Curtis, perfect as "the cookie full of arsenic" in The Sweet Smell of Success, was ever thought suitable to play a slave-boy in sword epics like this and Spartacus, completely beats me. Janet Leigh, perfect in Psycho, is a little too 20th century for all this more general kind of blood and guts, but everything else is terrific, and most of it is almost authentic. A lot of the dialogue is superb: "I'm a lady, and I just won't row a boat to save my life". I can't remember the exact words. The scene where the wimpy Anglo-Saxon peasants vamoose the fields, crying "It's the Vikings, It's the Vikings" has remained memorable for 45 years. The DVD quality is excellent.

"Odin! Odin! Bring the wind and turn the tide!"
I remember as a small child watching this magnificent epic adventure on the big screen at Rockefeller Center in New York, in 1958. The music in this film is truly magnificent and effectively reinforces the audience's emotional reactions to dramatic scenes. Three musical high points are particularly potent. First, when a Viking utilizes a mammoth tusk as a horn to welcome returning warriors; next: when a Valkarie's voice heralds the coming of the North Wind to save an important character; and finally, when an unseen choir sings the triumphant welcome of another important character into heavenly Valhalla.

UNDERWHELMING ACTION - NICE LOOKING TRANSFER!
For some reason "The Vikings" is fondly remembered as one of the bloodiest films in cinema history - certainly from the 1950s. That's odd, because aside from Kirk Douglas getting his eye pecked out by a hawk (which is rather violently depicted) there are no other moments of extreme bloodshed in this film. Yes, there are epic battles, but these are all shot through the glamor and gauze of pre-Braveheart euphoria for guts and gruesome carnage. Douglas stars as Einar, an "I'm too sexy for my breast-plate" pin-up of a viking, whose way with the ladies is forever shattered when his face is deliberately disfigured by Eric's (Tony Curtis)pet bird. This attack stirs up a life-long hatred that is strengthened by both men's love of the princess (Janet Leigh). You would think with Norsman and kidnapped royalty the plot would be rather vibrant but actually its dull and uninspiring from this point onward.
TRANSFER: MGM gives us a handsome looking transfer. Colors are rich and vibrant. The travelogue footage of the Fiords is surrealisticly gorgeous. Black levels are solid. Contrast levels are bang on. Only occasionally does the original negative betray the vintage of the film. Age related artifacts are kept to a bare minimum. There is no edge enhancement, pixelization or shimmering of fine details in this presentation. The audio is MONO (I thought all Cinemascope films were stereophonic?!?)and somewhat of a disappointment. The audio is generally balanced though there are occasions where it seems muffled and lacking in treble tone.
EXTRAS: A featurette with the director, Richard Fleischer that is remarkably useful and engaging - if all too short.
BOTTOM LINE: It's not a great film but it is a fairly wonderful looking transfer. And hey, any film with Kirk Douglas is never all bad! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Charlton Heston seemed fond of starring in apocalyptic science-fiction films in the late 1960s and early '70s. There was Planet of the Apes, of course, and The Omega Man. But there was also 1973's Soylent Green, a strange detective film (based on Harry Harrison's Make Room! Make Room!) set in 2022 and starring Heston as a Manhattan cop trying to solve a murder in the overpopulated, overheated city. His roommate (a necessity in the overcrowded metropolis), played by Edward G. Robinson, tries telling him about a better time on Earth before there were no more resources or room left; but Heston doesn't care. Directed by Richard Fleischer (The Vikings), the film has a curious but largely successful mix of mystery and bleak futuristic vision, somewhat like Blade Runner but without the extraordinary art direction. This was Robinson's last film and he's easily the best thing about it; his final scene seems terribly appropriate in retrospect. Joseph Cotten makes an appearance as the man whose murder results in the revelation of a shocking secret. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (97)

3 1/2 stars for sharply written and directed sf classic
THe 70's were a strange time for science fiction films. There were a number of minor classics (Westworld, the absurd and pretentious Zardoz, Logan's Run) and major space operas (Star Wars)that dominated the scene. While none of these films were perfect, Soylent Green was one of the outstanding efforts from the era. Although it's a flawed minor masterpiece, the strong performances from Heston, Robinson, Leigh Taylor-Young and Chuck Conners help the film continue to shine. All the actors benefit from the assured direction of veteran Richard Fleischer. The film was produced during one of MGM's bleakest periods and, in turn, has a rather bleak out look about the future.

Set nearly twenty years from now, humanity has used up most of our resources and spoiled the planet. There isn't enough to eat and there's even less space to live in; the cities are crowded with street people everywhere. The middle class is virtually extinct and only the wealthy have lives approaching the comfort to which we've become accustomed.

A executive with a major food corporation is murdered. The company produces a variety of pre-processed foods that are popular among the general population. Fresh fruit and foods are almost as extinct as many of the species that have disappeared from our overburdened, overdeveloped planet. Charleton Heston plays Detective Thorn who is investigating the murder. In the process, his life is threatened and he comes into major conflict with the police force about his methods. What Heston's character discovers about the food maker could unravel the fabric of the comfortable society that runs the world.

Soylent Green is based on Harry Harrison's fine novel Make Room, Make Room!. The adaption incorporates a lot of common themes from films during the 70's particularly the issue of the ecology. That isn't to say this film is obsessed with issues. While there are a number of importance observations, all of them are well integrated into this sharply written science fiction murder mystery. The direction by Richard Fleischer (Fantastic Voyage, 20,000 Leages Under the Sea, Treasure Island)isn't as stylized as one would expect but he does manage to get the most out of the material. The director's commentary is often wry and observant--a rarity now on most DVDs.

This was Edward G. Robinson's last film and his 101st. A talented, popular actor often misused by Hollywood, Robinson gives a startling fresh and powerful performance as Heston's roommate and assistant Sol. His final scene in the film is both powerful and gives Heston's character the faith to carry on his investigation. The dinner scene between Heston and Robinson (which was ad libbed) is terrific and much of the dialog and banter between the two actors is both funny and touching.

The DVD looks terrific particularly after all the poor prints that have circulated on television. Yes, there's analog artifacts but this is probably about as pristine a print as were likely to see. The transfer is vivid and well balanced. The sound is fairly strong given the fact that this was pre-THX and stereo. The DVD includes a couple of short featurettes about Heston and the making of the film. Robinson also gets due notice. A vintage theatrical trailer is also included.

Soylent Green's importance in science fiction cannot be underestimated. There were a number of bad films produced after 2001 and Planet of the Apes (including many of the sequels to the original Apes film)that had cheapened the luster these two fine films had temporarily given to science fiction. Soylent Green is a somber, powerful film. It's also an entertaining mystery. After this the genre would fall back into decline (although there were a few highlights) until the success of Star Wars in 1977. Thoughtful, impactful science fiction films were rare during the 70's. Although Soylent Green hasn't aged as well as one would expect, it's intent and the power of the performances, script and direction still make it a potent look into the future.

'Soylent Green' still nourishing after all this time!
If there was ever such a thing as 'sci-fi-noir', this is it. This wonderful, pessimistic, science fiction flick works as a cautionary tale, an action-mystery and a love story to boot. Charlton Heston fans will love it! It's 'Taylor-made' for the big guy (pardon the 'apes' pun). Heston excells at playing the cynical, tough yet decent sort; here a cop who's trying to unearth a cover-up reaching into the very top of government and industry. The movie is paced well and allows us to experience the gritty, sooty, reality of an exhausted, failing industrial society in the all too near future. The story line is supported by wonderful supporting performances by notable actors like Leigh Taylor-Young, Brock Peters, Chuck Connors, Joseph Cotten, and the great Edward G. Robinson, in what I believe is his last move. Unlike some 70's science fiction movies, the premise of 'Soylent Green' has not proved dated. It's as frightening and riviting today as it was when it was filmed nearly three decades ago. It's also poignant. The scene where Sol Roth (Edward G. Robinson) weeps out of sadness as the delighted Thorn (Heston) tasts the first real food he's ever eaten, is pristine, pure, gut-level story telling. Thorn's ultimate abandonment of his love interest, (Leigh-Taylor Young) to her unhappy fate is in keeping with the film's hard edge. Ultimately Thorn and Roth uncover a secret best left hidden. This movie never flinches. It's not as well known as Heston's other science fiction classic, 'Planet of the Apes' but 'Soylent Green' is great entertainment and perhaps the most underrated science fiction movie of the 1970's!

"Sorry We Went" Green
My wife and I saw this film in his initial theater release, expecting a good couple of hours entertainment, because of our faith in Charlton Heston. Bad move! Though it did depict rather well a bleak Malthusian future, its focus was entirely on efforts to obtain the wondrous Soylent Green as food, since it was so much superior to the other 2 colors. Alas, as soon as we had guessed the "shocking" source of the Green, there was nothing more to this one-trick-pony of a movie.

A nightmare every time closer
In 2022 the population's growth may reach eight billions people So the awful warning call given by Aldous Huxley ( A new visit for a brave new world) , George Orwell (Animal's farm or 1984) will suppose several restrictions about the free circulation vehicles and also an estimated amount of liters of water by each one of us.
This film is a very clever scifi story about a overcrowded world, where the reduced free spaces of the world we know actually , may be more narrow.
The story holds a deep reflection about the effects of a claustrophobic world, the lack of certain benefits you assumed almost naturally till now.
This movie shows us about a reality not so far. This work was the last appearance of Edward G. Robinson; thanks to Heston efforts for including him in that role. The last sequence in which you watch the ancient world like it was; it depicts a bucolic landscape; and the Pastoral Symphony works out perfectly with this goal. You may feel it something tearful, but the remarkable point is the hidden message. Still we are on time to avoid it. But who'll take this dangerous flag?
This film was released just one year after since Roma's club establihment, in 1972. In that age I had the opportunity of reading that fundamental work of Barry Commoner titled The circle that it closes.Watch for this one. Because with these raising reflections about the enviroment concern around the world made it possible, by instance, avoid to throw several hazardous weapons over Vietnam, whose direct and collateral effects had not studied enough. Chernobyl was just only fourteen years before and Long island twelve years.
Only with this long introduction you'll be capable of understand why this film,together with Farenheit 451, Capricorn one, The Omega man, Zardoz, The planet of the apes , 2001 and Solaris were made between 1967 and 1972. We are taking about movies of film makers so distant in style and view directorial as Kubrick , Tarkovski, Truffaut, Schafner ,Hyams and Boorman, but surrounded by that cloudy atmosphere who involved the world in those days.
A must for you to watch. It will let you thinking for a long, long time.

An Underrated SF Thriller
I just rediscovered this classic movie on DVD recently. It is an extraordinary and haunting film with a powerful message. The performance by Edward G. Robinson is moving, and it's almost obligatory to say that Charles Heston chews up the scenery (as usual).

Some of the reviewers here have bemoaned the fact that there are so many 70s-type vehicles in the world of Soylent Green, which detracts from its setting in the year 2022. Nothing could be further from the truth. I remember watching this film in 1973 and was very conscious of that fact that it was projecting what NYC might look like 49 years from then. Why so? Read on.

Not to state the obvious, but this is a film about a dystopian future. The planet is overpopulated and running out of resources. All of the major oil fields on earth have passed peak production (our experts tell us that the last major fields in Saudi Arabia and Iraq will reach peak production in just a few years from now). Most of the automobiles are old and broken down. Infrastructure is decaying. Even in 2004, here and now, you can see this process beginning. In many parts of the city where I live, people are driving vehicles manufactured from the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. Things are run down. People are working harder and making less money. Richard Fleischer's vision of the future is brilliant and spot on.

So what about the cheesy 70s background music, you say? All I can say is that by 2022 there might very well be a 70s renaissance, because by then people will have realized how good things were in the 1970s. Look at us in 2004, we're still playing Beatles music, and it is quite likely that the music industry will dramatically change or won't even exist by 2022.

And finally, to underscore the scope and brilliance of this film, just do some investigative research into today's Monsanto Corporation and see if you can't find an overwhelming parallel with the Soylent Corporation depicted in the film, whose aim was to control the world's food supply.

And who knows, by the year 2022, food processing and Chicken McNuggets will be so pervasive that NOBODY will know where their food really comes from. What a chilling thought.

I wish that every person on this planet owned this DVD. It's not just a great Heston film, or a brilliant science fiction thriller, it's an important film for all of mankind...because it's still not too late.

p.s. the amazing quality and sharpness of the images in this film are astounding. This is the film that I saw in 1973. All other versions have been muddy and dark. Another outstanding transfer!! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

The swashbuckler genre bumped into science fiction in 1954 for one of Hollywood's great entertainments. The Jules Verne story of adventure under the sea was Walt Disney's magnificent debut into live-action films. A professor (Paul Lukas) seeks the truth about a legendary sea monster in the years just after the Civil War. When his ship is sunk, he, his aide (Peter Lorre), and a harpoon master (Kirk Douglas) survive to discover that the monsteris actually a metal submarine run by Captain Nemo (James Mason). Along with the rollicking adventure, it's fun to see the future technology that Verne dreamed up in his novel, including diving equipment and sea farming. The film's physical prowess is anchored by the Nautilus, an impressive full-scale gothic submarine complete with red carpet and pipe organ. In the era of big sets,20,000 Leagues set a precedent for films shot on the water anddeservedly won Oscars for art direction and special effects. Lost in the inventiveness of the film and great set pieces including a giant squid attack are two great performances. Mason is the perfect Nemo, taut and private, clothed in dark fabric that counters the Technicolor dreamboat that is the beaming red-and-white-stripe-shirted Kirk Douglas as the heroic Ned Land. The film works as peerless family adventure nearly half a century later. --Doug Thomas ... Read more

Reviews (52)

Voyage of the Nautilus
Kirk Douglas and James Mason explore the mysteries of the deep in the Sci-Fi classic "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea". Rumours of a sea monster that attacks ships, has open the interests of a curious French scientist (Paul Lukas), his faithful aide (Peter Lorre) and an able harpoonist (Kirk Douglas). Upon a striking encounter, they learn that the "sea monster" is a powerful under-water vessel under the command of the vengeful Captain Nemo (James Mason). "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" is a remarkable adaptation of Jules Verne's stunning adventure tale. The film features a powerful story, great under-water photography and a rich music score. Kirk Douglas, Paul Lukas and Peter Lorre are well cast but it's James Mason's intense performance of Captain Nemo that often drives the whole film. It also contains some impressive visuals and thrilling momments including a gripping battle against a giant squid.

Disney gives "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" the full "2-Disc special edition" treatment. The movie is presented in it's original theatrical widescreen format. The DVD contains an amazing video transfer and clear digital sound quality. Disc 2 features exclusive bonus material including Behind-the-scene featurettes, Theatrical trailer, picture gallery and audio commentaries. Like previous Disney DVD, the disc also contains forced commercials and trailers of upcoming Disney releases. Overall, it scores an "A".

It's not just a Disney classic, it's a classic, period.
Among the live-action output of the Disney studios there are precious few _truly_ great films. One of them is "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea."

It was the first wholly live-action movie made at the Burbank studios (the previous live films having been made in England, one of which -- "Treasure Island" -- is another classic, recently reissued in a gorgeous DVD transfer). "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" is a classic example of how simply throwing money, talent, and imagination at a project can result in a masterpiece.

It is difficult to overpraise this film. Earl Felton's imaginative rethinking of Jules Verne's novel and his script's focus on the moral issues at the center of the story; James Mason's subtle and controlled performance as Captain Nemo; the startlingly realistic miniatures (which have not been surpassed); and Richard Fleischer's simple, uncluttered direction are standouts.

But all these pale in the face of the incredible art design, which deservedly won an Oscar. The interior of the Nautilus cleverly imagines how a Victorian submarine (had there been such a thing!) would be furnished. The exterior is the most-fanciful submarine design ever conceived. It does for this film what Robby does for "Forbidden Planet."

Did I forget to mention the fight with the giant squid, one of the most-memorable scenes in the history of movies?

My only complaint is that I'm not a fan of Paul Smith's music. His principal theme for this film is inspired, perfectly invoking the fundamentally somber mood of the story, but the rest of the score doesn't come up to it. (It might be that the dreadful style of Disney's "house" orchestrations -- which afflict dozens of other Disney films -- keeps me from properly appreciating Smith's work.) I can only note that, while Disney was hiring one of Fox's model designers to create the miniatures, he might also have borrowed Bernard Herrmann, who, five years later, would produce a classic score for another Jules Verne story, also starring James Mason.

This transfer is the best yet (including the LV). The color is rich and varied (quite unlike the overly-red/muddy-green mess Technicolor would soon become), and I didn't see a single spot or scratch. There's a lot of supplemental material, including an hour-long "making of" feature that's well-above-average for this sort of thing, Disney or otherwise. There is also a intermittently interesting running commentary from the director and Rudy Behlmer, the film historian. Note that the "Operation Undersea" episode of Disneyland -- an hour-long "commerical" for the film that won an Emmy -- is _not_ included.

Despite its half-century age, "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" has lost little of its freshness or excitement. If your kids don't like it -- get new kids.

A Great DVD of a Great Film
Like many of the other reviewers of this movie, I'm a pre-boomer who was dazzled by the film as a child. Somewhere in my aging mom's attic, I have a few bolts (painted wood) from the movie set of the Nautilus, which I "borrowed" from one of the Disney properties as a kid nearly a half century ago. I remember taking a bus from LA to Burbank to stare through the slats of the fence in the back lot of the Disney Studios and seeing a partial model of the Nautilus, perhaps 1/3 scale, tossed in a corner like so much debris. What I would have given to be able to drag that model home.

When I viewed the VHS version of this film a couple of years ago, I was bitterly disappointed by the poor quality which made the watching experience actually painful to a fan like me. But, let me tell you, this DVD is as thrilling as the VHS was painful. This fully-restored version of the film comes roaring back to life in all of its glory and then some. It's the best film restoration these old eyes have ever beheld. Watched on a state-of-the-art widescreen TV, this is every bit the experience it was in the '50's and I think it's wonderful that this great film is now preserved for the ages, just as it was when it was first released.

Is this a perfect movie? No. Even as a kid, I noticed that the background music was too cheesy, that Kirk Douglas's songs seemed gratuitous, that the fish swimming outside the large porthole were cartoonish, and that the electrically-illuminated eye of the Giant Squid made an otherwise perfect special effect look a bit fake. I'm just as puzzled by those weaknesses today as I was then, especially since all other aspects of the film, including the numerous, Oscar-winning special effects involving the Nautilus, are masterful. But no movie is perfect and this movie, minor warts and all, is nothing less than a memorial to the genius of Disney, the acting of James Mason, the passion of the Disney staff, and the vision of Jules Verne.

The best Disney movie ever... and a DVD to match it!
Finally! The definitive edition of a Jules Verne classic brought back in all its pomp and glory. The price, for once, is right.

I remember it when it first was released in Europe, and I can safely say that this version beats even that showing back then.

Extremely clear image, stupendous surround sound, make this a must have in the most absolute way.

Forget all the other versions ever made. This remains THE classic of them all!

Forget the dated special effects which, by the way, you may not even notice, since the story is so gripping and fast paced, that you may not even realize they are.

James Mason gives a wonderful portrayal of Captain Nemo. One of his best roles, together with Fieldmarshal Rommel in "The Desert Fox", Cicero in "Five Fingers" and Professor Arronax in "Journey to the Center of the Earth" of about the same period.
Kirk Douglas and Peter Lorre form a perfect if not odd comical duo, to ease the tension of the story.

The score is beautifully remastered and brings you immediately back to those long bygone days of great moviemaking.

I won't be long reviewing this movie, since many others before me, have already praised it and described it in detail.

I can only say, buy it, buy it, buy it!

Oh, and by the way, don't forget about another Jules Verne classic coming out soon on DVD and in Widescreen:
"Around the World in 80 Days".
That's another "absolutely must have".

In the meanwhile, have you checked on "Journey to the Center of the Earth".
Do you have it on your DVD shelf?
No?
Shame on you...
Go and get it fast.
It's been remastered and it's a worthy companion to the other two Jules Verne movies.
So, what are you waiting for?

Superior DVD Package of a Memorable Film
Loosely based on the celebrated novel by Jules Verne and set in the late 19th Century, LEAGUES offers the story of Professor Arronax (Paul Lukas), his assistant Conseil (Peter Lorre), and harpooner Ned Land (Kirk Douglas), who are coaxed by the United States government to aid in the search for a sea monster said to be terrorizing shipping lanes. But the monster is not of flesh and blood, and soon the three find themselves in the hands of the mysterious Captain Nemo (James Mason) as prisoners aboard the Nautilus--a fully functional submarine capable of ramming ships and sending them to the ocean floor.

Underwater photography was hardly new in 1954, but never had it been used so extensively nor to such visually beautiful effect, and the art designs--particularly those for the Nautilus--are justly celebrated. But for all its beauty, it is the performances which make the film work. James Mason does not merely play Nemo, he seems to be Nemo; after seeing his performance it is impossible to imagine any other actor in the role. Paul Lukas adds yet another brilliantly understated performance to his memorable career, and while Kirk Douglas and Peter Lorre are hardly the Ned Land and Conseil of the Verne novel they have surprising chemistry and lend the film considerable dash.

At the time of its release, LEAGUES was the single most expensive motion picture ever made (ironically it would loose that dubious distinction later that same year to yet another film featuring James Mason: A STAR IS BORN), and every penny of the money spent shows in the onscreen result. While many of Disney's live-action films are fondly recalled, few have had enduring fame, much less claim to status as art--but LEAGUES is the exception, and although the episodic nature of the story seems a shade languid from time to time it remains both a landmark and one of the most influential films of its decade. Truly enjoyable from start to finish.

GFT, Amazon Reviewer ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Best Cop Movie of all time
Words cant truly express how realistic this movie is. It faces the harsh realities of police work, most havent changed since this movie was made.

Possibly the best Police movie ever
This movie inspired me to a law enforcement career that lasted 28 years. George C. Scott (Officer Kilvinsky) delivers one of his best performances as a veteran patrolman of the L.A.P.D. He teaches a rookie cop "Stacy Keach" how to survive on the streets of L.A. Erik Estrada plays a former gang banger that turned cop, only to find himself working patrol in his old stomping grounds. The realism was great. No doubt they used police advisors when making the film. A sad movie that will make you realize that cops are human. Kilvinsky the cynical cop, shows compassion in dealing with illegal Mexican immigrants that are being taken advantage of by a money grubbing landlord. Stacy Keach suffers a failed marriage and gets involved in an interracial relationship. Truly a gut wrenching movie that shows the brutality of police work, both mentally and physically. I'd pay a hundred dollars if I could get the movie on DVD.

A must see for anyone interested in police work.
I saw "The New Centurions" on television back in the late 1970's. I thought it was a good movie about the police work. The movie is based on the book written by a former LAPD officer Joseph Wambaugh. Alot of the movie is a depressing because it deals with alcoholism, divorce, and suicide. Even though the movie was based on the LAPD back in the 1960's, alot of it still rings true today. You see several young officers in the academy going thru PT and other training. Then, they graduate the academy and are sent to a high crime division to beginning training with a TO (training officer). Immediately, Kilvinsky tells Stacy Keach character to forget about half of what he learn in the academy because it is useless. You see them going to various radio calls. The most interesting part of the movie is when George C. Scott charater starts telling Roy (Keach) how he deals with various crimes (Kilvinsky Law). The scene with the hookers in the back of the paddy wagon is funny. It is a good movie about some of what happens in police patrol cars and handling calls. It is kind of depressing but, it is still a good movie.

New Centurions
A Geart LawEnforcement Movie set in the LosAngeles 60's It Demostrates the Mental and Emotional Problems that working the Streets of LA as a Cop have to endure! This shows How Wambaugh as a X-LAPD Offficer and Writer, helped to get trama care to LawEnforcment Personal. This is also a Movie thats costars the Young James Woods and Erick Estrada in their early carrier. I grew Up in LosAngeles (The Valley) and this Movie gives a great View of LosAngeles During the Watts Riots in 63'

Great Cop Movie
I didn't realize that this movie was still in print, and I was pleasantly surprised.

I think it's one of the best movies I've seen with Stacy Keach (sp?). George C. Scott was great also. I guess the one thing I did not care for is the way it ended... with Keach getting killed. In fact, both of the main characters get nixed. Don't like endings like that. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The dark, brooding tone of Conan the Barbarian is replaced in this rousing sequel by a lighter, more humorous tone and one of the campiest casts ever assembled. This time, Conan is assigned by a duplicitous queen (Sarah Douglas) to escort a virgin princess (Olivia d'Abo) on a treacherous trek to a crystal palace where they will retrieve a priceless gemstone. Basketball champ and self-described Lothario Wilt Chamberlain plays Bombaata, a warrior sent on a secret mission to kill Conan, and the androgynous Grace Jones plays Zula, a wild woman who becomes Conan's loyal ally. Some consider this sequel a disappointment, but the film makes no apologies for its silliness, and that's the key to its success as gloriously pulpy entertainment. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (56)

Not horrible but not great
Call this more like 2 1/2 stars. This movie may actually be a bit closer in spirit to a true swords and sorcery epic than the first movie. We've got evil queens, evil wizards, monsters, etc...

Unfortunately, Conan is even saddled with a bigger cast of companians. Mako is back as the wizard, Tracy Walter plays a thief for comic relief, then we have Oliva D'Abo as a Princess, and Wilt Chamberlain and Grace Jones rounding out the cast.

This is some of the worst casting EVER! Jones, Chamberlain and Walter are totally out of place in this movie. Chamberlain is even more wooden than Arnold, Jones basically scowls and growls for 90 minutes and Walter sounds like a hillbilly in ancient times.

The special effects are B movie at it's best. Poorly looking rubber costumes. Conan's nemesis from the books and comics, Thoth Amon comes off as totally pathetic.

It's not all bad. Arnold himself holds things together as best he can and the action scenes are well done. Still, We have yet to see anyone do a REAL good swords and sorcery/fantasy movie(discounting Lord of the Rings, of course).

King Kull with Kevin Sorbo was yet another slap in the face to fans of Robert E. Howard.

Quirky casting decisions quickly sink this "Conan" sequel
The 1982 film "Conan the Barbarian" is the film that gets the credit (or blame) for turning Arnold Schwarzenegger into a movie star, but it should be remembered more as the best Sword & Sorcery film produced to date. The main reasons, besides Schwarzenegger cutting an imposing figure as Conan, flexing his muscles and swinging his big sword, was that director John Milius treated the characters seriously and avoided descending into camp. But for the 1984 sequel "Conan the Destroyer," the key factor seemed to be coming up with casting in a similar vein to the logic that had landed Arnold the role.

The story of "Conan the Destroyer" was by Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway, a pair of writers for Marvel Comics. Thomas was the writer for Marvel's "Conan the Barbarian," often adapating Robert E. Howard's stories, whether they were originally Conan stories or not. The story is a basic quest story where Conan escorts a virgin princess to bring back a powerful gem from a crystal palace, which will then be returned to a queen (Sarah Douglas), who turns out to be evil and wants to sacrifice the princess so the gem can used to summon an ancient demon, at which point wackiness will ensue.

The problem is not in the story, which certainly allows you to string together a series of Sword & Sorcery adventures, but in the casting. The princess is played by Olivia d'Abo, who simply looks too young (i.e., Conan was forever leaving pregnant princesses behind in his various adventures but there is not chance for that sort of chemistry here). Her body guard, Bombaata, is played by basketball Hall of Famer, Wilt Chamberlain, while Zula, the warrior woman who joins the group is played by Grace Jones, the singer/dancer/model/crazy woman. Comic relif, which was relatively absent in the orignal film, is provided by Tracey Walter as Malak. With such casting the descent into camp becomes inevitable. Besides, there is nothing in this film even close to rivaling Arnold's best moments in the original (especially since the final shot of the old King Conan is recycled from the first film).

Those who have actually read the originally Conan stories will also find it rather distressing that Toth-Amon, the great Stygian wizard who was Conan's biggest enemy in the Howard stories, is reduced to a pit stop on this quest (I remember thinking at the time that this was the equivalent of Darth Vader being one of the guys that got dispatched at the Cantina in "Star Wars"). Thomas and Conway were upset by Stanley Mann's final screenplay, as well as the finished film, and ended up turning their story into the graphic novel "Conan and the Horn of Azoth," with art by Mike Docherty (all the names got changed to avoid any confusion).

Ultimately, "Conan the Destroyer" gets three stars because we round down simply to make sure that it is clear that "Conan the Barbarian" was a better movie. Besides, this 1984 film pretty much killed the franchise, although Milius is apparently preparing a 2005 film "King Conan: Crown of Iron," which there being a lot of speculation as to who will play Conan now that Arnold is Governor of Cal-e-fornia (the hot names are apparently all wrestlers).

Awful movie. I wish I could forget it
The masterul epic quality of "Conan the Barbarian" demanded an epic sequel. Instead, what we were given was a parody.

In the first movie Conan's character was well developed, you saw what happened to him over the course of his life, what created him, and what his motivations were.

In this movie, Conan is reduced to a bodybuilder in a fur diaper.

Conan's companions in the first movie were formidible accomplices who Conan respected. In this movie, Conan's companions, especially the annoyingly sniveling cretin Malak, (played by Tracey Walter) have no redeeming qualities at all. I kept hoping Conan would impale him and put us out of our misery. I was constantly lead to wonder "Why is Conan hanging around with this guy?"

Sandahl Bergman in the original movie was a Valkyrie. She was amazingly beautiful, but also amazingly powerful and dangerous.

In the second movie we were given Grace Jones. Please. Not only is she unattractive, her character was essentially unbelievable, crude and repulsive. The notion that she could portray any kind of a warrior was laughable.

The villains in the first movie are fearful. James Earl Jones as Thulsa Doom, Sven Ole Thorsen as Thorgrim and Ben Davidson as Rexor come across as men who could perhaps beat Conan. It made the outcome uncertain and Conan's eventual victory that much more powerful.

In this movie the villain is a guy in a monster suit, and a rhino horn with poorly done special effects. It is so ridiculously, lame that Conan must drop his sword and arm wrestle the monster for a fair fight. Wilt Chamberlain, while a creditable athlete, simply did not have the screen prescence necessary. One look at him and it was obvious that Conan could take him. Chamberlain didn't do the role justice.

In the first movie, magic was just that. Magic. It was dangerous, expensive in terms of life and used only in dire circumstances. In this movie magic is reduced to the level of a bad "Dungeons and Dragons" game. I halfway expected The wizard (Mako) to pull out some oddly shaped dice and roll them in his battle with the Man Ape/Toth-Amon.

In the original movie, Conan ponders The riddle of steel, he's a thinker and a man of action. He speaks little. In this movie, talks toomuch, Conan rescues a blonde girl and is betrayed by the evil stepmother. It was a variation of Snow White, Cimmerian style. At least there weren't seven dwarves.

Finally, Conan movies should be R rated. The world of Conan is violent, brutal, lusty and grim. Solutuions ot problems are found with the edge of a blade, not with talk. This watered-down milquetoast version of a Conan adventure was designed to pander to a family friendly audience and D&D geeks. There's plenty of family entertainment out there, and to bring adapt Conan to that environment is wrong.

It's too bad that John Milius was not in charge of this movie. The suits in Hollywood had their way and this movie stinks as a result. The fans lost, because instead three movies we only get one good one, one bad one, and if a third is ever made, it likely won't star Arnold in the title role. What a missed opportunity. It could have been SO much better.

If you like the Conan stories, ignore this film, and stick to the one and only Conan movie.

the greatest
this is the best one cuz this one has more speical Affects and it has monster like the other one didn't and this had more fighting and more wizards now this was the best one of all thats what i think get this,it's a really great movie Arnold kicks @$$ on this movie but i think he should just get about valeria.but this is a great and powerful movie

A Must-have
Among Arnold's early movies, this one stands out for the eclectic supporting cast. His early movies were remarkedly free of any acting on his part; I suspect he was still learning English then. But one way to make him look better is to hire nonactors, or miscast semiactors. Enter Wilt and Grace. (Later, Richard Dawson). This is as much a collectible as Terminator 2. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Best filmization of Mark Twain's classic, so far!
This sumptuous retelling of Mark Twain's classic tale of two young look-a-likes who switch places to see who has the easiest life is rousing family entertainment. Mark Lester(of "Oliver" fame) is consistently appealing in dual title role, and he receives solid support from other stalwarts like Charlton Heston, Oliver Reed, George C. Scott, etc. This is the best filmization of Twain's novel by far.

The Prince and the Pauper
This is a excellent movie. It's a beautifull expression of human's behaviors. Through a wonderfull story, the most magnificent human qualities are expressed . Honesty, generosity and compassion are opposed to cupidity, malice and cruelty. This is the kind of movies that will make you again young in heart... if your not already. I recommend it to anybody that want to revive their humanity or rejuvinate a few year. ... Read more

Reviews (151)

A great factual account of Pearl Harbor... to a fault.
There's no denying the grand effort that went into making this historical presentation of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Taking accounts of both sides of the war equally, made respectively by both United States and Japanese production crews, Tora! Tora! Tora! is a great documentation of how the attack really occurred. Unlike the recent Pearl Harbor film, which tries to tell the historical story (with many flaws), a love story and a disaster story, Tora! Tora! Tora knows what is meant to be, and strictly follows the historical angle.

Unfortunately, this dedication to fact is the films major weakness. There are no real characterizations of any of the major roles, no central character the audience can connect with, either on the American or Japanese forces. This lack of a so called staring role (which both sides should have had) makes the film feel more like a documentary then a movie. What characters the film does center on are all flat and rather uninteresting. Not to mention poorly acted.

Despite this, the film provides a great understanding of how the attack really occurred, and gives a wonderful visual feast of the disaster. For 1970, when this film was released, the visual effects are outstanding. Definitely worth at least one viewing, more if you're a World War II buff.

The Definitive Pearl Harbor Film -- Not To Be Missed
A unique collaboration between American and Japanese filmmakers, "Tora, Tora, Tora" remains the definitive Hollywood portrayal of the tragic events of December 7, 1941. Perhaps the greatest compliment ever paid to this film was provided by none other than Jerry Bruckheimer and Michael Bay, the "masterminds" behind the disastrous "Pearl Harbor", who stated that "Tora" played too much like a documentary. Well, how about that? No meandering love story, no Hallmark script, just cold, hard facts. "Tora" places us smack dab in the middle of a lethal chess game played by politicians in Washington and Tokyo throughout the Fall of '41. The political stalemates and blunders which inevitably lead to war are the meat and potatoes of "Tora". The climax is, of course, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor which is masterfully and accurately re-created. Vintage airplanes and actual ships are seemlessly juxtaposed with miniature models. The results are a spectacular cinematic experience which still holds up by today's standards. (Digital effects didn't exist when "Tora" was released in 1970.) Several big names-- Joseph Cotten, Martin Balsam and E.G. Marshall -- assume starring roles, yet wisely let the story be the "star" of the film. Credit the filmmakers for steering the focus toward the "event" without getting sidetracked in typical Hollywood fashion. To objectively portray the events of Pearl Harbor through the eyes of both sides, while keeping finger-pointing to a minimum, was no small task. In turn, the ability of the viewer to experience the preparation and strategy of both sides makes "Tora" truly unique. This is an important film which treats a monumentally tragic event with the respect and accuracy it rightfully deserves. Essential cinema -- not to be missed.

Superb!
After seeing Das Boot for the first time recently, my interest was piqued for another WWII movie. I remember when Tora! was in the theater while I was in high school...and that I had no interest in seeing it at the time. This is a serious-minded, fact-based film of epic proportion. It has similarities to Das Boot in that part of the story is told from the US enemy's point of view. And, oddly enough, I found the structure of the film to be somewhat reminiscent of The Deer Hunter, or even King Solomon's Mines [1950], in that there is a long, detailed build-up of the story prior to any action sequences. And once the action arrived, I sat there thinking, "How did they do this?" Especially considering the fact that this was 1970. But the biggest reward for me is the story itself, and the non-Hollywood way in which it is told here. No one would get financial backing today for a film of this expense coupled with such a non-fiction approach.

The Best Movie Ever Made About Pearl Harbor
Tora! Tora! Tora! is the single best movie ever made about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. It features excellent performances from such actors as James Whitmore, E.G. Marshall, Jason Robards and Martin Balsam. The special effects are far more convincing than what's in modern movies. It also has some of the best movie music of all time. Best of all, the movie shows the sheer complacency on the U.S. side that enabled the Japanese to successfully mount the surprise attack.

Tora! Tora! Tora! is far superior to any other movie ever made about Pearl Harbor. In fact, it is one of the absolute best movies ever made about World War II. It is a classic motion picture in its own right.

On a scale of 1 to 5, it really merits a 10.

Should have been 5 if...
...this movie, which got awesome air scenes and very well documented background info (politic, diplomatic, and military), had been a couple of minutes longer at the end of 1st part. And showed how Roosevelt, who was informed of the results of the (fantastic) Intelligence work -they even could pin the time of the attack- decided to keep it under wraps: so that, without any prior warning, the damage would be maximum, and the shock upon American people would be such as to suppress the reluctance they still got towards entering the war. One of the best examples of "The end justify the means". The Pearl Harbor story could as well have as title "They were expendable". ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Haunting
This movie is haunting, creepy, and fascinating. The first half of the movie deals with the gradual shock and horror in Boston as the stranglings continue, and focuses on the search by the police for the killer, including many false leads (which are fascinating in themselves). The camera work is interesting (including split screen effects) and contributes to a sense of unease as the search intensifies. (This movie should be seen in widescreen so I hope the DVD version is forthcoming.) The acting may seem a little flat and Jack-Webbish at times.

The second half of the movie is incredible. Henry Fonda finds Tony Curtis and suspects he may be the strangler. Their scenes together are powerful. Henry Fonda gently but forcefully guides the strangler to a realization of what he's done. There are scenes that are filmed in such a way that you are able to feel along with the strangler a sense of dread and horror as the truth of what he's done begins to unfold. Tony Curtis is gives a stunning peformance. He is totally convincing as the disturbed plumber. Some of the scenes stay in your mind a long time. There is no gore, but there is one scene of an attack, and in general the film is somewhat disturbing, so I wouldn't let a young child or anyone too unstable watch it. The movie deals compassionately with the strangler as a victim of a severe mental illness, and Tony Curtis brings a strong sense of pathos to the role.

" Murder, Mayhem and Madness"
Tony Curtis gives the best performance of his life! The Boston Strangler is without a doubt the greatest camera work I have ever seen, split screen, widescreen, multi camera frames on one screen. Mr. Fleischer you made a real piece of artwork that will stand the test of time! The camera tell's and reminds you how each seen is played out on a multi pictured screen! It is a puzzle that you have to put together in your mind , a lot of fun! Tony you played the greatest Psychological character I have ever seen on screen! I know because of my own experiences. Albert De Salvo the real Boston Strangler while in prison made 2 leather wallet's, in which he gave them to Dir. Fleischer & com. Tony did not receive one! (I guess De Salvo did not like my performance Tony once said!) This is a rare one! A must see! Thank you Tony for one of the greatest performances!

Exemplary acting!
I saw this video many years ago and was quite moved by the story as well as the acting. I would love to see it again. ... Read more

Reviews (97)

3 1/2 stars for sharply written and directed sf classic
THe 70's were a strange time for science fiction films. There were a number of minor classics (Westworld, the absurd and pretentious Zardoz, Logan's Run) and major space operas (Star Wars)that dominated the scene. While none of these films were perfect, Soylent Green was one of the outstanding efforts from the era. Although it's a flawed minor masterpiece, the strong performances from Heston, Robinson, Leigh Taylor-Young and Chuck Conners help the film continue to shine. All the actors benefit from the assured direction of veteran Richard Fleischer. The film was produced during one of MG