Amazon.com

Andrei Konchalovsky's expansive television mini-series production of Homer's epic poem gets off to clumsy start as he tries to squeeze the Trojan War into a mere half hour, but once the arrogant but honorable Odysseus (strikingly played by Armand Assante) and his loyal crew begin their doomed voyage home, this film turns into a fantastical adventure. Integrating often-stunning special effects with inventive art design, Konchalovsky achieves a beautiful look on a limited budget as he follows the 10-year ordeal of Odysseus from his battles with the Cyclops and the magical Circe (Bernadette Peters) to his secret homecoming and his confrontation with the treacherous Eurymachus (Eric Roberts). Isabella Rossellini appears as his spiritual guide, the goddess Athena, with Greta Scacchi as Odysseus's faithful wife and Vanessa Williams as the seductive Calypso. The rest of the cast includes Geraldine Chaplin, Jeroen Krabbé, Christopher Lee, and Irene Papas. The production was shot on location in and around the Mediterranean, making for a lush, lovely visual experience. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (156)

Wow, what a EXTRAORDINARY movie!!
I have just finished watching the movie, The Odyssey. It was good in many different ways. It had a lot of actors in it and many of them played their part very well. My favorite character would have to be Penelope (Greta Scacchi). She had a hard time handling the fact that her husband, Odysseus (Armand Assante), was gone at war and may never return home. The fact that her husband left right after their son was born was upsetting as well. She made a promise to her husband that when their son grew into a man, she would have to choose a new husband. After the Trojan War ended, Odysseus yelled to the gods that he didn't need their help after all, when he actually did use their help. The god of the sea, Poseidon, heard him and put a curse on him that he couldn't go home to Ithaca. Odysseus went through many extraordinary adventures and many didn't creatures while trying to get home. One of these strange creatures was Cyclops, Poseidon's brother. Cyclops (Reid Asato) is a giant with one huge eye in the middle of his forehead that loves to eat humans. Odysseus and his men floated down to the island where Cyclops lived and Cyclops asked Odysseus what his name was and Odysseus said that it was nobody. While Odysseus and his men were there with the Cyclops they gave him the gift that they had brought, which was wine. After some cups, Cyclops started to lay down and fall asleep. Once they thought that he was asleep, they took a large stake and jammed it into the Cyclops' eye. The Cyclops immediately jumped up and started to run around yelling, Nobody hurt my eye. The men escaped quickly, but the Cyclops ate the fiddler. The men that were left, left the island and floated along some more for many more adventures. In conclusion, I thought that this movie was great! It used a lot of facts from the epics by Homer.

Movie Review for THE ODYSSEY By Phil
THE ODYSSEY is based in the book THE ODYSSEY by Homer. It tells the exciting tale of Odysseus, the king of Ithaca, who, on the day of his son's birth, was called to fight in the Trojan War. However, the movie is not about Odysseus fighting in the Trojan War. The real plot begins when Odysseus begins his journey home after the war. As the war ended, Odysseus happened to anger a very vengeful god named Poseidon, who is the god of the sea. Poseidon decided to make Odysseus' journey home as miserable as possible. Now Odysseus must make it home to Ithaca while avoiding Poseidon's wrath. During his long, hard journey, Odysseus and his crew encounter many strange creatures. Some creatures are friendly and try to help Odysseus and his men. Others are not friendly and try to destroy Odysseus and prevent him from reaching Ithaca. Here are some of the main characters: Odysseus:The mighty king of Ithaca and main character of the story.(Armand Assante) Penelope:Odysseus' beloved wife who waits patiently for his return.(Greta Scacchi) Athena:Odysseus' guardian god who guides him in times of need and gives him helpful advice.(Isabella Rosselini) Circe:Odysseus was unlucky to run into this woman. After someone drinks her magical honey wine, she turns them into swine.(Bernadette Peters) Calypso:Another unfourtunate accident of Odysseus' was running into Calypso. She kept him on her island for two whole years!(Vanessa Williams)

THE ODYSSEY has a very strong visual impact on the audience that watches it. It is full of action and suspense and the special effects are amazing, especially the scene where Poseidon was speaking to Odysseus through the waves. Also, the acting and costumes were realistic. The actors talked and wore clothes that were worn in that time. The soundtrack is also realistic to that time, The music on the soundtrack is mostly old Greek music.

Overall, I give THE ODYSSEY five stars.

Best Odysseus I've Seen
Armand Asante does an excellent job as Odysseus. As with all movies, there will be some significant differences from the original Homer. After having seen the recent release of Troy, I'd have to say The Odyssey is a better movie. If you prefer to watch a movie that remains faithful to the original classic with good casting/acting, this is for you. If you want cool special effects and big name stars in a story that is loosly based on a classic tale...then see Troy.

Still compelling after 3000 years.
Homer would have endorsed this rendering of his tale. Full of wonderful special effects, gorgeous Mediterranean vistas, and gods and goddesses who look their parts, this movie is still driven by personalities. The casting was brilliant: Armand Asante is all that one could wish in an Odysseus -- engaging, passionate, mature, heroic in every dimension. Isabella Rosellini and Greta Saachi are perfect in their roles as Athena and Penelope, respectively. Telemachus is a classical adolescent only child, and Antichea, Odysseus's mother, dominates each of her scenes. While this production is eye-candy from beginning to end, the visual appeal cannot distract from the timeless humanity of its characters. There is a reason that Homer's story still reaches us after 3000 years, and this telling does justice to its ancient material.

A great story
In my English class, on the last weeks of school, our teacher said she wanted us to watch a movie that will be educating for years to come and pulled out The Odyssey. At first the whole class seemed dull by the ideal of the movie but from the beginning, we were stuck.

The story has an amazing plot, and the actors are pretty good. Some of the special effects were kind of lame but that wasn't the movies fault, it was their budget. This is really good for a TV miniseries.

From the spooky lair of Syclla to the amazing Island of Ithaca, this movie really portrays the story well. It's very enjoyable, and I'm going to have to order the movie to keep! ... Read more

Reviews (40)

Smashing Through All Obstacles...
I'm a railfan -- i try to go to virtually every "train" movie that i hear about. I've seen some mediocre films ("Breakheart Pass"), some Awful Films ("The Cassandra Crossing") and some Pretty Good films ("Silver Streak") that way.

And i saw "Runaway Train" -- an Incredible Film.

With Jon Voight nominated for Both Oscar and Golden Globe (which he won) as Best Actor, and Eric Roberts nominated for both Oscar and Golden Globe as Best Supporting Actor, and featuring Rebecca deMornay in a decidedly UN-glamourous role, this is obviously not your standard action film.

And when one adds that the original screenplay was by Akira Kurosawa, one realises that this is NOT the usual Golan-Globus production at all, at all.

In brief, the story is simple -- two cons, one old and experienced and dangerous and one young, cocky and ignorant, break out of a max security prison in Alaska, hop a train headed for the Lower 48, and find themselves (along with a female railroad worker) on a hair-raising ride to nowhere on a runaway train with no brakes and no engineer.

But the performances and the nuances make this film Something Special Indeed.

Voight's portrayal of Manny, the man so dangerous that for three years his cell door was *welded* shut, is scary, compelling and sympathetic by turns. "Anything that doesn't kill me makes me stronger" is his motto.

Eric Roberts's performance as the cocky young loser, destined to spend major parts of his life inside, who can't even recognise good advice when Manny practically rubs his nose in it, is at almost the same level, and honestly deserving of the "Best Supporting" nominations he earned for it.

John P. Ryan, as Assistant Warden Rankin, Manny's antagonist and would-be nemesis, is adequate, but not up to the level of performance of Voight and Roberts.

In the end, after all of the incredible stunt work and amazing train work, after all of the violence and emotion, it comes down to two big men (Manny and Rankin) finally confronting each other, in one final test to prove which is the stronger.

Along the way, Voight, playing the existential monster to the hilt, gives us a view of a man who knows all too vividly that he long ago chose the wrong road, but also knows that there is no turning back for him.

When the girl screams at him that he is an animal, he replies "No -- Worse! Human!"

He tries to set the kid straight -- tells him that if he's smart he'll find a job flipping burgers or scrubbing toilets, and do it well and earn his pay -- "...and, if you could do that, you could be President of the United States." But the kid knows better -- he wonders why this big tough guy is talking such nonsense; and he doesn't hear the longing in Manny's voice.

And the final confrontation and the end -- after one last, horrifying and exhilirating stunt sequence -- is exactly what the film needs for its perfect conclusion; as exhilirating and appropriate in its way as the end of "Thelma & Louise" or of "Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid".

Be warned -- this is a brutally, horrifyingly violent film (i spent a lot of time wincing and cringing, reacting in a way that most film violence doesn't bother me), and the language used, while probably somewhat less graphic than actual cons would use, is not for Little Old Ladies.

Add in the Almost Perfect portrayal of railroading (there is one major departure from the way a real railroad would Do Things, but it's necessary for the film to work, and it *could* happen, i suppose), some incredible cinematography, and generally perfect design and execution of sets and costume, and you have got one incredible film experience; a thrill ride you will NOT soon forget.

((Knowing that Kurosawa wrote the original screenplay and had intended to make this film himself, i kept trying to guess whether Manny or Rankin would have been played by Toshira Mifune...))

Entertaining From The Get Go
when i first heard of this movie i thought a movie that is an hour and fifty minutes that is based on a train i thought i can get pretty boring after awhile, but as it turns out i was very wrong. Jon Voight plays a man just released from the hole (inside a prison) after three of being in it and is accompanied by Julia's brother Eric Roberts in this thrilling tale about two men breaking out of prison and catching a ride on a train which quickly becomes out of control. Voight is amazing as the title role and really shows his acting skills in this all out preformance. Roberts plays his part well but no comparison to Voight. Some memorable lines i feel came out of this movie such as when Rebecca DeMorney says "Your an animal" Voight replys "No, Worse. I'm Human." an outstanding movie with some violent scenes definatly worth watching

High drama and intensity
Jon Voight's riveting performance and his battle onboard the train with a prison warden are the most compelling moments in this otherwordly movie about escaped convicts and a railroad employee on a runaway train headed for disaster in the Alaskan wilderness. This film begins with a prison riot -- filmed at an actual prison in Alaska -- and the white hot pace never lets up for a moment...until the closing scene where Voight takes the engine to oblivion.

Along the way, viewers are treated to one of Voight's best performances since "Midnight Cowboy". The cast is comprised of character actors Eric Roberts and John P. Ryan in significant roles with sexpot Rebecca De Mornay playing the railroad employee on board the runaway with convicts Voight and Roberts. They stir up a lot of mayhem running through a red light and crashing with another train and going over a rickety bridge about 100 MPH before facing the inevitable when they are pushed onto a siding with only a fatal end in sight.

This movie has an extraordinarily high intensity level comparable to another great train movie, 1974's "The Taking of Pelham One-Two-Three". The intensity and drama never relents throughout the 111 minutes of screen time. The script isn't much and the plot is lean but the action, violence and high voltage footage will keep you locked to the screen during this most exciting movie.

A MUST-SEE!!!
A beautiful movie - this is beyond action...

Childhood memories.....
I remember watching this movie when I was 10/11 years old. It was mesmorizing then, and it still is now. While I do not yet own the DVD, today I was able to catch this wonderful film on cable...and it was so good! John Voigt and cast put in such a great performance. The drama is very riveting and the final scenes of the movie make one actually shiver. It's a haunting and chilling tale....and an albeit sad one. There are so many good themes riding along throughout: the meaning of freedom, friendship, the beauty of winter. I highly recommend this movie. You won't be disappointed! ... Read more

Reviews (3)

It's The Feel Bad Movie Of The Year!
Dustin Hoffman in "Rain Man," Tom Hanks in "Forrest Gump" and Russell Crowe in "A Beautiful Mind" brilliantly portrayed mentally challenged characters, and each film won the Academy Award for Best Motion Picture. In this movie, Jim Belushi plays Homer, a mildly retarded man. He is portrayed as a pathetic caricature, not as a realistic character. Whoopie Goldberg plays Eddie, a patient that escaped from a mental institution, who is dying from an inoperable brain tumor. Spouting profanities and shooting clerks dead in a series of robberies, Eddie is one of the most unlikable characters ever created. Most disappointing of all, blonde bombshell Angelyne is only seen in a cameo lasting a few seconds. Jim Belushi and Whoopie Goldberg have no chemistry together, and their characters are too mismatched to make their growing friendship believable. This movie fails to create an emotional bond between the viewer and the characters. When Eddie is shot dead, the only thing I felt was relief, because I knew this film was finally coming to an end. "Homer And Eddie" should have won the Razzie Award for Worst Motion Picture Of The Year.

It's NOT a comedy movie !
Don't get mistaken. It is NOT a comedy movie. Rather a road movie with a bitter taste to it. As Whoopie Goldberg plays a vagrant with a tumor in her head which is slowly killing her and Belushi plays a retard who's in search of his parents who have left him behind in hospital 14 years ago.

This is rather a drama and shows superior acting skills by both main characters. Definitely worth an oscar (but never nominated). So don't go thinking this is a family movie that you can watch during christmas eve !! It is NOT.

Great Movie!!
If you like James Belushi and Whoopi Goldberg then you'll love this comedy that's about 2 travelers.It's a must see!! ... Read more

Reviews (156)

Wow, what a EXTRAORDINARY movie!!
I have just finished watching the movie, The Odyssey. It was good in many different ways. It had a lot of actors in it and many of them played their part very well. My favorite character would have to be Penelope (Greta Scacchi). She had a hard time handling the fact that her husband, Odysseus (Armand Assante), was gone at war and may never return home. The fact that her husband left right after their son was born was upsetting as well. She made a promise to her husband that when their son grew into a man, she would have to choose a new husband. After the Trojan War ended, Odysseus yelled to the gods that he didn't need their help after all, when he actually did use their help. The god of the sea, Poseidon, heard him and put a curse on him that he couldn't go home to Ithaca. Odysseus went through many extraordinary adventures and many didn't creatures while trying to get home. One of these strange creatures was Cyclops, Poseidon's brother. Cyclops (Reid Asato) is a giant with one huge eye in the middle of his forehead that loves to eat humans. Odysseus and his men floated down to the island where Cyclops lived and Cyclops asked Odysseus what his name was and Odysseus said that it was nobody. While Odysseus and his men were there with the Cyclops they gave him the gift that they had brought, which was wine. After some cups, Cyclops started to lay down and fall asleep. Once they thought that he was asleep, they took a large stake and jammed it into the Cyclops' eye. The Cyclops immediately jumped up and started to run around yelling, Nobody hurt my eye. The men escaped quickly, but the Cyclops ate the fiddler. The men that were left, left the island and floated along some more for many more adventures. In conclusion, I thought that this movie was great! It used a lot of facts from the epics by Homer.

Movie Review for THE ODYSSEY By Phil
THE ODYSSEY is based in the book THE ODYSSEY by Homer. It tells the exciting tale of Odysseus, the king of Ithaca, who, on the day of his son's birth, was called to fight in the Trojan War. However, the movie is not about Odysseus fighting in the Trojan War. The real plot begins when Odysseus begins his journey home after the war. As the war ended, Odysseus happened to anger a very vengeful god named Poseidon, who is the god of the sea. Poseidon decided to make Odysseus' journey home as miserable as possible. Now Odysseus must make it home to Ithaca while avoiding Poseidon's wrath. During his long, hard journey, Odysseus and his crew encounter many strange creatures. Some creatures are friendly and try to help Odysseus and his men. Others are not friendly and try to destroy Odysseus and prevent him from reaching Ithaca. Here are some of the main characters: Odysseus:The mighty king of Ithaca and main character of the story.(Armand Assante) Penelope:Odysseus' beloved wife who waits patiently for his return.(Greta Scacchi) Athena:Odysseus' guardian god who guides him in times of need and gives him helpful advice.(Isabella Rosselini) Circe:Odysseus was unlucky to run into this woman. After someone drinks her magical honey wine, she turns them into swine.(Bernadette Peters) Calypso:Another unfourtunate accident of Odysseus' was running into Calypso. She kept him on her island for two whole years!(Vanessa Williams)

THE ODYSSEY has a very strong visual impact on the audience that watches it. It is full of action and suspense and the special effects are amazing, especially the scene where Poseidon was speaking to Odysseus through the waves. Also, the acting and costumes were realistic. The actors talked and wore clothes that were worn in that time. The soundtrack is also realistic to that time, The music on the soundtrack is mostly old Greek music.

Overall, I give THE ODYSSEY five stars.

Best Odysseus I've Seen
Armand Asante does an excellent job as Odysseus. As with all movies, there will be some significant differences from the original Homer. After having seen the recent release of Troy, I'd have to say The Odyssey is a better movie. If you prefer to watch a movie that remains faithful to the original classic with good casting/acting, this is for you. If you want cool special effects and big name stars in a story that is loosly based on a classic tale...then see Troy.

Still compelling after 3000 years.
Homer would have endorsed this rendering of his tale. Full of wonderful special effects, gorgeous Mediterranean vistas, and gods and goddesses who look their parts, this movie is still driven by personalities. The casting was brilliant: Armand Asante is all that one could wish in an Odysseus -- engaging, passionate, mature, heroic in every dimension. Isabella Rosellini and Greta Saachi are perfect in their roles as Athena and Penelope, respectively. Telemachus is a classical adolescent only child, and Antichea, Odysseus's mother, dominates each of her scenes. While this production is eye-candy from beginning to end, the visual appeal cannot distract from the timeless humanity of its characters. There is a reason that Homer's story still reaches us after 3000 years, and this telling does justice to its ancient material.

A great story
In my English class, on the last weeks of school, our teacher said she wanted us to watch a movie that will be educating for years to come and pulled out The Odyssey. At first the whole class seemed dull by the ideal of the movie but from the beginning, we were stuck.

The story has an amazing plot, and the actors are pretty good. Some of the special effects were kind of lame but that wasn't the movies fault, it was their budget. This is really good for a TV miniseries.

From the spooky lair of Syclla to the amazing Island of Ithaca, this movie really portrays the story well. It's very enjoyable, and I'm going to have to order the movie to keep! ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Julie exels
Julie gives the best dramatic performance of her career - she just gives it all and excels in the delivering.I went to the UK opening and I cried and I enjoyed the impact this film had on the audiences. Julie IS the best.

Simply magnificent!
I frankly don't see why people have overlooked this film or given it bad critiques and reviews. I think it's magnificent. I watched it the very same day I got it, and Ms. Andrews gives a magnificent performance. I foud tears on my own face at times, while Stephanie's struggling with her life. True, I'd never heard Ms. Julie use so much profanity, but everyone does it-she's a human being too. And a very wonderful human being, might I add. I know that in preparing for this role, Ms. Andrews spent time in a hospital, observing those with multiple sclerosis, and she did a wonderufl job portraying Stephanie. Perhaps another reason why I like this movie is because one of my friend's mother has multiple sclerosis. In a way, "Duet For One" has helped me to better understand what Kathryn goes through with her mother, who is also wheelchair bound. It must be frightful for someone to see their life ending that way. Anyhoo, the movie's great, and I really recommend it. It's very drammatic, very well done, and Ms. Andrews' performance sparkles.

A DYNAMIC TOUR DE FORCE
It is so sad that this film remains little seen and little known. Clearly, Julie Andrews gives the best performance of her career (where was the Oscar nomination she deserved?) as a world- class violionist stricken with multiple schlerosis at the height of her career in this film based on a play by Tom Kempinski. Max Von Sydow plays her psychiatrist (scenes between Sydow and Andrews are powerful) and Alan Bates plays her philandering husband. Also features early performances from Rupert Everett and Liam Neeson. A heavy film, and a shattering, dynamic, tour de force for Julie Andrews.

Very Good but Disturbing Film to Watch
Julie Andrews gives the performance of her career as a virtuoso violinist stricken with a degenerative and crippling disease, which destroys her complacent life. Tom Kempinski wrote the script from his play giving it greater depth. Alan Bates and Max von Sydow give excellent performances, as they must deal with Andrews as fate takes its toll. A difficult film to watch, but Julie Andrews' performance is so thought provoking that it just makes you stop and take account of things. This 1968 film was produced by Menahem Golan and Yoram Globus and directed in England by Andrei Konchalovsky. Look for a young Liam Neeson.

One Good Performance, Depressing Film
While I admired Julie Andrews' performance, I found the movie as a whole dismal and slow-moving. Obviously, a story about a violinist whose career and life are ruined by her disease is not going to leave you feeling good, but the scenes with the therapist became grinding, strident and,frankly, boring after a while. Small parts by Rupert Everett and Liam Neeson (two of my favorites normally) were well enough done but seemed almost irrelevant. Max Von Sydow's part was more a non-part than a part and Alan Bates was wooden in all of his scenes. I would not recommend this movie unless you are looking for a downer. ... Read more

Description

A journalist and her teenage daughter journey to the swamps of the Louisiana bayou to write a story about a long lost branch of their family. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Shy People
Please excuse me if I'm a little off, it has been about 5 years since I've seen the movie. It's a good movie if you like the independant style films. Big city girl, Martha Plimpton, travels with her journalist mother to the backwoods of Louisiana (I think...) to "study" her back woods relatives. Meets cousins pregnant wife who wants to get away from it all and find out what 'the big city' is all about, a mentally disabled cousin, and yet another cousin who has benn locked in a shed for years for talking, what seems to be, the truth about their dead father. The "Momma" can't seem to let go of the dead father either. The expectant Dad is played by Patrick Swayze's brother, who in the movie tries to rape Martha Plimpton.
Sounds quite dumb when you break it down like that but I thought it was a decent movie.

Boring to the extreme
It gives a dark feeling of a typical Soviet movie. Two hours of no chemistry, no actions, no romance and no nothing. They probably wanted to show us several deep physiological characters under the microscope in a very substandard manner. But who want to see them? This is one of the most boring movies I have ever seen.

THE CITY MOUSE MEETS THE COUNTRY MOUSE...
This is an unusual film with a knockout performance by Barbara Hershey, who deservedly won the 1987 Cannes Film Festival Best Actress award for her brilliant and moving portrayal of Ruth Sullivan, a fiercely proud, backwoods, bayou matriarch, who resorts to unusual tactics to keep her sons from the outside world.

The story centers around the Sullivan family, the East Coast and Louisiana branches. It turns out that the East Coast branch is headed up by magazine editor, Diana Sullivan (Jill Clayburgh), who decides to write a piece about her southern relatives. Diana heads down South with her spoiled, teenage daughter (Martha Plimpton).

When they gets down there, they are is taken aback by what they find. This Southern branch of the Sullivan family seems like a throwback to another era. The first word that pops into the viewer's mind is "inbreeding", so backwards do they seem. The East Coast Sullivans are wealthy and overdressed for their new environs. The Bayou Sullivans do not even have electricity. Still, they try to socialize and get to know one another, after an initial standoff.

The outside world has now invaded Ruth's home, and some of Ruth's stern notions have invaded Diane's psyche. This becomes manifest at the end in the new way in which they each decide to handle their rebellious offspring. One can tell that Ruth and Diane have each touched the other in some meaningful way. This does not happen, however, before there have been some serious clashes.

It is hard to describe this film, as it is not a plot driven film. What little plot there is, is a bit implausible. It is just a highly unusual, character driven film, and the one who drives it is Barbara Hershey with a performance so awesome, it will take the viewer's breath away. With a stellar supporting cast, it is film not to be missed.

Filmed in the heart of Cajun country, the cinematography is magnificent, with incredible shots of the mist shrouded bayou with its unusual terrain and fauna. It makes for a haunting and highly atmospheric film.

Unbelievable Becomes Believable
The story line seems mild, the city mouse and the country mouse meet. But when you combine the two matriarchs, knowing they are blood related and seeing that their core beliefs are totally opposite, holds your curiosity as to whether they will meld, not just meet. Everything neccessary to keep one interested and riveted is achieved. I only left the couch about 3 or 4 times...(sheer feer) Most important (if your are one to try and outhink the next scene) is that the predictable always provided a bit of the unpredictable. To say the costuming was not appropriate, is like, "Who Cares". This film has all the elements for entertainment. It holds your attention, tickles your curiosity, your fears, and tweaks your brain. The end has a very sage message. Every parent with older children will nod with understanding. The acting was superb, the casting terrific and the photography excellent.

Excellent, Haunting...
I saw this movie several years ago on cable T.V. and it has envoked many memories through time. A MUST SEE movie if you like intense, nail biting thrillers. Barbara Hershey is the definition of the word ACTOR! She and the cast were all excellent in their parts. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Here's an intriguing little premise: Inside Stalin's Kremlin, as seen by... his movie projectionist! Now that's glasnost. As played by Tom Hulce, he's an optimistic little dweeb who believes that Fearless Leader has only his best interests at heart. Most of the film is about his waiting to do his job, getting occasional glimpses of Uncle Joe, not realizing that, when the ruthless dictator finally does engage him in conversation, Stalin might as well be talking to a bug. Bob Hoskins pops up as Berea, head of the KGB and master of deceit--but mostly he wags his eyebrows and looks amused. It's a long slog to the finish, but then, that's true of almost all of director Andrei Konchalovsky's films.--Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (12)

How many Katyas are there?
A poignant, chilling and fascinating look into what Totalitarianism does to the human mind, and how it destroys innocent lives.
Ivan, played by Tom Hulce, is a simple-minded projectionist, who is devoted with all his heart and soul, the Communist Party and its leaders, first and foremost, the mass murderer Stalin.
He gets a job working for Stalin and his Ministers, and cannot see that this is the heart of evil.

Lolita Davidovich plays the role of his beautiful young wife, Anastasia, who is also a wonderful person, who cannot live in such an evil society.

The humanity of her relationship with the little daughter of their neighbors (Katya), the Kupermans (executed as enemies of the people) is extremely touching, but cannot survive the cruelty of the Communist system.

It is essentially a human drama, not a political movie, but humanity is destroyed in totalitarian systems, and after we see the suffering it has caused, we see how the old Professor in Ivan's apartment is on the mark when he observes how 'Satan is; living in the Kremlin'

In regard to Katya's fate, the movie asks us 'how many Katyas are there?'
Indeed how many innocents where destroyed by Communist dictatorships around the world.
At universities around the world, the human cost of this system does not interest the academics, who have no time for ordinary humans.
It is left to the survivors to pick up the pieces, and the victims forgotten'

Powerful
This is by far the most underrated film ever made. Granted, it might seem emotionally draining and depressing the first time you see it. However, it is still one of the most memorable pictures I have ever seen. The story is simple in a sense that everyone's motivations are clear, and that is precisely what is so good about the film; you don't have to spend hours figuring out who did what and why. The characters are not one-dimensional, as Leonard Maltin said. They are as complex as they need to be. Matlin also pointed out that the film lacks subtlety. Actually, the film is more subtle than it appears to be. Think about it. The Inner Circle is, among other things, a statement against Stalinism. Yet we never see any labor camps. We do not see anyone getting shot. The Inner Circle only tells a story of one family. After seeing what they have to go through we begin to understand the true extent of the horror that Stalin unleashed on his nation. Also, this film is truly moving. Part of the reason the movie is so successful is that it is about real people and real situations. Oh, the performances.... I do not where to begin. Tom Hulce is incredible. If I did not know him from Amadeus I would have thought he was a Russian actor. Just look at the expression on his face: He looks as if he is actually living the story. Other actors are great too. To make the long story short, if you are into Russian history and you don't mind watching powerful and thought-provoking drama once in a while than this movie is for you.

Astonishing movie!
This is a very powerful movie. It will teach you about communism and about life in the Soviet Union better than any history book. Stalin, as you probably know, spent ten years in a ministry college before he joined the communist party. He did not become a pastor of course. But he learned from this experience that a blind faith is a very powerful weapon to keep people in line. He managed to make the whole nation believe that he was a god while keeping them in misery. Watch this and you will see.

It gives you the perfect feeling of Stalin regime in USSR .
Just an everadge russian ( Tom Hulce ) in Stalin regime time . Got a job inside the Kremlin by exident ... and the movie started . Through the " looking glass " of his wife ( Lolita Davidovich ).
This film will help you to understand all the crasyness , brutality and unfearness of this period of Russian history . People desapiaring without a trace . For no reason at all . People turning each other in ... just to look better . Brainwashing of propaganda at it's best . It is so sad ... it hearts . But not as much , as real people has been heart in reality of that time .
A must se film for people , who wants to learn more about this period of time in Russian history . Who wants to realise , how brainwashing works in morden time in ANY society ...

very tough but worth it
I found this movie difficult, disturbing yet, ultimately, not without hope. Tom Hulce is great as we see his character transform from happy and optimistic complete with his unique loose-lip grin to the grim, sad man he becomes. The scenes of Lolita Davidovich and the little neighbor girl will tug your heart..This movie addresses the human need to believe in something bigger than ourselves and how that need is exploited. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Was this remake really necessary
In a world which sees more and more remakes - some classics are better left alone. This is one of them. Glenn Close is no Katherine Hepburn and that's probably the major weakness of this remake although Patrick Stewart isn't a Peter O'Toole either. The image of Jean-Luc Picard keeps popping up and you keep expecting him to utter something like "Make it so, Number One" at any moment.

The original also gave us a pre-James Bond Timothy Dalton as Phillip of France in a vastly underrated performance. And let's not forget Anthony Hopkins as Richard.

Historically, if this movie were to be made with any accuracy it would feature French actors instead of English ones since French was the language spoken by Henry and his family. It's highly unlikely any of them - including Richard and John - spoke much if any English, so if its going to be re-done, perhaps utilizing French actors is the answer.

Meanwhile, pop in your DVD of the O'Toole/Hepburn original and if you're wondering which version to purchase - go with the original.

But Why?
To be sure, the reasoning behind many of today's films defies understanding. This one is no exception.

Although the main stars all give adequate performances, and the screenplay is exactly the same as the original, the question remains. Why remake one of the finest films of all time? Who could have possibly thought there was room for improvement? Why not remake Casablanca or Citizen Kane while we're at it?

Again, I fault not the actors in this treatment, for they all did fine jobs - if pale by comparison to the originals. My problems with this film stem with the powers that be who decided to produce it in the first place.

Slight correction
One correction for a previous review. JULIE Harris was not in the Broadway production of "Lion In Winter". It was another wonderful actress, ROSEMARY Harris.

One other interesting piece of casting, it was an early role for Christopher Walken as the King of France.

Two and a half hours of pure delight and intrigue ...
I was certainly a pleasant surprise that this fast paced (not in action to be sure) intellectual game of intrigue and give and take could keep my solid attention for the full movie. The viewers attention is required to keep track of the plot twists and turns as we see King Henry sparring with his wife Elanor and his three woebegotten sons in the hills of France.

The greatest thing about this movie is that it depicts an interpretation of the life and times of King henry II, Richard and of course Prince John, an era that I have always felt were taken hostage by Shakespeare and Arthur and the knights of the round table......

Certainly a great depiction/interpretation of historical value that would, for me in any case, be too troublesome to read.

I do give the viewer fair warning without any intellectual snobbery intended. The story is complex and chacrter development is long but thorough .... The action is of course limited and most, if not all the movie takes place on the set of the castle..... Unless you enjoy this type of human chess game, oddds are that you'll walk out after the first half hour ...

A relatively light weight production of Goldman's drama
It is impossible for me to watch this Showtime remake of "The Lion in Winter" starring Glenn Close and Patrick Stewart without constantly comparing it to the 1968 theatrical film with Katharine Hepburn and Peter O'Toole. That was the first Hepburn film I ever saw and the way she delivers James Goldman's great lines (my favorite would be "I could peel you like a pear and God himself would call it justice!") is forever etched in my brain.

However, I also think that it is clear that the specter of the original film hangs over the entire cast of this production. By that I mean that it seems like every single memorable line from the play (and there are literally dozens) is delivered in a decidedly different way. Specifically, Close plays Eleanor of Aquitaine as being much more emotional, which is rather ironic given that her ex-husband, the late King of France, is described as being a weeper. This means that when Eleanor has what should be her final emotional collapse at the end of the film, it is really just another in what has been a series of emotional moments. As for Stewart, his Henry II tends to underplay all of the key moments. It certainly seems that every time O'Toole engages in bluster and bombast, Stewart goes quiet, bordering on a whisper. Again, I can only conclude that these were conscious choices because they stand out so boldly against the original film version.

This is not to say that I am against new productions of the play. I would have loved to have seen Robert Preston and Julie Harris on Broadway or the Roundabout Theater production starring Laurence Fishburne and Stockard Channing. But Stewart and Close make choices, obviously endorsed by director Andrei Konchalovsky, that remove much of the fire from Goldman's brilliant dialogue. For those who have never seen a production of "The Lion in Winter" they may get a sense of the high quality of the drama, but I do not believe they get the complete picture.

"The Lion in Winter" takes place during Christmas 1183, when Henry II, King of England, summons family to his castle in Chinon, France. At issue is the question of who will be Henry's successor to the English throne. Henry wants his youngest son, John (Rafe Spall), while Eleanor supports their eldest surviving son, Richard the Lionheart (Andrew Howard), which leaves middle son Geoffrey (John Light, in what I think is the best performance because I like his spin on the character). Also along for the ride are Henry's mistress, Alais Capet (Yuliya Vysotskaya), who is supposed to marry the heir, and her brother, Philip (Jonathan Rhys-Meyers), the young King of France.

The chief attraction here is that while Henry and the rest play out their power games through a series of confrontations, feints, compromises, and sudden reversals they are delivering their lines with an extraordinary level of insight, wit, and irony. That is, of course, provided they are delivered so as not to undercut the power of the lines. The confrontations between Henry and Eleanor are supposed to be a clash of heavyweights and the cast here is dropping down in weight class. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

A Filmmakers Dream Project
In 1885, the Lumiere Brothers perfected a hand-cranked movie camera that moved the world. This 100th year anniversary takes forty filmmakers to task with the same camera to produce a film less than a minute. It's not as interesting in its results as one might have hoped. It was a huge challenge and few really completed something of interest. Of those, David Lynch, Patrice Leconte and Alaine Corneau are the most intriguing, while well known directors like Spike Lee and Liv Ullmann are less so. However, this is subjective. Many of the directors are asked simple questions with the hopes of profound answers. "Why do you film" and "Is cinema immortal" get answers as mundane as 'climbing a mountain because it is there'. Film students will, however, be fascinated with this project and historians will marvel that an invention so old can still be of artistic use. For the average viewer, this 88 minute documentary might seem boring, but at the very least, it is historic.

Cinemaphiles will love this film
As a tribute to the spirit of motion pictures, Lumiere & Company is a tremendous achievement and a sublime experience for true cineastes who are fortunate to find a copy on DVD. Produced in celebration of the centennial of what is considered to be the first motion picture camera, invented by the Lumiere Brothers of France, the approach is similar to asking the most accomplished electric guitar player to go acoustic.

The producers asked a collection of international film directors to create a 52-second piece each using the same technology as the Lumieres did more than one hundred years ago, 52 seconds being the amount of time it takes for one spool of film to run through their camera. Therefore, each of the segments is done in one take. All the directors are well respected, but among the more well-known participants are David Lynch, Wim Wenders, John Boorman, Spike Lee, James Ivory, Zhang Yimou and Liv Ullman.

Each segment is intriguing. While the results are understandably uneven, the pleasure of watching this film is in discovering the remarkable diversity in the working minds of motion picture's prominent practitioners. The DVD allows for free roaming and alternative selection of each short film. Given the nearly limitless possibilities available in the modern film industry, it's worth noting how the directors make use of their limited time and yet still reveal their own styles.

The subject matter ranges from miniature narratives to political statements and social documents. The locations are as varied as the directors themselves, from Bedford-Stuyvesant to Hiroshima. Although this film may seem a bit obscure and tedious to the non-enthusiast, historians and die-hard cinema fans will marvel not only at how limitations forcibly create ingenious ideas to spring forth, but also at how well the Lumiere camera still functions.

The DVD release also offers production notes, a trailer, French language, and English subtitles.

GOOD GOOD VERY GOOD
THIS IS GREAT WORK,GOOD GOOD GOOD VERY GOOD,YOU MUST TO SEE

A gem.
Lumiere and Company (Sarah Moon, 1995)

No, Lumiere and Company is not some sort of obscure sequel to Disney's Beauty and the Beast. (And where I got that idea, which I had for years, is completely beyond me.) Instead, it's Sarah Moon's third film, and a kind of global version of her second, Contriere l'oubli. Moon took the original camera manufactured by the Lumiere brothers, set some ground rules, and asked forty world-famous directors to shoot a fifty-two second scene with it. She then made a documentary incorporating behind-the-scenes footage with the short pieces themselves.

The result is a wonderful look into the mind of the filmmaker as he goes about the filmmaker's art. Each of the filmmakers does something completely different, and each answers the five questions put to him by Moon so disparately that the overall effect is one of a sort of comprehensive feeling about how films get made; one that no one director would subscribe to, but all embrace.

The short films themselves are directed by such luminaries as Costa-Gavras, Spike Lee, David Lynch, Liv Ullmann, Lasse Hallstrom, and many others who are easily recognizable; the trick was to get Moon, the relative neophyte, to create a wrapper that is the equal of the movies therein. And she did so, admirably. The is a fine little gem of a film, and well worth seeing. **** ½

Less Is More
What an intriguing idea. Take several well known directors used to working with today's state of the art equipment and see what they can do with the first practical motion picture camera. And to make it more of a challenge, give them less than a minute to work with. The results are naturally uneven. How could they not be? I won't name names but even the weakest entries have something to offer while the best lend credence to the old adage "less is more". The viewer will ultimately have to decide for him or herself which is which. As a longtime admirer of silent films I found the voiceovers during the segments rather distracting in the manner of Mystery Science Theatre 3000. One of the rules should have called for no comments made during filming to be allowed on the soundtrack. Let us supply our own voices to what we see. All in all an interesting concept that is well executed and worth seeing for any serious student of film. The DVD format is ideal for this type of omnibus film as you can easily select the segments that you want to see again and again. You should also check out the LUMIERE BROTHERS FIRST FILMS on DVD to see what was originally done with this remarkable piece of equipment. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Another action flick from an unlikely source (wildly inconsistent Russian director Andrei Konchalovsky), buddy movie Tango & Cash teams Sly Stallone and Kurt Russell as bullet-dodging cops who get on each others' nerves while uniting against a slimy French drug kingpin (Jack Palance). Violent, profane, and packed with implausibilities, this is one of those big-budget, stunt-laden affairs that gets by on the charisma of its stars, and they almost pull it off. Tango & Cash was Stallone's first attempt to share the spotlight with another hero, and he's casually laid-back in his change-of-pace role (well, OK, it's not that change-of-pace), while Russell is equally enjoyable as Sly's well-coifed sidekick. Ridiculous all the way, this one is entertaining if only as a virtual catalog of action-movie clichés.--Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (24)

Best Worst Movie Ever!
This movie is so bad, so stupid, that it's great. Where to start? Well, to begin with the acting. No one ever expects a movie headlined by Stallone and Russell to be a groundbreaking film. Nevertheless, their over the top cheesiness (especially Russell's) lends the film a sort of idiotic charm. Stallone's inane delivery of his lines will keep you captivated. Jack Palance even seems to up the cheese factor in his performance. Teri Hatcher is a highlight of the movie, playing Stallone's spunky sister. She plays the part of damsel in distress, but is also very clever and strong willed. (Who knew there would be a role-model for feminists in a film like this? I kid, I kid) The story is pretty cookie-cutter for an '80s action buddy film. You could almost transplant Eddie Murphy and Nick Nolte into this film and it would just about have the same effect.

So, with a mediocre script and subpar acting, Tango & Cash could very well be a train wreck of a film (like any Seagal or Van Damme flick). It avoids this though, by being so tongue-in-cheek. Whether or not this is intentional can be debated. I only know that I can't help but watch this film every time it comes on!

So if you're looking for big, dumb fun, this is the flick for you!

I miss the 80's
I bought this dvd for christmas and watched it for the first time in a while. Kurt Russell steals the show from his partner and if this movie starred anybody else, then it would have came out a lot worse than it did. Russeell is Gabe Cash and Stallone is Ray Tango, the two toughest and hardest cops in the city. They have done so much damage to the crime syndicate's income that Yves Perret(a brilliant Jack Palance)has to take matters into his own hand and get the duo off the streets. They get set up and end up in a maximum security prison only to discover that if they don't escape, their is no hope for survival. This movie really owes a debt of gratitude to Harold Faltermeyer, who uses all kinds of COOL beats in his score throughout the film and keeps the viewer interested. This movie could have been longer, but I won't complain considering the action films that are being made these days are really stupid!

Stallone & Rusell - an explosive combination
I must say I'm a big fan of detective movies, and '80 were great time for that kind of films (action comedies, adventures...). We already had LETHAL WEAPON in that time, but this film really pushed the limits. Critics often say that this is a B-movie, but that is what they think. For me, this is one of the best Stallone's movies and he and Rusell are really good together as two heavy cops alway aguing and having a lot of troubles with Jack Palance, leader of some terrorist organization who send them to prison where they will meet their doom. Of course, they will win and the rest is to you to be seen. Don't listen the others who didn't like it - give your own oppinion (possitive, I hope).

A lot of fun!
I have to agree with the majority of reviews posted so far regarding this flick. I saw it when it came out in theatres (with my dad; I was just a little kid) but this movie is so cheesy that it's laughable (in a good way) and a lot of fun to watch at the same time. Very adrenaline rushing, action pact destruction and pyrotechnics best define this movie as Stallone and Russle play two cops from the East and West side who cost the local drug lord big bucks by busting all of his drug deals, so he has them framed and sent to prison. They escape of course in order to clear their names and seek retribution. You could probobly find it on VHS for a few bucks at the local pawn shop.....just don't expect Shakespeare. Appriciate it for what it is.

Plenty of Action!!
Lots of action for gals (like me!), watchin Sly and Kurt's cute buns and hot bods running through this movie- also Terri Hatcher is great for the guys to see, she can act but not dance ha ha- lots of one-liner wisecracks and great second performances- Jack Palance as a hilarious chief villain, Geoffrey Lewis (who, incidentally, didn't get listed in the credits!)Clint Howard and more! As fine of a plot as one expects for an action flick, come on, its a MOVIE!! and a mighty FUN one, at that! Two L.A. cops, rivalling for headlines & high total of drug busts, and the bad guys that try to take them out! Not to mention lots of zany characters along the way- WHY can't hollywood make a Clive Cussler Novel like this? Funny, witty, lots of action, just like its written! as the Aussie villain puts it, "Balls to plan A!!" as a "B" movie, this one gets MY vote!! Hope you have fun watching it!:) ... Read more

Reviews (4)

John Savage is superb, but Nastassja Kinski is better
Savage comes back from the war to find out his crush when he was little has a boyfriend but the 2 end up being married. Mitchum and Carradine seem miscast but that doesnt count the fact of the good story and good performances by the leading man and woman. god I want to just, take Kinski home and butter her up, lick her, prop her on the couch. shes a lover in my eyes. there are some scenes with her where I just shivered and my jaw dropped, shes a goddess

Turkey award
This is a piece of junk. Do not waste your money.

The Best Love Story Ever
Russian director Andrei Konchalovsky's "Maria's Lovers" is definitly my favorite film. There is nothing too flashy or groundbreaking about this film, in fact it is very subtle. However, it is one of the finest love stories I've ever seen, and John Savage's performance is in my opinion the best I've ever seen. I don't think a film has ever moved me so much. The story is very real and I think the themes and values behind this film are very important and are ones that contemporary Americans often forget about. If you have a taste for European movies and you don't mind a quiet serious drama, this film is really quite exceptional. In my opinion, it's one of the most overlooked and underated films of the 1980's (there aren't many good ones from that decade). I can't believe how low profile it was considering Nasstasia Kinski was the most popular film actress when it was released in 1984. In fact the most attention it has recieved is that is is being released on DVD, which I'm so grateful to MGM for. I hope the DVD market continues releasing unusual and /or conventional films.

about time!
I know it's not out yet, but ... this is a Christmas present to treasure, great ... movie, watch it, I love it and am shocked and extremely happy it got to DVD, there is a DVD God....watch the great John Savage in his best role and look for a great bit with an unknown John Goodman and Bud Cort.... ... Read more

Reviews (6)

The Bets Movie of 2002
This film deserved an Oscar but as always the academy does a horrible job at giving credit where it is deserved. This movie is one of the best anti war movies of the last 40 years it is on par or above such classics as "Full Metal Jacket" but just below "Apocalyps Now", it really is a great movie to watch and enjoy. Filled with symbolism and Fellinian characters that you cannot help but laugh and cry with them on this crazy journey. It makes a stronger case against war since you really see the absurdity of it all and how people become entagled in a vicious circle of death and absurdity. The ending is very symbolic as a soldier finds salvation in embracing the crazies since they are the only ones sane and humane in a crazy world.
P.S. The other two guys whom gave this movie 4 out of 5 stars really need to expand their cinematographic understanding and familiarity with good movies because this movie is not on par with loosers like "As good as it gets", I saw their reviews. Its like saying that Steven King is on the same level with Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky, big error.

Mad Good!
what can i say? this is one of the most odd and amazing and beautiful and gorgeous movies i have ever seen!! With its beauty and literal insanity all rolled into a Russian film, you will find yourself moving from emotion to emotion. Try to catch it on tv (as i have done) and wait to buy it later because, honestly, $73.00?? that;s a little much. but you definitely need to see this Russian treasure!

Awesome.
Excellent film. Everything from the story line to acting is absolutely outstanding. In fact, I have a really hard time coming up with something negative to say... The only thing that I can pick at is the scene where a helicopter falls to the ground - it was obvious that the fall was staged. But other than that small technical nitpicking, it's an awesome film.

An exquisite, hauntingly beautiful Russian masterpiece
I come to this review with as much humility as I can muster, knowing that I cannot possibly - no matter how many fantastic things I say about this Russian movie - truly do it justice. House of Fools is a flat-out masterpiece, in my opinion. Some critics express dissatisfaction with the film, and I believe their dissatisfaction stems from a desire, be it conscious or unconscious, to make this film "say" what they want or expect it to say. Thus, some criticize the movie for a failure to truly examine or perfectly satirize a problematic war; some say the film is too disjointed to adequately express any kind of serious message; some seem disappointed this isn't some sort of reborn King of Hearts; others call it pretentious and over-done. I personally carried very little baggage with me into this film, which allowed me to let the film communicate whatever it wanted to communicate to me. Certainly, warfare is central to the story and there are scenes that wonderfully depict the horror and inanity of war, but House of Fools is so much more than an anti-war movie. This is a story about nothing less than the heart of humanity itself, and I believe multiple viewings would impart an almost limitless number of emotional epiphanies for the serious viewer.

The background for this powerful motion picture is the war in Chechnya in 1996. We meet the residents of a Chechen psychiatric hospital (oblivious to the war being waged outside their protected walls) just before their ordered, insulated lives change forever, and each of the many characters touches your heart in some way. Of course, none grab the viewer's attention as forcefully as Janna (Julia Vysotsky). Janna can at times seem quite sane, and the care and love she has for those around her can easily be seen in everything she does. She is always quick to help out, shares a strong bond with even the most uncommunicative of patients, and in no small way holds the group together with her beautiful attitude, ethereal charm, and spirited accordion-playing. When conflict or trouble rears its head, she reaches for her accordion, and we are provided a glimpse into her own momentary vision of everyone enjoying themselves as she plays; of course, reality intervenes all too quickly, but her kind-hearted efforts normally do help ease the tension. Janna is clearly delusional, though; she has a veritable shrine to singer Bryan Adams in her room and believes she is his fiancée. Clearly, I wasn't expecting Bryan Adams cameos in a Russian film, but these segments of the film are masterfully done.

One night, the splendidly-lit train that the patients all love to watch does not come, and the next morning the hospital staff is gone. The institution quickly becomes a radically different place, and the patients have little choice but to stay there when war finally knocks on the door in the most unmistakable of ways. Chechen forces eventually take over the hospital, treating the patients in quite a humane manner. One of these soldiers jokingly asks Janna to marry him after she plays and dances for the men, not realizing that Janna would take his offer seriously. We watch her undergo the agony of saying goodbye to her friends even as they transform her through clothes and makeup into a strikingly beguiling young woman. From here on out, the movie really pulls on the old heart-strings. Janna is as endearing a character as I have come across in a long, long time. While her troubled state of mind continues to reveal itself more and more emotionally, we can do nothing but helplessly watch her endure heartache, pain, and numb terror in the face of spiritual as well as military warfare.

This was Julia Vysotsky's first starring role, and I personally would give her any best actress award she asked for. Some critics feel as if she did not truly blossom into the role or succeed in giving it the depth it required; these are obviously some of the most demanding people on the planet, as I don't think any actress could have given a better performance than Vysotsky delivered in this film. House of Fools did win some prestigious awards, and rightly so. At the Venice Film Festival, it took home the jury grand prize. It was also Russia's official submission for consideration by the Academy Awards in the Foreign Language category, but the Academy did not nominate it for the award (proving once again how capricious and questionable Academy Award nominations can be). I don't know if this was the best foreign language film of the year or not, but I can't possibly understand how House of Fools did not merit nomination.

Just as I suspected, I have not been able to communicate at all satisfactorily my sense of the power, exquisite beauty, and poignant grace of this film. A number of scenes remain vivid in my mind: for example, the meeting of opposing Russian and Chechen leaders in which the two discover a strong bond from the past, as well as the scene in which Janna states that we are all alive because someone somewhere is praying for us. As far as I am concerned, writer and director Andrei Konchalovsky - a name already familiar to Western audiences - is a cinematic genius, Julia Vysotsky is one of the most impressive young actresses in the world today, and House of Fools is a film that all who love movies and hold them up to the highest of standards should see and experience.

Great Russian Import
"House of Fools" deserving received an Oscar nomination for 2002's Best Foreign Film. It combines war action, drama, and fantasy wonderfully. The plot was written beautifully. They desplict the true story of a woman staying in a mental institution while in the middle of the Russian-Chechian War. Her high spirits are the only hopes of everyone else's survival. The writer's creative side shines in the scenes of her dreams about Bryan Adams. The creates another war: her love for Bryan Adams vs. her newfound love for a war soldier. Such conflicts combine as one brilliantly. Yuliya Vysotskaya, the lead actress, played her role emotionally. She could become a worldwide success someday with such level of talent. All other actors also played their roles wonderfully. The special effects in the war fighting scenes were created realistic looking. The elaborate scenes desplict the realisms of war gruesomeness. This allows the characters' deathly fears to be expressed much more. Such movie quality makes "House of Fools" worth watching. Many will enjoy this regardless of genre favorite. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This ambitious 1979 Russian film attempts no less a feat than the encapsulation of the tumultuous history of Russia in the 20th century.Written and directed by Andrei Konchalovsky (Runaway Train, Tango and Cash), the film weaves an engrossing tale of three generations of two Russian families in the remote region of Siberia, each trying in their own way to find fulfillment in their lives as they seek to reconcile themselves with the ever-changing landscape of their homeland. Sandwiched between the chaotic events of the First and Second World Wars, as well as the Russian Revolution of 1917, the people of the small village find themselves at the cusp of great changes, from communications to the expanding infrastructure and the changes that brings, to the discovery of oil and the riches and perils that come with it. Konchalovsky juxtaposes archival footage with stunning cinematography and contrasts the assaultive changes of the modern world with the timeless impulses of family and the enduring need to adapt and survive.Reminiscent of such great films as Giant and 1900, Siberiade is a visually adept and stunningly effective epic about the price of a country's history on its people. --Robert Lane ... Read more

Reviews (9)

Oh, to be exiled to this Siberia!
Once one gets past the required Marxist dialectic ("rich people bad, poor people good"), there is nothing less than splendid about this Soviet film. The cinematography alone is breathtaking, and the irony of the more adventuresome characters' constant refrain, "They can't exile you any further than Siberia!" is not lost.

The "underdog" family in the film produces men in each generation who shake their fist at their village, rhetorically, and try to get away, but they are always pulled back somehow. As the revolutionary Nikolai says to his young son Alexei, "It's not a good place, but it's the best place for us."

The acting is first rate. Grief, loss, hope, and faith are equally represented throughout the film. Most of the actors are more low-key than in Hollywood films (a fact that allows the Siberian woodlands and scenes of village life, as well as stock film of national events, to play out much of the story). But they do not lack passion. Especially touching is a scene of a youngster grieving for his father. The young actor gives a performance beyond his years.

The recurrent themes and beautiful scenery and music (folk during the rural scenes, electronic during the sped-up, sepia- tinted stock footage) make the six hours of film very easy to digest. Konchalovsky's Siberiade suggests a cinematic Tchaikovsky symphony, with its alternating poignant romance, pathos, and an ending of hopefulness.

One of the last great Russian historical dramas.
Category: Historical drama
Director: Andrei Konchalovsky ("My Name is Ivan" '63, "Tango and Cash" '89, "The Inner Circle" '91,
"The Odyssey" '97, "House of Fools" '03)
Year: 1979
Running time: 206 min (2 tapes)
Rating: R (violence, sexual content)
Grade: A
Starring: Vitaly Solomin, Sergei Shakurov, Nikita Mikhalkov, Ludmila Gurchenko
Winner of 1979 Cannes Film Festival (Special Jury Prize)
My point: One of the last great Russian historical dramas

Over 6 decades of the history of the great Russian land and the country USSR through the lives of two families in a small Siberian village. Two opposite families: Ustuganins, the pure ones; and Solomins, the rich ones. The story of life, love, betrayal, happiness and pain.
This film is very long and very slow. Cinematography is excellent, but it doesn't bother you... it is only helping you to get into the story and the beauty of the Russian land.
If you love good films, if you are interested in history and Russia? A must se.
"Vlad"

Extraordinary
I saw this film in Madrid, in 1979... in Russian with Spanish sub-titles and at the time I spoke no Russian and hardly any Spanish. But no matter, it instantly became my all time favorite movie. I saw the original 6 hour version in two evenings... and it wasn't a minute too long. The main "character" is really the natural splendor of Siberia.... it is a visual jewel. I have since seen cut versions... at various film festivals... the 4 hour version, and the 3 hour version. I long to see the full 6 hour version again. Worth every minute.

Where is "The Barber of Siberia" on the US video market?
I decided to use this opportunity to ask a question (rhetorical??): where is "The Barber of Siberia" on the American video market? Do those people who released other movies by Mikhalkov seriously think that it is less of a movie? I find it ridiculous that such a jewel is available only in Britain (at Amazon.co.uk site!) on VHS, and it is in PAL format, so an American viewer cannot watch it on a regular VCR. So if you are ready to pay 400$ for a multi-system VCR at Bestbuy.com, I highly recommend you getting "The Barber of Siberia" from Amazon.co.uk. Well, if you can play Region2 DVDs and understand French, you can get a DVD copy of this movie from French Amazon.com site. You can also read reviews of that movie on Amazon.co.uk

beautiful, tragic, and haunting
"Siberiade" is an epic Russian film which spans three generations and chronicles the lives of two rival Siberian families. It is also a deeply spiritual film which depicts the breathtaking beauty and power of the Siberian land. We see how the people's lifestyle has always adapted to the environment of the taiga, and had remained little affected by the changes wrought by revolution, politics, or war. That is, until the lure of oil brings greed and devastation to their remote village. There is a defining scene early on in the film, in which a lynx has been captured. Hanging upside down, paws trussed to a horizontal pole, jaws wedged apart and muzzled, the cat thrashes and moans in torment. Nearby, in callous oblivion to the suffering of the magnificent animal, the two human protagonists envision their future fortune. The scene is to me profoundly disturbing, first because it is obvious that a real lynx was tortured in the filming of the scene -- not many international productions in 1979 gave thought to cruelty to animals. But the abuse of the beautiful wild cat is symbolic of the theme of the film -- how the wild Siberian land itself will soon be exploited and despoiled. Nature must be dominated in the name of progress. And ultimately the people's ties to their land and the spirits of their ancestors are violently severed. This is how the film affected me; the imagery of its haunting climax remains with me. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

It's The Feel Bad Movie Of The Year!
Dustin Hoffman in "Rain Man," Tom Hanks in "Forrest Gump" and Russell Crowe in "A Beautiful Mind" brilliantly portrayed mentally challenged characters, and each film won the Academy Award for Best Motion Picture. In this movie, Jim Belushi plays Homer, a mildly retarded man. He is portrayed as a pathetic caricature, not as a realistic character. Whoopie Goldberg plays Eddie, a patient that escaped from a mental institution, who is dying from an inoperable brain tumor. Spouting profanities and shooting clerks dead in a series of robberies, Eddie is one of the most unlikable characters ever created. Most disappointing of all, blonde bombshell Angelyne is only seen in a cameo lasting a few seconds. Jim Belushi and Whoopie Goldberg have no chemistry together, and their characters are too mismatched to make their growing friendship believable. This movie fails to create an emotional bond between the viewer and the characters. When Eddie is shot dead, the only thing I felt was relief, because I knew this film was finally coming to an end. "Homer And Eddie" should have won the Razzie Award for Worst Motion Picture Of The Year.

It's NOT a comedy movie !
Don't get mistaken. It is NOT a comedy movie. Rather a road movie with a bitter taste to it. As Whoopie Goldberg plays a vagrant with a tumor in her head which is slowly killing her and Belushi plays a retard who's in search of his parents who have left him behind in hospital 14 years ago.

This is rather a drama and shows superior acting skills by both main characters. Definitely worth an oscar (but never nominated). So don't go thinking this is a family movie that you can watch during christmas eve !! It is NOT.

Great Movie!!
If you like James Belushi and Whoopi Goldberg then you'll love this comedy that's about 2 travelers.It's a must see!! ... Read more

Reviews (24)

Best Worst Movie Ever!
This movie is so bad, so stupid, that it's great. Where to start? Well, to begin with the acting. No one ever expects a movie headlined by Stallone and Russell to be a groundbreaking film. Nevertheless, their over the top cheesiness (especially Russell's) lends the film a sort of idiotic charm. Stallone's inane delivery of his lines will keep you captivated. Jack Palance even seems to up the cheese factor in his performance. Teri Hatcher is a highlight of the movie, playing Stallone's spunky sister. She plays the part of damsel in distress, but is also very clever and strong willed. (Who knew there would be a role-model for feminists in a film like this? I kid, I kid) The story is pretty cookie-cutter for an '80s action buddy film. You could almost transplant Eddie Murphy and Nick Nolte into this film and it would just about have the same effect.

So, with a mediocre script and subpar acting, Tango & Cash could very well be a train wreck of a film (like any Seagal or Van Damme flick). It avoids this though, by being so tongue-in-cheek. Whether or not this is intentional can be debated. I only know that I can't help but watch this film every time it comes on!

So if you're looking for big, dumb fun, this is the flick for you!

I miss the 80's
I bought this dvd for christmas and watched it for the first time in a while. Kurt Russell steals the show from his partner and if this movie starred anybody else, then it would have came out a lot worse than it did. Russeell is Gabe Cash and Stallone is Ray Tango, the two toughest and hardest cops in the city. They have done so much damage to the crime syndicate's income that Yves Perret(a brilliant Jack Palance)has to take matters into his own hand and get the duo off the streets. They get set up and end up in a maximum security prison only to discover that if they don't escape, their is no hope for survival. This movie really owes a debt of gratitude to Harold Faltermeyer, who uses all kinds of COOL beats in his score throughout the film and keeps the viewer interested. This movie could have been longer, but I won't complain considering the action films that are being made these days are really stupid!

Stallone & Rusell - an explosive combination
I must say I'm a big fan of detective movies, and '80 were great time for that kind of films (action comedies, adventures...). We already had LETHAL WEAPON in that time, but this film really pushed the limits. Critics often say that this is a B-movie, but that is what they think. For me, this is one of the best Stallone's movies and he and Rusell are really good together as two heavy cops alway aguing and having a lot of troubles with Jack Palance, leader of some terrorist organization who send them to prison where they will meet their doom. Of course, they will win and the rest is to you to be seen. Don't listen the others w