Description

DON'T TELL ANYONE (No Se Lo Digas A Nadie).A beautiful Peruvian student must confront his macho father, his overly religious mother, and his doting girlfriend, before discovering his true sexual nature.Based on the best-selling novel by popular talk show host Jaime Bayly. Featuring Latin TV stars Santiago Magill, Christian Meier, and Lucia Jimenez.Official Selection: Latin American Film Series at Lincoln Center as well as The Los Angeles & Chicago Latin American Film Festivals.

... Read more

Reviews (16)

Excellent!!!
I went to see this film in Lima, I read the book a year before the release of the movie. I really enjoyed it, is a very good film from one of the best peruviand directors. The story of a "in the closet" young boy, his struggles to try to be himself, find his sexuality in a society like Lima, where apparences are everything. Diego Maguill and Christian Meier, have a credible role, although the sex scenes are not so explicit, believe it or not they are for peruvian audiences. The only one that can't really be credible is that spanish actress, Ms. Jimenez, she really tries, but every peruvian knows she doesn't sound like a "pituca limeña". The songs are part of the story and I enjoyed every single one of them, specially the last one. I really recommend it.

Square Peg for only Round Holes
I endorse Timothy Halkin's comments, currently in the Spotlight.

"Don't Tell Anyone" focuses on Joaquin Camino (well played by Santiago Magill), a young gay Peruvian from a good family, who is trying to get established as an adult. The society as a whole is conservative, with strong family values and Catholic morals. Joaquin has two relationships with men, Gonzalo (played by Christian Meier) and Alfonso Cordoba (played by Giovanni Ciccia), who are both comfortably bisexual. They will each marry and have supplemental same-sex dalliances. Joaquin wants his relationships uncluttered with wives and girlfriends, outs himself to his parents, and tells Gonzalo's fiancee about the same-sex relationship.

When a crisis emerges, Joaquin flees to Miami and lives there a year. We don't see Joaquin trying to meet a kindred spirit. It's just backrooms, tricks, and his cute bisexual roommate, who wants a wife. Joaquin's English is all right, and he is handsome. I just wonder why he didn't try harder to be in a relationship with a fully gay man.

Joaquin's girl-friend Alejandra (played by Lucia Jimenez) gets him to return to Lima, where he graduates from a university. She has some idea of what is happening, but thinks she can help or cure him.

At graduation, both Alfonso Cordoba amd Gonzalo advocate traditional marriage, with boyfriends on the side. It is a possibility that Joaquin might go along with this plan since the only alternative seems to be bachelorhood.

A different way of looking at this movie is to note how unconflicted the bisexuals seem to be. Societies that are very rigid and universal in marriage practices or that frequently use arranged marriages tend to wink at adultery, knowing that the marriages themselves are semi-coerced. This opens a window for bisexuality in Peru that is not acceptable in differently-Puritanical America, where people are expected to marry for love, not convenience.

Politics in the USA have carved out room for straights and for gays. (Joaquin should have done well here.) There are no institutions, programs, or real tolerance for bisexuality, even though more people are bi than gay. Bisexuals are to pick one sex and stick with it, at least serially. The movie shows a Latin American approach. Does the USA really have anything better?

Impresionantes actuaciones
Aunque casi llegando a la pornografía, las actuaciones de Santiago Magill y Christian Meier son magnificas y bastante creibles.
La adaptacion propiamente de la novela de Jaime Bayly es un poco exagerada, pero creo que conserva la esencia de la narración.
Esta película muestra como la intolerencia y la ignorancia puede influir en una vida desordenada de homosexualidad, drogas y perversion.
Al final no deja ninguna leccion clara, pero en resumen es una pelicula muy entretenida.

strangly enough, in a sense a bit homophobic
I'm not going to write a complete review of this DVD, the previous reviews already give a lot of information. Joaquin, the main character of this movie, is bisexual but with a preference for men. Then why is it that his first heterosexual encounter with a woman is shown quite explicitely, and his first homosexual encounter with a man is hardly shown at all? And this happens more often in this movie. Don't get me wrong, I'm not asking for a gay porn movie. However when the main character of a movie is predominantly gay, then it is a bit silly if his gay encounters are hardly shown at all, and his heterosexual encounters are shown lengthy and explicitely. The love scenes are important for the movie, but then homosexual encounters and heterosexual encounters should have been shown with equal explicity. The movie now feels rather unbalanced in this respect, and makes it much more difficult to understand the feelings of Joaquin.

Cheerless film rails against bigotry and oppression
DON'T TELL ANYONE [No se lo Digas a Nadie] (Peru/Spain 1998): An unhappy young Peruvian man (Santiago Magill) clashes with his affluent, god-fearing parents as he struggles to come to terms with his attraction to other men in a country steeped in hypocrisy and prejudice.

An understanding of the macho culture which underpins Peruvian society is a prerequisite for viewers of Francisco J. Lombardi's DON'T TELL ANYONE, an apparently sanitized version of the bestselling book by chat show host Jaime Bayly. Hot young TV star Santiago Magill (The Most Beautiful Man In The World - official!) plays the central character as a deeply confused individual who wants to conform but is unable to deny his true sexuality, despite the attentions of a sympathetic girlfriend (Lucia Jimenez) who believes she can make him 'normal' again. Inevitably, Magill goes off the rails and forfeits his education before descending into coke-fuelled abandon and fleeing to Miami. Unable to escape his past, he's forced to compromise the very essence of his humanity...

Lombardi's cheerless film shakes an angry fist at the influence of religious doctrine in Peru (revealed here as a sham) and the racism suffered by the country's native Indian population, an anger shared by the movie's principal character, who rails against the very same bigotry and oppression which stifles his freedom at every turn. His slide into rebellion makes for uncomfortable viewing (Magill gives a powerhouse performance as the delicate, pretty-boy waif who gravitates toward anarchy and emerges a strong - though embittered - survivor), but it's also faintly predictable, given the terrible circumstances under which he is forced to exist. Magill is pleasingly nude in a number of scenes, though gay viewers may be alarmed by the emphasis placed on his relationship with Jimenez, who thinks he's merely suffering a 'trauma' and can be cured by having sex with a woman (it's no surprise to learn that director Lombardi is straight), while his relationships with men are depicted as fragile and fleeting, primarily because his male partners are under the same societal pressures as himself. Unable to indulge his true sexuality, Magill's character seems doomed to a life of unhappiness and deceit, an approach which distinguishes the film from its feel-good American counterparts. Technical credits are polished, and the cast is exemplary, but it's hard to enjoy this bleak little movie, and even harder to dismiss it.

The DVD from Picture This! is fair enough, though this is yet another gay movie whose theatrical Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack has been downmixed to 2.0 surround for its US disc release. Picture quality may suffer on larger monitors and colors are a little heavy (which may have been part of the film's original color scheme), but it's generally OK. A trailer for this film is included, along with previews for other gay-themed movies from Picture This! The 114 minute running time quoted on the packaging is a mistake.

108m 28s
1.85:1 / Letterboxed
DVD soundtrack: Stereo surround 2.0
Theatrical soundtrack: Dolby Digital
Spanish with optional English subtitles
All regions ... Read more

Reviews (1)

delightful little comedy
I'm not the biggest fan of these romantic comedies but I found this one very funny and entertaining. Garaffalo was great and uma was pretty good too. I especially liked the radio shows and the clever title. A good escape movie ... Read more

Reviews (283)

Real animation.
As a sequel to the Alien trilogy, the general consensus is that 'Alien Resurrection' scraps the bottom of the barrel. It goes for melodramatic impact with predictable deaths and corny action movie one-liners. A massive setback for a highly acclaimed sequence of films but not a bad adaption of a comic book series. Indeed the premise behind 'Resurrection' seems to have been lifted mostly from the Dark Horse comic's 'Alien' stories. The characters are richly 2-dimensional. Bad acting? When you're playing a comic-book character, there's no need to wander through the depths of human emotion, just play it as it is on the page. Jean-Pierre Jeunet's style in his French language films do portray a highly animated sense of reality and much of the set designs and action sequences in 'Alien Resurrection' do seem to have been directly influenced by the comic stories. The previous films worked hard on displaying an imaginable sci-fi future, where human emotion and interaction still managed to take precedence over technology. In 'Resurrection' we are blasted with endless amounts of explosions and gore, the only tinge of humanity coming from an androyid (ironically played by the rather 'wooden' Winona Ryder).

I would love to see Jeunet tackle the sci-fi genre again, maybe a film where he could harness some of his own vision in the story, as well as in the direction. Terry Gilliam's 'Brazil' was a wonderful example of how a highly imaginative director could create his own pseudo-sci-fi world without the cuddly trappings of George Lucas. If you're a sci-fi comic book fan then, 'Alien Resurrection' is definitely one to see.

A Joke!
This almost doesn't even qualify as an Alien movie and feels more like some spin-off of the franchise and really ruins the power of the 1992 third Alien movie. Why would anyone want to clone Ripley and an alien anyway? The acting, even by Weaver is weak and this movie's plot is laughable! What a sad ending to a great movie series. It should've ended with Alien 3!!!!! End of story!

This final installment is on shaky ground.
1997's fourth installment in the "Aliens" movie franchise is my least favorite of the bunch for many reasons even though it also has it's own merits. In all honesty, while there's plenty of things to enjoy, this movie is missing something that made the first two movies so incredible and even the third one which has it's own flaws of it's own.

This movie takes place 200 years after the events of "Alien 3". Ellen Ripley's DNA has been successfully recovered and a mix of Ripley and the alien's DNA have been successfully cloned and now Ripley's 'descendant', actually a clone of her has been brought to life to wage her final battle against the predatory aliens that are now approaching the planet Earth. The 'new' Ripley has Alien DNA within her that makes her capable of 'caring' for the alien creatures. A band of vicious smugglers however comes on board to steal the Alien DNA only to discover that the new breed of aliens is more dangerous than any other ever before and now the aliens are hunting both 'Ripley' and the smugglers and now they must destroy the alien and prevent them from getting to Earth and also try to make it home alive.

This movie cuts both ways for me. While certainly not a bad movie overall, "Alien Resurrection" suffers the most from serious flaws more than any of the previous "Alien" movies. While the movie is enjoyable for its special effects and awesome action sequences, I for one agree with many that this was almost not even necessary to be made like this especially since the 1992 third entry was where it should've ended. A lot scenes are pretty gross to look at especially the ones where 'Ripley' tries to 'calm' down the alien creatures or even tries to act like some 'mother' figure to them. I for one feel that this movie is more of like some 'alternate timeline' movie spin-off of some sort that almost feels completely detached from the previous three and that it's almost like thrown together leftovers from them as well.

The cast is hit and miss for me. Sigourney Weaver as the 'new' Ellen Ripley is fantastic as usual and is the only one in my opinion who really carries this movie all the way through. Her character is still very good although a step or two down from the previous movies. The rest of the cast however really don't fare anywhere near as good. Winona Ryder really drops the ball on this one and the character she plays is boring and without character or personality even though she isn't as she is thought to be. The male cast comes off being excessively dry and unconvincing and one in particular is almost enough to tick you off at his attitude towards Ryder's character in this movie. The directing by Jean-Pierre Jeunet is really good and this combined with Siguorney Weaver's acting as usual really do a lot to make this flawed movie a good movie worth watching.

The movie has its merits though. The special effects are top-rate and the movie has a really suspenseful tone but it starts getting to the point that the formula has been a bit tried since it has already been done three times already. The newest species of alien is really scary and but the face and head look almost like a human skull or even a deformed Freddy Krueger. The movie is saved by a really awesome but gruesome ending which I'm not going to mention out of fear of spoiling it. The ending alone saves this movie along with the special effects. While many movie series seam to suffer from a pattern called the "Fourth Installment Syndrome/Curse" or whatever you call it with examples like "Batman and Robin" or "Jaws: The Revenge", "Alien Resurrection" avoids a lot of this with great special effects and awesome sequences. For a 'Part 4' movie, this really fares so well for a fourth installment and maintains some freshness even if the cracks in the franchise start showing through.

The "Director's Cut" edition of "Alien Resurrection" does little to improve this movie and is only like ten minutes longer than the original and of the revamped versions of all of the "Alien" movies, "Alien Resurrection" benefits the least out of them all and the result is disappointing. The movie also has a new intro to it. The second disc like the other films on their newest re-issues has lots of great extras with 'making of', commentaries, and lots of cool Easter eggs. There are plenty of extras in this movie that are worth looking at though and the DVD is really excellent. The picture quality was good to begin with but this "Collector's Edition" really improves the picture quality and the sound quality is amazing to the point that if you have surround audio speakers or can connect your TV to the stereo speakers, then it will feel almost like you're back at the big screen again! The final result for me is that this gets a rating that rounds off to 3 solid stars but at the same time, this movie while good on its own, just never can find it's own place against the shadows of it's predecessors and is ultimately a movie that is more for the die-hard Alien audiences.

Looking back on it now, I have to say that despite the weaknesses especially on the last two parts in the series, "Aliens" stands as one of the best sci-fi/horror/action movie franchises of all time and that Sigourney Weaver may be the most remembered by her roles in all of them.

THE DARKEST CHAPTER IN THE SERIES.
Some people think that "Alien 3" is the worst movie in the series. Others think that "Alien Resurrection" is the worst. I think that "Resurrection" is slightly better than "Alien 3", but I also think that we all agree that both "Resurrection" and "Alien 3" aren't even close to the level of excellency of the first two movies.

Anyway, "Alien Resurrection" does have interesting things: the atmosphere is dark and it's very stylish. Finally we can see a pretty face in the series, Winona Ryder plays a supporting role in this movie. Also, "Resurrection" has scenes packed with bullets, explosions and action.

However, "Alien Resurrection" also has low points. Yes, Winona appears here, but her acting talent is kinda wasted. Some plot twists feel very forced, and the movie has its share of grotesque and pointless scenes. But all those things are OK, however, the thing that I can't forgive as a fan of the series is the Alien / human creature, that thing is so grotesque and infamous that the damn thing makes that the final scenes look like an ultra-cheap horror movie.

In the final countdown "Alien Resurrection" still is good enough to score a solid 3 stars rating in my scale, but to be honest I would recommend you only the first two movies, "Alien" and "Aliens".

WHAT THE...?!?!
'Alien' was excellent. 'Aliens' was superb. 'Alien 3' was.. well.. it was okay. At least I found it to be a respectable sequel in its own right. But this... THIS?!!?! Let me just say 'Resurrection' should've been SHELVED AND NEVER HAVE SEEN THE INSIDE OF ANY THEATER!!! This movie sucks on so many levels it's unreal. Bad acting, bad plot, lame, boring, dumb... I still can't believe Sigourney Weaver would go along with such an inane project. Must've been the money, cuz reportedly she got a lot of it to play in this travesty. And what about that freaky 'Mummy Returns' reject of an alien at the end?? LAME!!!

Movie sucked. Stick with the first two definitely, and possibly the third... This one sucks big time. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

A good Spanish comedy about a struggling actor
Javier Bardem plays Victor Ventura, a young man who moves to Madrid to make it as an actor. While waiting for his big break, he struggles to make ends meet as a pizza delivery man. Forced to find a way to make more money, he becomes a phone sex operator. His first client, a man who calls himself "Bill." Some time later, he is requested by a woman named "Amand" and, during their phone conversation, he immediately falls for her and breaks the cardinal rule of the group: meeting one of the callers. After a fantastic night together, she confesses her true reason for calling him and enlists his help to get evidence so she can divorce her husband, "Bill." And, he's just about to get his big break in an American film. But things are not quite what they seem, and Victor soon finds himself involved in a murderous plot as well as a love triangle.

This is a charming and funny comedy gem from Spainsh director Manual Gómez Pereira. Javier Bardem does a fine job as Victor and really carried the film. I had problems with his character immediately falling for Amanda (played superbly by Aitana Sanchez-Gijon). No build up to the relationship or any understanding why he falls for her. Alastair Mackenzie does a fine job as the American movie director Oswaldo, though much of the English diaolgue (from other characters) is obviously dubbed and sounds very stiff and unnatural.

Overll, it's a fun movie to watch, and I really enjoyed Javier Bardem's performance.

"There are a lot of repressed men--all with phones."
In the Spanish comedy, "Mouth to Mouth", Victor Ventura has dreamed of becoming an actor since boyhood. As a pizza delivery driver in Madrid, he waits for his big break, but after a run of bad luck, he turns to 'Hot Line' --a telephone--I'll euphemistically call it--entertainment operation run by a mother and son team. After telling himself that "rich guys get turned on by labourers", Victor uses Robert De Niro for inspiration and soon becomes a natural in the world of adult telephone entertainment.

Victor (known as Salvador at the Hot Line) picks up a regular male customer known as Bill. Victor also breaks the rules and becomes rather intimately involved with another caller who calls herself Amanda. Suddenly Victor finds himself up to his neck in intrigue--there's a femme fatale, a murder plot, and a multi-million dollar film.

Javier Bardem stars as Victor, and this role was created before Bardem became a recognizable name in Hollywood. Actually, I prefer "Mouth to Mouth" to any other film Bardem has made. He's got great comedic talent, and his facial features naturally lend themselves to being cast as the innocent, guileless fall guy. Several times during "Mouth to Mouth", Victor auditions for roles and comes off very credibly as the nervous wannabe performing an atrocious Broadway number, the foul-mouthed tough guy, and the great Latin Lover. He switches between characters and makes it look easy. When Victor takes his first phone call at the Hot Line he calls on all his acting talent to help him 'save' the call, and the scene is really well done. The culture of the Hot Line office is particularly amusing, and some of the calls are hilarious.

"Mouth to Mouth" almost has the feel of an Almodovar film--but this is mainly due to pacing and the character of Victor's agent, the semi-hysterical and babbling Angela. However, "Mouth to Mouth" is essentially a comedy and verves firmly away from the darker philosophical issues that Almodovar often wrestles with. "Mouth to Mouth" is a great foreign comedy, and I think most people could easily relate to its universal humour-displacedhuman.

Javier Bardem as "Victor" gets into some phone sex.
Javier Bardem plays "Victor" who has been trying very hard to find work to be an actor. With his agent he has been trying for fifteen months. While delivering pizza to a company, he realizes there is a room full of phone sex operators. Since acting auditions are not getting him anywhere right now. He decides to quit and leave town. His agent talks him out of it with a big movie company coming to town in a few weeks. In the meantime, he begins work as a phone sex operator. His first client is a man. The hot talk is a success. Now he tries his business with women clients and in person as well. This film is spoken in English and Spanish. Use of yellow subtitles in English is used. Rated R.

Delightful, Funny, & Touching Comedy w/typical Spanish humor
This film touches on all the universally modern issues: love, sex, jealousy, money (the lack of it), homosexuality, friendship, and human need for one another.

The plot is to die for. A young, struggling actor, is out job and out of luck, but he needs to go on...So, he begins an adventure that is likely to end with a big mess.

At times, this film feels like a one man show or a stand-up act; nevertheless, absolutely all characters are well-developed and rich: the shady sex-line owner in need of his over-bearing mother's approval, the dancing girl in need of money, the plastic surgeon in need of love, the Hollywood lady producer in need of success, etc. As it is common in Spanish cinema, colors are very important in this film: red and black are the main ones. They symbolize passion, jealousy, crazyness, and sarcasm.

When you start watching this film, you can sit back and enjoy yourselves. By the end, you are likely to re-evaluate your opinions about issues raised. You're also likely to have a blast, in the process.

A Sexy and Hysterical Farce!
I totally love this movie! The cast, work together so beautifully. It is about a struggling young actor named Victor who, because of his lack of acting jobs and the need to eat, takes a temporary position as a "Phone Sex" operator! As luck would have it, his first call, being supervised by his new boss, is from a Man! Victor has to summon up all his acting talents, not to mention his nerve, to sweet talk a caller without the caller hanging up. It is just too funny! Javier Bardem is adorable as the young actor and Josep Maria Flotats is the vulnerable and very funny "Bill", the homosexual caller. This movie has many well-executed characters including, the pervy phone sex manager, a beautiful caller with a secret who, together with Bill, begin to complicate Victor's life by involving him in a situation where someone is out to murder Bill! It's one of the best Spanish comedies I have seen so far - Glad I bought it! ... Read more

Reviews (44)

The Definitive Cat and Mouse Submarine Movie
This is one of the best duel-of-wits on the high seas between submarine and destroyer ever filmed. Robert Mitchum as the captain of an American destroyer and Curt Jurgens as the captain of a German submarine try to out maneuver each other in a battle of nerves, instincts, intelligence, seamanship and raw courage. The multi-talented Dick Powell directed this taught drama, which remains one of the most memorable and benchmark films of this genre. The interior of the German submarine does not have the realistic or claustrophobic look as seen in DAS BOOT but that's not the point. Powell's focus is on the two captains and how they act and react. This film does not lose sight of the mentality of that era and the psychological makeup of the men at sea above and below. This is classic filmmaking and should not be overshadowed by the recent resurgence of certain World War II films that seem to have lost sight of the reason men fought and died. This film also has an impressive cast featuring David Hedison, Theodore Bikel, Kurt Kreuger and Doug McClure. Robert Mitchum and Curt Jurgens portrayed true men of honor each dedicated to their duty that they were called upon.

Dive into this good submarine drama
There is a fairly extensive sub-category of war movies - submarine battles - within which movies made in the 1950's are highly regarded. THE ENEMY BELOW is not up to the standards of RUN SILENT, RUN DEEP but is better than TORPEDO RUN. It is also different that both those movies. Where they use a dramatic human interest story as the main plot line, this movie has a narrow focus on what you would expect from a film about a sub battle. The emphasis is on the chase, the strategy, the cunning and wiles of both commanders - US destroyer Captain Murrell (Robert Mitchum) and veteran German U-Boat commander Von Stolberg (Curt Jurgens). The drama is in changing fortunes - now who is the hunter and the hunted? Both of the main characters are well developed, and while there are differences in behavior, motivation, and naturally, stategy, the movie also shows clearly that as professional sailors they recognize and appreciate the good qualities in their opposites. As such this movie is memorable for the fact that Germans are not demonized or simply stereotyped as Nazis.

It's a well directed movie, with excellent moments of suspense, good acting in some key supporting roles - Lt Ware (David Hedison). The only let down is with some very obvious models in some of the battle scenes.

The Definitive Cat and Mouse Submarine Movie
This is one of the best duel-of-wits on the high seas between submarine and destroyer ever filmed. Robert Mitchum as the captain of an American destroyer and Curt Jurgens as the captain of a German submarine try to out maneuver each other in a battle of nerves, instincts, intelligence, seamanship and raw courage. The multi-talented Dick Powell directed this taught drama, which remains one of the most memorable and benchmark films of this genre. The interior of the German submarine does not have the realistic or claustrophobic look as seen in DAS BOOT but that's not the point. Powell's focus is on the two captains and how they act and react. This film does not lose sight of the mentality of that era and the psychological makeup of the men at sea above and below. This is classic filmmaking and should not be overshadowed by the recent resurgence of certain World War II films that seem to have lost sight of the reason men fought and died. This film also has an impressive cast featuring David Hedison, Theodore Bikel, Kurt Kreuger and Doug McClure. Robert Mitchum and Curt Jurgens portrayed true men of honor each dedicated to their duty that they were called upon.

Enemy Below
Dick Powell had to have had one of the most interesting careers in Hollywood history. He started out as a golden-throated pretty boy actor, made a successful mid-career shift to hard boiled roles like Philip Marlowe and then, for good measure, directed a handful of movies, including the submarine action picture THE ENEMY BELOW.
THE ENEMY BELOW is a 100% action movie, without any distracting romantic sub-plot or comic relief crew members. Robert Mitchum and Curt Jurgens are excellent as the American destroyer commander and U-boat commander who cross paths in the Atlantic Ocean and engage in a deadly hunt. With a few exceptions the models are realistically rendered and convincing. This is one of the best war movies out there, and maybe the best navy movie available. I strongly recommend it to action fans.

great cat and mouse game by two great actors!
This is not the average sub-film that centers on the crews of the sub and the sub-chaser. This is a two-man cat and mouse film, marvelously done with style and incisive insight.

Robert Mitchum is the man who rises to do what is needed. Not a superhero, but a very human man who goes into war and does what is required. He is the Captain of a U.S. destroyer sent out to track U-boats. Curt Jurgens is his mirror reflection - below - a Captain of the U-Boat that becomes the target of Mitchum's search. He is not a product of the Nazi war-machine, but again, a very likable man just defending his country. This is demonstrated with deft humor when Jurgens very deliberately hangs his jacket over the plaque of Hitler's propaganda.

The script eschews the stereotypical "Nazi monsters", and portrays a German crew with very real - and universal - emotions. They, too, were just men doing their job and what is required. Instead of having us root for the Americans to blow up the evil Germans, you are put in the position of caring equally for both sides. You comprehend that they are men, offering their lives for their command, not in a political way, but in a time-honoured fashion of a man going to war. You understand both sides REALLY do not want to be here, to kill or be killed; they would rather home. No rousing stereotypical propaganda. In the end, they will kill each other if they must, but given the choice, they would rather not. Very different for that period of war films.

A little dated appearance on the boat scenes by today's standards. It's obvious toy models when the boats crash, but easily overlooked and dismissed when balanced with the very impressive lack of finger-pointing and flag-waving for either nationality. Both Mitchum and Jurgens are dead-bang on target in their lead roles, with David Hedison, Theodore Bickel and Doug McClure round out a super cast ... Read more

Reviews (52)

Brilliant ERIC Roberts
So you thought Julia Roberts had all the talent in the family? Think again, and see "It's My Party" if you want proof positive that Eric, her brother, deserves the same level of praise and attention. A shattering performance that was grossly overlooked in 1996, Roberts plays the central character, dying from AIDS with dignity and self-determination that is so rarely captured ANYWHERE it's often astounding to the viewer to get through. If you thought "Terms of Endearment" was a terrific film, you might dislike the honesty and wrenching sincerity of this movie. There is little room for self-disdain here, or sadness. Rather, what erupts throughout is pure emotional awareness....Roberts captures so many dimensions of a dying man, you're celebrating AND reflecting at once. There is also an incredible supporting cast and special kudos to Harrison, Newton-John, and Cho. A real family film - see it and share it with the people you love. A note to the studio - how about a DVD release with some behind-the-scenes extras and perhaps even some reflections from the lovely Julia Roberts on her brother's extraordinary turn

Don't waste your time
A few weeks ago, I attempted to watch this movie with a small group of friends. We had all read the summary on the back of the case, and though it sounded good. We were wrong. While the basic story has potential, the presentation is extremely melodramatic. The acting is terrible, and the writing even worse. This is, without a doubt, among the worst movies I have ever seen.

Powerful film, inspired by true events
IT'S MY PARTY (USA 1996): In the last few days before an AIDS-related brain tumor renders him insensible, a young LA designer (Eric Roberts) decides to end his own life, though not before throwing a final joyous bash for family and loved ones. However, the occasion is strained by the arrival of Roberts' former lover (Gregory Harrison), seeking reconciliation at the eleventh hour...

Though heartfelt and moving, Randal Kleiser's powerful film - inspired by actual events - feels a little fragmented and plays like a reunion of his closest showbiz friends (the cast is a veritable who's-who of familiar faces), anchored firmly by Harrison and Roberts in the central roles. Their former relationship is outlined briefly at the start of the film, too briefly for the subsequent break-up to register as anything more than a minor event, though their love for one another is conveyed with real strength and conviction. Roddy McDowall essays the voice of conscience during a brief cameo appearance in which he questions the ethics of suicide, but his character's conservative views are given short shrift by Kleiser's defiant screenplay, which uses a sprinkling of mordant humor to keep mawkishness at bay (at one point, Roberts and his best friend [Bronson Pinchot, camping it up with abandon] launch into a rousing rendition of "It's my party/And I'll die if I want to"!). Viewers are advised, however, that the final twenty minutes are relentlessly, heartbreakingly sad. Amongst the high-profile supporting players, look fast for Nina Foch, Sally Kellerman, Greg Louganis, Steve Antin and a virtually unrecognizable Dennis Christopher and Christopher Atkins.

Sound and picture on MGM/UA's DVD are uniformly fine, and the extras include extended/deleted scenes, a trailer, and an audio commentary with director, cast and crew which goes into greater detail about the 1992 events which inspired the movie.

109m 35s
1.85:1 / Anamorphically enhanced
DVD soundtrack: Dolby 5.1
Theatrical soundtracks: DTS
Optional English subtitles and closed captions
Region 1

Yes it is Moving, But Geez is it ever Depressing
As a rule, if you are a gay male, you are suppose to support any independent type gay film thrust upon you. I have yet to be impressed with these art house gay themed films (with the exception of "Monster"). This one is no exception.
Yes the story is written well. Yes the message is deep. Yes it will make you cry and blah blah blah.
Why do gay films depict the main characters as either drag queens, tramps, or suffering from disease?
Maybe I don't like this film because it was disturbing in the true depiction of what an AIDS victim could possibly face. Or the flashbacks of others that have died in the film. Or the shallow lover that abandons the sick main character. I don't know, it isn't a bad film, it is just horribly depressing and not a film I ever care to watch again.
Why can't the next gay film embrace life, not death. Embrace love, not break-ups. Embrace happiness, not sadness?
Olivia Newton-John sings a beautiful song over the ending credits, if you watch the film, leave the credits rolling to witness this moving song.

Great performances enhance a timely story!
I came upon this little-known film by accident the other evening and it was a discovery that I was glad to have made. As has previously been stated, Eric Roberts portrays "Nick" who has been living an idyllic existence with his partner "Brandon", portrayed by Gregory Harrison. Suddenly, their lives are turned inside out when Nick is diagnosed with AIDS. Brandon is unable to cope with the revelation and begins to distance himself from his friend. The strain on the relationship caused them to have a permanent and ugly separation.

One year later, as the disease begins to progress to its eventual fatal end, Nick decides to throw a "bash" for his himself, as well as his family and friends. Nick also intends on taking his own life because prior to his mind and body's deterioration.

Nick's family and friends all come with the exception of the unknowing Brandon. Margaret Cho, playing one of Nick's friends, intercedes and seeks out Brandon, telling him about his former lover's intentions. During the party, Brandon appears and amidst the celebration, he and Nick briefly reconcile.

The final meeting between the two is poignant as well as celebratory.

As far as the performances are concerned, the principals are superb. Why Roberts did not attain the heights, as his better-known sibling, Julia, is unfathomable. He is quite good as the dying Nick.

Harrison is appropriately confused and compassionate as one that must deal with his own guilt and the mortality of someone with whom he had planned to share his life.

Lee Grant, as Nick's mom, is brilliant, showing why she has been one of the most under appreciated actresses of the past fifty years.

With a supporting cast of Bronson Pinchot, George Segal, Bruce Davison, Marlee Matlin, Olivia Newton-John (who supplies the song heard over the closing credits), Roddy McDowall (in one of his last roles), and a cameo appearance by acting legend Nina Foch (as Brandon's mother), the film has the clout to be one of the best ensemble cast in recent years.

It's too bad that this well-made film came and went with little fanfare and seems now relegated to late night on cable televsion.

The film is powerful and deserving of wider viewership. ... Read more

Reviews (676)

A dissapointment
The first Mummy was an enjoyable, if tedious, romp about the struggles of an adventurer and his companions to stop the apocalyptic agenda of an ancient Egyptian priest. Far from perfect, The Mummy nevertheless boasted an infectious blend of high adventure, low-scare horror, and special effects that transformed it into a surprise hit. Now comes the sequel; The Mummy Returns along with most of the original cast. The rather jumbled plot is as follows: A cult of power-mad Egyptologists have concocted a plan by which they can obtain world domination. First, they must resurrect Im-Ho-Tep, the mummy from the first film. Since they are being led by the ancient priest's re-incarnated girlfriend, Anck-Su-Namun (Patricia Velazquez), this proves to be surprisingly easy. Then, with his powers restored, Im-Ho-Tep heads off to do battle with the mythical Scorpion King, whose tomb lies in a pyramid at the center of a hidden oasis. In order to find that oasis, Im-Ho-Tep needs an artifact which happens to be in the possession of Alex O'Connell. And, when the boy is kidnapped, that brings his parents, his uncle Jonathan, and their old friend, Ardeth Bay, into the conflict. This results in a lot of chasing around the globe and a climax that features a special effects-laden battle between two armies. Unfortunately, it becomes obvious real fast that the only reason The Mummy Returns exists is because of Universal Studio's greed, and not due to a creative process. Of course this is the thought process that kills most sequels. The story is told so sloppy and is so unnecessary, the characters are eventually abandoned and it becomes really hard to care about anyone or anything. The plot pot is boiling so furiously with silly deaths-and-rebirths and various attempts at sub-plots, it turns to overkill.

Fraser has never seemed more smarmy; he doesn't retain a smidgen of his usual bumptious charm. Weisz, who must shift from being a strong woman at one instant to a helpless damsel the next (and endure some really embarrassing fight sequences with Velasquez in flashbacks to her former life in ancient Thebes -- she's been reincarnated -- don't ask), is surprisingly nondescript in all these guises. Even the CGI is a let down: The computer generated Scorpion King is simply awful (the warriors of Anubis are so startingly fake you can feel Ray Harryhausen crying out for vengeance). While roller-coaster rides can be fun, even they need proper timing: they require occasional pauses from the plunges, and certainly shouldn't drag on forever. Oh well, I hope Jurassic Park and Planet of the Apes score better than The Mummy Returns.

Action-packed Entertainment - a True Sequel
I tend to rate a movie on it's 'see again' factor - I'd watch this one again and again... I've rarely seen a sequel that follows on so beautifully from where the original left off. It's 10 years later and the O'Connells have a son, Alex, who has a relentless tendency to get into trouble - kind of like his mother, really.

Okay, so there are a few 'seen-it, 'been there, done that' moments, but despite this, "The Mummy Returns" manages to pack in the action and keep your eyes glued to the screen. Best points: the story behind the murder of Pharaoh Seti I in the first movie involving Evy, Imhotep and Anck Su Namun - nice follow on there; the FANTASTIC battle between Anubis's army and the Medjai in the desert - great SFX! And the moment of Anck Su Namun betrayal - one of those rare times your heart goes out to the bad guy.

Most importantly, the movie is about FUN. Yes, there are things that defy reality, the plot isn't water-tight or rock-steady - so what? It's an action-packed, entertaining, SCI-FI movie with memorable characters, great actors that makes brilliant use of special effects and doesn't take itself too seriously. What more could a die-hard movie buff ask for?

All I'm saying is...
...this could have been much better. Three years after the fact, I know many of us are in agreement that this sequel did not live up to the original, so instead of just bashing it, I thought I'd do a take on what NOT to do with a sequel:

1.) Do not sacrifice plot for action. After so many sequels that bombed because of this, the producers still fell for it anyway. Do you know what made "The Mummy" so awesome? The lure of all the ancient Egyptian lore and myth, which, when interspersed with action, brought the entire movie alive. We don't need more brawls and swordfights and self-consuming cities--we need more of the MAGIC.

2.) Don't reference the original more than twice. It's not as if we don't remember the books and the plagues and the happy romance. If anything, constant reflections insult us as an audience. It's another bad trap that sequel-makers fall into, and again, it happened here too.

3.) Don't wreck the memory of a beloved setting. Hamunaptra was chock-full of all that we as Americans want from ancient Egypt: vast treasures, sarcophogi, curses, booby traps, juicy mummies. And what did we see of it in the second film? Sand, teeming with people who couldn't even find it eight years before. Huge electric lights illuminating what once could only be seen by torchlight. Trucks, instead of camels! And some really strangely reincarnated Anck-su-namun. The moviemakers effectively ruined the magic of Hamunaptra, and they didn't have to. Shame!

4.) Never, ever, ever pull a stunt like a CGI Rock again. Could they not afford to pay him for the final scenes? Just imagine the heroic fight between Rick, Imhotep, and the Scorpion King--only all three are in the flesh! People would have been cheering in the theatre watching the Rock fight with Brendan Fraser and Arnold Vosloo. But noooo...let's pull CGI out of our butts for the eighty millionth time. Shame shame!

5.) Don't ruin the best moments of the film by shortening them. Were we too busy playing around with CGI Rock to choreograph a great fight scene between Anck and Evie? I think we might have been. I understand that having Anck shy away from fighting helped set up her not being brave enough in the end for other things, but even just extending the fight a little longer would have helped. Anck could have given her best in an extended fight but still lost, and then we could have watched her bravado melt away and become her undoing.

All that being said, there are some bright spots. The mummy himself, for one. And the character of Jonathan was as lively and funny as ever, thank goodness; Ardeth Bay (Oded Fehr) was even more campily serious and apocolyptic, and that was fun, too. Enough can't be said for Brendan Frasier, who IS the action hero of the the new millenium--handsome, funny, totally self-aware, and he puts his heart into everything completely.

I hope they make a third "Mummy." There's a lot left of ancient Egypt to explore, especially since in the time period of the movies not everything had been discovered yet. I think all the main characters would have to return, and that the plot with the most potential still remains that between Imhotep and Anck-su-namun. With all the money they have in Hollywood, the producers should be able to hire a team talented enough to write a movie as magical as the first.

Mummy Dearest
Such trash the movie studios insult us with. The Cringometer peaked over the red line from the opener and climaxed with some of the worst CG ever. The Rock- more like The Crock! Possibly the worst film in any aspect ratio, preferable on NO SCREEN. Had hoped that Stephen Sommers would be sent into exile for this sub-par Jules Verne abortion, but we've just seen Van Helsing and don't understand why he hasn't suicided.

Mummys Back
The second adventure of this series is set eight years after the first. This time the affects are better and we get to see more of supermodel, Patricia Velasquez, wearing only gold paint as well as toting a machine gun. The most popular scene in the movie is the chic fight between Velasquez and Weiss, no doubt the pause and shuttle buttons will get a work out...

As usuall Brendan Frazer is at his silly best with his now on screen wife, Rachael Wiess a still overly beautiful adventurist. This time they have an equally inqusitive son who simple can't leave things alone... ... Read more

Reviews (147)

A good ol' time at the movies.
Elizabeth Hurley was an ideal choice for the role of Satan in "Bedazzled," opposite Brendan Fraser, who is also well cast as a misfit who offers his soul in return for seven wishes. The movie is a remake of an original film, and while it may tend to drag down a bit in its final acts, the result is a comedy tour-de-force which had me laughing and feeling pleased throughout.

What more pathetic character could we ask for in Elliott, the computer technician with no life? Elliott has no friends, but that doesn't stop him from conversing with his coworkers whom he thinks are actually listening. When his attention becomes snagged by fellow coworker Allison, her rejection brings him to the attention of a mysterious woman in red who reveals herself to be the Princess of Darkness. Her plan: to offer him seven wishes in return for his soul, and while he remains skeptical, the thought of being with Allison (with the help of Satan's television screens) drives him to accept the offer.

This is where the movie gets good, as we follow him on his many adventures accompanying each of his wishes. His first wish, to be rich and have Allison for his wife, lands him as a Spanish cocaine dealer whose wife is cheating on him with her English teacher, followed by his second wish to be emotionally sensitive, which drives Allison into the arms of a shallow man ("I just want someone who wants to get in my pants"). Elliott soon catches on to Satan's tricks, yet still keeps taking his wishes, with hilarious results.

First and foremost, the performances from Hurley and Fraser are what make the movie worthwhile. Brendan Fraser looks like he's having so much fun playing his role, segueing from a fast-talking Mexican who speaks multiple languages, to the overtly sensitive red-haired boy who bursts into tears at the glance of the sunset. Hurley gives a smashing performance as a female Satan, her accent adding wit and charisma to a role that is being dealt with in a new way. In watching "Bedazzled," I could see how much fun the two actors were having in playing their roles, which made the movie more enjoyable and the comedy more comfortable.

That comedy arises from many different things: first, there's the relationship between the two characters. Satan knows that she's not going to live up to her promises entirely without flaw, which leads to some very funny results as Elliott discovers each wish's put-off. I also found a great many laughs during the opening sequence, which singles people out in the frantic pace of life and labels them with a certain flaw. Add a bit of witty dialogue and a goofy character on his way to his dreams, and what you've got is a reasonably successful film which delivers what it was intended to: laughs.

Which is why the ending, for me, doesn't quite live up to the rest of the material. The laughs seem to fizzle out a bit: they're still a couple of chuckle-worthy moments at hand, but not on par with the hysterics of the first two thirds of the movie. I originally intended to dispute the way in which the movie "cops out" by taking the approach it does in the end, but once I thought about it (and you'll understand me when you watch it yourself), there really was no other way for it to end and still retain a certain lightheartedness.

On a slightly off-the-subject opinion, I also felt that the film had a good advertising plan going for it. The preview trailers don't give away all the laughs, and the movie takes certain turns that we don't get to see in the ads.

All-in-all, "Bedazzled" is a regular comedy made just a touch better by the bright and vivacious performances of its leads. The fun they have in creating their characters' body and verbal language is laugh-out-loud funny, while the situations they find themselves in aren't original, but still have comedic charm.

Devilishly good fun from Fraser and Hurley
If you're looking for a light, screwballish comedy, this will fit the bill. The premise is predictable, but ripe with opportunities. Dweebish Elliot, marvelously played by Brendan Fraser, trades his soul to the Devil for seven wishes. The twist here is that each wish lands Elliot in a whole different world - Columian drug lord, NBA star, etc. In each scenario Fraser basically creates a whole new character, and principal members of the supporting cast also appear in revamped personas. Not only is it an impressive show of the actors' versitility, but it makes for a very funny movie. As funny as all the different wish lives are, the best parts of the movie are the connecting scenes where Elliot and the Devil plan the next wish. Elizabeth Hurley has a wonderful time as the Devil, and this is the perfect vehicle for her wicked sense of humor. This is also a movie where you really appreciate the work of the costume and make-up crews. Everything from Hurley's devilishly funny costumes to Fraser's repeatedly revamped features really contribute to the humor of the movie. All in all, a very appealing movie.

One of the worst remakes of all time
Very few movies have I been to see in theatres and wanted to walk out on. I ended up staying till the end of this one, but I wish I hadnt... This DVD isnt at a cheap price for any other reason then it beeing a pretty bad movie. Most people who didnt like the movie wouldnt even bother to reveiw it, but I got time to kill...

Read someone elses reveiw for the plot, I'm sure it's been explained a thousand times already.

The most annoying thing about the film was Liz Hurly. Her constand bobbing around as she walked was irratating, I dunno what she was thinking, but that was one of the worst performance's i've ever seen by anyone. ... I suppose if your one of her loyal fans who would go to see her do anything for a perv on her, you probably will be distracted by somthing else other then your mind to come to the conclusion shes is doing a terrible job of acting.. I hoep they didnt pay her for that role... and probably the fans of Brendan Frasier are giving out good reveiws because theyd give there right arms to watch him on screen... but for me, sex images dont sell a movie at all. Therefor, the thought that having 2 actors both men and women would go to see for some kind of attraction thing going on, just dosent cut if, espeiclly when it's not funny, the acting is terrible, and again, that annoying bobbing up and down as Liz Hurly walks... what is that??? was it supposed to be funny? well, underline "supposed to be" then.

Horrible film, only fans of these actors, or people looking at the movie for the wrong reasons will absolutly love this film.

Horrible acting

I enjoyed it
Selling your soul to the devil has been a theme in a couple of moives. This modern tale of it isn't that bad and is actually pretty good thanks to smart writing, a great director, and good casting.

Elliot Richards(Fraser) is the love desperate nerd that everybody hates. He is to nice and gets annoyinig from the simple fact that he trys to hard. He has the hots for a woman at work Allison(O'Connor) who barely even knows he's there. He wants her desperately so he says to God he'd do almost anything for her. The next thing you know The Devil(Hurley) is there offering Elliot a chance to get Allison.

The deal is simple. Elliot will get the Devil his soul in exchange for seven wishes. Elliot is reluctant at first to the proposition but after some clever temptations by the devil he buckles in and says yes to her. The next thing you know he is making wishes and the devil is fulfilling them with some nasty and quite devilish tricks. Now Elliot must decide if this is really the path he wants to take and if these wishes are all that they are cracked up to be.

Brendan Fraser is good in this movie. This guys movies are usually hit or miss and this one is a hit. I don't like it as much as say the Mummy series or Blast from the Past, but this is a good movie. Fraser is fantastic when he acts out the wishes. He's so funny when he's the Colombian drug lord speaking his Spanish. He's great in the movie and you can tell he really had some fun making this movie.

Elizabeth Hurley is breath taking in the film. This is one of the most gorgeous and flawless woman in the world and in ways she carries this movie. She is very tempting and I like how they casted her as the devil instead of some sweet talking con artist man. She's so hot in the film and she's just awesome. If you like Elizabeth Hurley you have to go and watch this film.

Harold Ramis has given himself another good film. This guy is a clever writer and it shows in the film. The movie was also clever in the way that he includes all of Elliots co-wokers from the beginning of the film in the wishes. He's a smart director and really is underrated in the business. He needs to make more movies because most of the ones he's made are great.

Bedazzled is a good movie and it's easy to find cheap. If your looking for a good pop corn movie this one is it. It has a good moral ending that I don't think will offend anybody. Go see Bedazzled and be prepared for a devilish good time.

Follow the skimpy outfits.
This movie is great entertainment for a day when you have nothing else to do. The Devil (Elizabeth Hurley) offers the office geek (Brendan Fraser) a handful of wishes that turn the poor guys world upside down in exchange for his soul. Fraser is chasing after a girl named Allison and uses his wishes to make her like him, but none of them work out since the Devil always had to twist them around and stick a wrench in the works. In the end, he figures out that you don't need to be rich and powerful to get a woman's attention and one simple wish breaks his contract with the Devil. A good movie, but the plot is a little overdone. ... Read more

Reviews (172)

Good sequel saves the series...
Val Kilmer is Batman in this third entry into the successful series. The Riddler is wreaking havoc on Gotham City and it's up to Batman to save the day. Chris O'Donnell plays Robin and joins a reluctant Batman in bringing down Riddler and Two-Face. Director Joel Schumacher makes "Batman Forever" a bright, stylized comic-book movie and succeeds for the most part. Tommy Lee Jones is silly as Two-Face and Jim Carrey is goofily over-the-top as the Riddler. Hold on to your bat-seats, fans. This is a good one!

Third Chapter Lightens Things Up A Bit
Joel Schumacher took over Tim Burton's director's chair for the first time in this mystical and visually stunning third installment in the BATMAN film series (Burton produced). His rather campy and flamboyant style is apparent throughout the film, which lightens things up a bit, but nowhere as severe as in his follow-up BATMAN & ROBIN. Val Kilmer does his best to play things straight (no homoerotic puns intended) as Batman this time while fighting Two-Face (Tommy Lee Jones) and The Riddler (Jim Carrey). In fact Jim Carrey manages to steal almost every scene he appears in, which kind of makes you route more for him than for the heroes. Robin is also introduced in this episode, played rather well (and sympathetically) by Chris O'Donnell. The only thing that really didn't work here was the under-development of Two-Face (we see a brief and rather cheesy televised glimpse of him in court as DA Harvey Dent as he gets acid thrown face, while Batman tries to save him). There was roughly an hour of footage cut from this film (sheesh!), which may account for some of the loopholes in character development and why things may seem a little too rushed at times.

F.Y.I there is a new BATMAN DVD set coming out sometime later this year (or early 2002). This film and the first film will be restored with extra footage. I for one am curious to see what else may have been left out, however that would make this movie over 3 hours long!

Tommy Deserved Better
This film has a suitable "Two-Face" style reaction for me. On the one hand it is a relief after the nasty darkness of 'Batman Returns' it is also a disappointment in terms of character development and overall Feel. Val Kilmer's Batman is a pouty, emotionally stunted wet blanket(not his fault but the director's), Nicole Kidman's character is a slut, Chris O'Donnel's Robin spends the entire movie acting like a punk, and Jim Carrey plays Ace Ventura, I mean the Mask, uhh.. Riddler.

The thing that really makes me mad though is taking a Great Actor, Tommy Lee Jones, Cast him as a Great Character, Two-Face, and Making him perform him like he was the Joker and under-develop him to the point that he plays second fiddle, no pun intended, to JIM CARREY! CURSE YOU SHUMACHER!

If the film had centered around Two-Face and Bruce's guilt for not being fast enough to help him, it would have been great! But that is almost an after thought in the actual film. Blaming Two-Face for the Death of Robin's parents sets him up to be a "Robin" villain, Something more suitable for Riddler or the Penguin.

All this ranting aside, Tommy is the only Main Character who is actually convincing in the film. It's too bad he wasn't able to work with Tim Burton and Michael Keaton on a film that was worthwhile.

Elliot Goldenthal Wrote the music but it pales in comparison with Elfman's work on the first two films.

I was hoping there would be deleted scenes on the DVD but there aren't any. Most of Tommy's Scenes are in the movie, but some juicier moments were cut. Oh well.

Batman Forever
Batman Forever is the third installment in the highly successful Batman series.This movie is good in many aspects, and not so great in other ways.It is certainly no where near as good as the first two, but it is still a fun and impressive film.The new characters ;Riddler and Two Face are great.Tommy Lee Jones and Jim Carry aren't that bad; but at first I wasn't that sure how they were going to do.I also liked how they brought in Robin.The movie has an awesome cast; they did for the most part a good job.Nicole Kidman was in this one, but this film definetly wasn't one of her best pictures;not that she didn,t do a good job.The riddles also weren't to bad.Now some of them were easy, but added up well.ASnother thing I liked was Gotham City; it looks best in B2 though.The special effects were an improvement from the first two.Now that we are through with the good let's go to the bad.I hated so much how there was a new Batman; no offence to Val Kilmer, but he just shouldn't have done this.Also the new director.It wasn't the same without Tim Burton and Michael Keaton.Besides that the film was good and I would recommend it.

The third installment in the "Batman" series. Here the Caped Crusader must once again contend with two strange-looking, personality-impaired villains. First, there's maniacal ex-DA Harvey Two-Face, so named because half his countenance has been horribly disfigured by acid. Then there's the wise-cracking, hyperactive Riddler, whose alter-ego Edward Nygma is a nerdy, highly disgruntled ex-employee of Bruce Wayne. Together, these two masterminds plan to conquer the world with a device that not only mesmerizes users with 3-D television images, but also transports the viewer's thoughts into the Riddler's mind.Batman also has to contend with two other new people in his life. One is lovely psychiatrist Chase Meridian, who has fallen in love with Batman AND Bruce Wayne. Then there's Dick Grayson, a young, orphaned acrobat who desperately wants to become Batman's crime-fighting sidekick in order to get revenge on the man responsible for his parents' death: Harvey Two-Face.(7/10)

"Not as dark as its predecessor but still a great visual feast"
-- Stefan Birgir Stefansson, SBS.IS

terrible
this may have been said before, but these last 2 sequels are like gay disco batman movies. joel shummacher even decided to put in rubber nipples for the last flick to add some homoerotic tone for the whole family, so if that's your cup of tea you will probably think this waste of plastic is just peachy. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Merciless And Brilliant.
"Deep Crimson" is a merciless movie that dwelves into human depravity and murder. It's directed by Arturo Ripstein, Mexico's most respected director who used to work under the wing of Luis Bunuel. In fact, there is a lot of Bunuel style in "Deep Crimson," a movie that shocks not only in violence, but in the entire story and character structure. In it's own way it's visceral and the performances are always chillingly convincing. Ripstein and his writer, Paz Alicia Garciadiego are not afraid to offend the audience and don't hold back, looking at reality unblinkingly. The photography is really rich, gritty and artistic. "Deep Crimson" can be seen as a study of human perversion mingled with lust and depravity. These are characters down on the evolutionary scale who resort to murder for petty reasons, and the way the murders are carried out and the way these characters act and the way Ripstein films it with such realism, is what makes the film effective and disturbing. "Deep Crimson" shows how sometimes American cinema can be really tame, Ripstein obviously isn't and shows his brilliance for realistic and effective cinema here. Obviously he learned well from Luis Bunuel, whom "Deep Crimson" would make proud.

Much ado about nothing much
The way Roger Ebert and TIME magazine described this movie made me buy it and see it. I was expecting a gruesome masterpiece, something like Buñuel's "Los Olvidados" or any film by Bigas Lunas. Certainly, Arturo Ripstein directing is always a good omen, but... alas, it was not to be!

Sure, the story is quite disturbing, but not as shocking as you'd think. Daniel Giménez Cacho and Regina Orozco are O.K. but not in their roles of a lifetime. The girl playing the last victim makes the best performance of them all, and Almodóvar's favorite Marisa Paredes is thoroughly wasted in the most dreadful acting I've ever seen. Too bad, really, but worth watching once.

Remember, it ain't over 'til the fat lady... sinks! ... Read more

Reviews (5)

4 stars rating is well deserved - a quite good movie
very good movie full of intellectual dialogues, beautiful scenes and settings, disgusting people, likable and lovely people are well chosen and nicely performed. this is a film that needs you to sit back to appreciate with better spirit and not feel sleepy or tired before starting, otherwise you might fall asleep or nodding off without even knowing it. but once you finish it, you'd know that you've watched a very good film. there is no climax or downturns but peacefully carried out and performed well from the very beginning to the very end.

Excellent foreign movie but sound-sync defective
This is a beautifully filmed, scripted and acted movie. It was directed by the same director of "To Begin Again/Volver a Empezar" (1982). However, many non-spanish speakers might not have noticed this, but the spanish language soundtrack (the original language of this film) is out of sync with the video. I contacted Miramax and they sent me another copy of the DVD. It had exactly the same problem. It is a shame that such a beautiful film was produced without adequate quality control. I almost gave it 3 stars because of this defect; but this is not the fault of the artists.

A True Gem
This film is a masterpeice of Spanish Literature made into film. With classic themes of Love, honor, family and pride this film is one everyone can relate to on some level. In addition the use of light in this film will take your breathe away. It is so vivid as to be like another actor in the scenes. I rented this film with little thought and came away astounded. Now I own it. So if you can watch one movie without a car chase or an explosion you ought to make it this one! What a gem!

Love is more important than honor in Grandfather.
It was only by accident that I happened to see this fine film. It did not take long for me to realize my good fortune. An elderly Spanish count wants to determine which of two young sisters is his legitimate grandchild. Both of the girls are beautiful and talented and love and care for their grandfather, who is a kind of modern day Don Quixote. He is a hard man to deal with and makes life difficult for family and friends; rightfully so, I might add.

The Count values honor above all and this leads him astray as he tries to discover which of the girls has his blood. We are as much in the dark about this problem as the Count and we watch closely as he observes the girls and forms his opinion.

Both the viewer and the Count learn that love is more important and powerful than honor in the powerful conclusion to this film. All the loose ends, and there are many of them, come together in a moving and satisfying conclusion.

The discovery of the Counts true grandchild is the mystery at the heart of Grandfather, but many other subplots make this a very long film to watch. Even so, the acting is so good and the story so compelling that I was sorry when the film finally ended. This movie deserves a wider audience and I hope this review serves that end.

DVD review only -NO movie comments
If you are reading this review then I assume you like the movie and know the storyline and characters. MY personal opinion is not really relevant.

However, the DVD itself is another matter. If you ARE into this movie then grab this DVD. The transfer to DVD is great, and this is the sort of movie you don't need a cinema sized screen to enjoy, just turn it on on a rainy day, grab a cup of tea and sit down.

My only quibble is the lack of features, pretty standard. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

roll over
usually i hate these cheesy family movies but in a genre of corney films this one is a champion i enjoyed it and grodien was hilarious i only wish i could say the same about the sequel ... Read more

Reviews (93)

Julia Ormond shines in role played by Hepburn!
Being a huge Audrey Hepburn fan, I NEVER thought I would find the remake as entertaining as the original. But was I ever wrong!

Julia Ormond's transformation to the luminously beautiful "woman of the world" Sabrina, is every bit as believable as Hepburn's earlier transformation. Ormond's chemistry with Harrison Ford is far more believable and charming, as Linus tries to distract Sabrina from her obsessive fascination with his younger brother, David, now engaged to the daughter of a business associate.

Harrison Ford gives his portrayal of Linus the needed humanity that Bogart's portrayal lacked. Linus, in Ford's capable hands, revealed the weight of being the older, more responsible brother, in whom the family fortune rested. Yet, Linus yearned to fall in love, and until Sabrina's return from Paris, and their mock courtship, he didn't believe it could ever happen. I really believed he was falling in love with Ormond's Sabrina.

Ford's Linus seemed genuinely heartbroken when he admitted the truth about the Paris trip to Sabrina. He watched with dismay, as her heart broke, to realize he'd been playing her for a fool during their romance. That's why their reunion in Paris, at the end, was so satisfying!

Greg Kinear's David was also more humane and less calculating, than William Holden's in the original version. I felt David's anger at his brother's deceptive romance of Sabrina. And so his punching Linus was a more realistic response.

I highly recommend this movie to all romantics! It also makes a great date film. A great update of an earlier classic, this film may well become a classic in its own right.

Enjoyable, more meaningful/romantic version than original
If you look through the reviews for this version and those for the old B&W, you'll see that there is a little debate going on about which is better. Really, both films have their merits. The original was cute and unpretentious, presenting a fragile Audrey Hepburn in some fashionable clothing (including that absurd gown she dragged through the tennis court scene). But this recent version has the benefit of having a much more appealing hero. Harrison Ford, though he is awkward in romantic roles, is still a far better choice than the clumsy and unattractive Humphrey Bogart. Ford plays the lead, Linus Larrabee, the oldest of two brothers and the responsible (even greedy) one. Greg Kinnear gives a brilliant performance as the younger brother, David, a playboy with only women on his mind. Caught between the two is Sabrina, even more brilliantly played by Julia Ormond. Unlike Hepburn, who presented a shy and awkward Sabrina, Ormond plays the role with not just shyness or insecurity, but an underlying gentleness that fleshes out the character, making her very real and very appealing. Each scene, she delivers just the right amount of insecurity combined with the right amount of emotion, and each line is delivered perfectly. Yet you are never aware that she is acting. The interactions between Kinnear and Ormond have tremendous "chemistry", more so than those she has with Ford. But between Julia and Greg, or rather their characters, there is so much honesty and quite frankly such superb acting that what you are witnessing is not some celebrity actors playing themselves playing a role, but two true actors who make it all look natural. (I know, something Hollywood typically doesn't appreciate.) Their scenes bring a passion and a reality to the film that is rather inspiring -- I'd like to see these two paired again, this time as the lovers and not those who end up "just friends". The storyline is played gently, more for comedy than drama. This film owes a lot to its predecessor, but I have to vote that this is the better, more charming, more emotional and more natural version. The cast of supporting characters is marvelous and expert, including Nancy Marchand as the Larrabee matriarch, John Wood as Sabrina's sensible father, Angie Dickinson and Richard Crenna as the Tysons of Tyson Electronics and a billion dollar merger if David marries their daughter, a physician played by Lauren Holly. Dana Ivey is Mack, Linus' secretary, who has all the funny lines ("We were up to our arms in your underwear drawer. It was like touching the Shroud of Turin.")All the supporting cast do a wonderful job of, well, supporting the stars. The pace never lags, the fun and the drama don't stop. The DVD version has excellent sound and color picture. This is a good investment if you want to see a film that is adult, gently dramatic, clever, and pure pleasure.

My Favorite Movie, Bar None
This movie is wonderful. It takes an already-good plot and updates it -- an Ever After for our classic Cinderella story. The new Sabrina is more self-sufficient, worldly, and her relationship with Linus is much more mature than the variety of relationships portrayed in any movies from Hollywood's Golden Era. It's not that the first Sabrina isn't a wonderful classic, but while that one was classic for its fairy-tale quality, and cute scenes that could never be truly be duplicated, this one meets the demands of an audience who today, wants proof that these are actually two people in love. With Ormond's character, we, the audience, understand and participate in her transition from teenage infatuation to mature love. There are no petty emotional mind-games here, as are so common in Bogart-era romantic comedies.

In addition, the actors themselves add considerably to the movie's success. Kinnear's David matures as well, from playboy to partner, and it is easy to see that his relationship with his brother has played no small part in the formation of his playboy image. Additionally, many of his lines are priceless. Ormond delivers a few ringers as well, including my favorite, when she refers to Linus as "the only living heart donor."

And all this is without speaking of the music. The soundtrack is excellent. The score is classy for its infusion of jazz, yet made passionate by John Williams' unmistakable orchestration. Sting also contributes a haunting ballad. It all fits beautifully into the movie.

Everytime I watch the new Sabrina, it makes me cry. And I'm not the crying type. I highly recommend it -- not as a remake, but on its own merit.

Enjoy it without comparing it to the original
In addition to this movie I've also seen the older one starring Audrey Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart, and I found that both can be enjoyed almost as two different kinds of films. Though not without its moments of drama, the Bogart/Hepburn film was lighter, more sparkling and witty, but also a little more shallow. In that movie, I couldn't understand the attraction between Bogart and Hepburn; they never seem to connect across their age gap.

In this remake of Sabrina, Julia Ormond gives a performance that's more mature and has more depth. Once she goes to Paris and grows up, she truly grows up (unlike Hepburn, who is loveable but too childlike). The love that develops between her character and Harrison Ford's is more believable; the movie takes more time and trouble to develop a plausible relationship between the grown up chaffeur's daughter and the billionaire without a social life. In addition to that, it also has witty dialogue and funny moments, just like the original.

Genuinely terrible remake of movie classic
This is a simply awful remake of the 1950s original with Audrey Hepburn, Humphrey Bogart and William Holden. Their roles are reprised by Julia Ormond, Harrison Ford and Greg Kinnear.

Of the three leads, Greg Kinnear (David Larrabee) does the best job. I think he is a very underrated actor, especially