Amazon.com

Lane Myer (John Cusack) is stuck in a personal hell. A compulsive, adolescent Everyman growing up in Suburbia, USA, not only does he fail to make the prestigious high school ski team (again), but his beloved sweetheart, Beth, also leaves him for Roy, the team's popular, arrogant captain. If this isn't bad enough, he's stuck with a mother who frighteningly experiments--rather than cooks--with food, a brother who builds rockets out of models, and a best friend so desperate for drugs that he settles for snorting powdered snow. Faced with these prospects, Lane opts to end it all ... until he comes up with a ridiculous plan to gain acceptance and win Beth back. Director Savage Steve Holland warps this simple, clichéd premise, letting his wacky imagination twist it into a fairly original, slightly dark, and completely hilarious '80s teen comedy. Not as serious a "suicide-attempt" movie as, say, Harold and Maude but just as funny, the film's more a collection of screwball sketches than a narrative. Holland livens the high jinks with surrealistic fantasy touches, including Jell-O that crawls, a hamburger that sings Van Halen, drawings that mock its creator, Japanese race-car drivers who only speak Howard Cosell, and a psychotic paperboy seeking blood over a missing $2. Cusack puts the whole thing on his shoulders and carries the insanity with another one of his touching, obsessively romantic performances, which, along with Say Anything, The Sure Thing, and One Crazy Summer, made him the quintessential (and appealing) personification of lovestruck adolescence and suffering. --Dave McCoy ... Read more

Reviews (141)

Not a 5 star movie, but it has 5 star appeal!
Director "Savage" Steve Holland does a masterful job of showing how HS aged teens perceive the world around them. And a young John Cusack does a great job as the inwardly tortured teen with the twisted view of reality (funny, but twisted). It is, after all, our perception of reality that is, for us, reality.

John Cusack plays a HS teen obsessed (and I mean OBSESSED!) with his girlfriend. When she dumps him for the captain of the HS ski team it's amazing what happens to and around him.

This movie includes laugh out loud scenes. You'll love his nemesis on the street racing scene, his neighbor "Ricky," and the French foreign exchange student who sees Cusack when he can't see anything else.

Watch for lines that will live forever, like... "Oh, please, don't let it be a bugger." "Gee Ricky, I'm sorry your mom blew up." "Language lessons." "You know...friend." and "I want my two dollars!"

There are, however, students at the HS dance who cannot possibly still be of HS age -- but that's typical for the movies...people want to remember themselves as being older, more mature than any HS students are anywhere -- talk about twisted views of reality!

Anyway, this is a grand movie with lots of wonderful lines, a fun story line, some interesting side trips into Cusack's daydreams, and an ongoing feud between Cusack's dad and the paperboy.

Check it out, it's a 4 star movie with 5 star hilarity.

Alan Holyoak

Can I Date Beth?
Better Off Dead is a small little gem from the mid 80's. With all of the other teen/school comedies of that era, it's no wonder this appealing and funny film got lost in the mix. John Cusack stars as Lane Myer, a normal kid with a not so normal family. His mom is a little off her rocker. She cooks horrendous food and makes deer coats for Christmas. His little brother tries to pick up trashy women. Lane's Dad is battling the paperboy. But, worst of all, Lane doesn't make the ski team and his beloved girlfriend, Beth, dumps him for some pukey captain of the ski team. Then, Lane meets a cute foreign exchange student who's staying with his obese neighbors. Lane tries to win her love as does the son of the family she's staying with. The movie is funny. Dan Schneider, as neighbor Ricky, is downright hilarious. An underrated comedic performance. Cusack, as always, is solid and appealing. The remaining cast includes Curtis(Revenge Of The Nerds)armstrong, Vincent Schiavelli, David Ogden Stiers FROM "Mash", and Kim(True Grit)Darby. There's even a cute animation sequence involving hamburger. You heard me right. The onrunning joke about a psycho paperboy is pretty funny. The best comedy from this film is, as I've mentioned, the
nerdy, overweight nerdy boy Ricky. This is a lost comedy gem that deserves to be exposed again.

Utterly Unbelievable, Lane Myer - Cusack Classic!!!!
John Cusack has done some campy flicks One Crazy Summer and Better Off Dead. This one far exceeds the first. There are so many funny scenes I don't know where to begin. The soundtrack although disappointing on the CD will not disappoint on the DVD. Too bad no additional footage or goodies like that. To me this was John Cusacks best movie.

Favorite Moments (Close your eyes and remember)

1) CHRISTMAS! DO THEY HAVE CHRISTMAS IN FRANCE? CHRISSSSMASSS! Opens picture of Ricky and goes outside and laughs for about 5 minutes on the front step.

2) TWO DOLLARS, PLUS TIP! I don't think there can ever be a more evident line for a movie than this. All you have to say to someone is "TWO DOLLARS!" Chances are if they saw this flick they will say "BETTER OFF DEAD".

3) "DUDE, RIGHT NOW I CAN BE MAKING SOME KILLER EGGNOG FROM LIGHTER FLUID!" "CHICKS WILL GET STERILE JUST LOOKING AT YOU" "BUCK UP LITTLE TROOPER" Charles Demar or Booger as you may have come to know him steals the scene on several occassions.
The funny thing is he teams up with Cusack again in One Crazy Summer.

4) BARNEY RUBBLE ASKING LANE TO GO OUT WITH BETH. Need I say more.

5) IT'S GOT RAISINS IN IT, YOU LIKE RAISINS - With that the green slime crawls off of its plate and across the table.

I could go on for hours, do yourself a favor and buy this movie! If you want to remember the eighties all over again this will bring it all back home. A great cast, script and many, many laughs. Also check out One Crazy Summer, along the same lines.

TWO DOLLARS!

Review #143 (and that should tell you something)
This is a great movie to have around for those nights when you really don't want to think about how it is, but would rather think about how it was. 143 people can't be wrong. John Cusak might be the most easily identified with actor of my generation, (with apologies to Jon Cryer, who makes a good race out of it.) The first time I saw it in the cheap local theater I almost suffered an incontinent moment when Layne (Lane?) uttered, "Gee, I'm sorry your mom blew up, Ricky." It's lines like that, scenes like David Ogden Stiers in the reindeer head coat, and the only known soundtrack appearance of Van Halen's "Everybody Wants Some" that make me go back for this one again and again.

Fun, stupid movie
This is a great rainy day movie, in other words: a movie you don't need to think about too much that'll still make you smile. Take care of who you watch it with, however, as you may find yourself embarrassed to be laughing at the dinner slowly crawling off the table or David Ogden Spears being foiled by the paperboy. ... Read more

Amazon.com

A different sort of Sergio Leone Western, this one takes place during the Mexican Revolution, with more politics than usual. But there's still plenty of action, with Rod Steiger as a cigar-chomping peasant who robs banks to liberate political prisoners, and James Coburn as an Irish terrorist trying to flee from his bitter past. They team up to thwart a sadistic officer and help the cause; redemption for the more subdued Coburn provides added depth. Beware: this is not the longer uncut version (released in Italy) known as Duck, You Sucker, featuring more flashbacks, more politics, and a more unsavory Steiger. But it's terrific fun, even in this shortened version, with Ennio Morricone's moody score and Coburn's most underrated performance. --Bill Desowitz ... Read more

Reviews (21)

Strange and entertaining political Leone western
Originally and horribly titled "Duck, you sucker", Fistful of Dynamite is a very political western circa early '70s. Rod Steiger plays the role of a Mexican bandit who ends up in a partnership with James Coburn.Coburn is an expat Irish revolutionary, complete with dynamite and a motorcycle on the run in Mexico. Both are simply excellent in their roles even though Coburn has a tendency to fall in and out of his Irish accent.

Politics plays a central role in this film. It opens with a quote from Chairman Mao on the nature of violence and revolution. The first scene is chock full of class warfare as Steiger's character is humiliated by the upper-class riders on the stage. Slowly Stieger is converted from bandit to revolutionary by Coburn. This is also one of Leone's most violent films (which is saying a lot); in one scene government troops are shown massacring hundreds in retaliation for rebel attacks.

You don't have to be left wing to enjoy Fistful of Dynamite. Neither side is really pictured in a positive manner; even the rebel leadership is duplicitous and even treasonous. In the end this is a very entertaining film, which has been in the shadow of Leone's other works. Interestingly he originally wanted to call this "Once Upon a Time, a Revolution", the first part of a Once Upon a Time trilogy. And of course don't miss the eerie and downright weird Ennio Morricone score (which I've been looking for since I watched this film).

Great, but where's the full length version?
When first released, this movie was 2 hours and 45 minutes long and entitled 'Duck, You Sucker'. Leone originally intended the film to be part 2 of a 'Once Upon a Time' trilogy ('Once Upon a Time in the West'; 'Once Upon a Time, the Revolution'; and 'Once Upon a Time in America'). However, for some reason the idea was dropped and 'Revolution' turned into the rather unimaginatively titled 'Duck You Sucker', which was then cut down and again retitled 'Fistful of Dynamite' for audiences in the USA.

Two scenes are missing from this version. The scene where Juan meets one of the leaders of the revolution is sorely missed as it gives added depth to the story, as well as balancing out the movie somewhat in terms of its main themes.

Even with the missing parts, this is still (in my opinion) one of Sergio Leone's best movies. The interaction between the two main characters is excellent, and Leone is on top form as he shows how each of the main characters are changed by the influences of the other.

Unlike Sergio Leone's other 'Spaghetti Westerns', this one is a bit more cerebral, and tends to focus more on character development and to a certain extent on political philosophy. Some don't like this, but I find that out of all of Leone's movies, this is the one that I always find myself coming back to, which is why I finally purchased it on videotape.

I hope that sometime in the near future, this forgotten classic will be reissued in widescreen DVD format, and restored to its original length. As I said before, the deleted scenes help the story, and widescreen format is essential, given Leone's penchant for super close-ups.

Italian restored DVD release far exceeds the MGM R2 DVD
Possibly my favorite of the Leone films. Please note that the R2 Italian restored DVD release of this film is FAR superior to the R2 Uk release in terms of both picture and sound. Look for the screenshot comaprisons on the web, they're out there. The Italians have fully restored the picture and have remastered the soundtrack in 5.1 dolby but unfortunately is in the Italian language only with NO subtitles whatsoever. The Italian release also includes a short documentary on Leone as well. Let's just hope that the powers that be can 'acquire' the Italian restored transfer for the Region 1 release. The films of Sergio Leone deserve nothing less...

What about a DVD release?
This movie is one among my favorites.
I have been waiting for its DVD release for some 4 years!
It is not yet released but it seems that,
under the italian relase title "Duck you sucker",
they are planing to.

So go and register for it, if we are numerous enough they might release it finally???

Very good Leone western
A Fistful of Dynamite is a very enjoyable western full of plenty of action that. A Mexican bandit, Juan, robs a stagecoach with his gang of family members when he runs into IRA fugitive and demolitions expert, John Mallory, on his motorcycle traveling across the desert. At first, they do not get along, but soon begin working together. Juan and John become involved in the Mexican Revolution and Juan inadvertently frees hundred of political prisoners from what he thought was a bank. Eventually, the two become heroes of the revolution. Along the way, a sadistic officer with his well-armed militia begins to track them down for all of the trouble they have caused. This is a very exciting movie with plenty of good action scenes as well as great, fully-developed characters. A Fistful of Dynamite is not Sergio Leone's best movie, but it is still very good and well worth a watch if you can find a copy.

Rod Steiger and James Coburn are great together as the two men who team up to work together during the Mexican Revolution. Their friendship is the high point of the movie along with the impressive action sequences, most notably the bridge explosion halfway through the movie. I've always thought this was one of Coburn's best performances, and Steiger is no slouch either. This is a great spaghetti western that does slow some with politics, but it is still a great movie. I hope this one gets an official DVD release since the VHS copies are getting harder to find. The VHS is of decent quality, but deserves a better release. For a great action movie with excellent characters and action, check out A Fistful of Dynamite! ... Read more

Reviews (25)

One for Joe & One for the Lizard
Also known as ANDY WARHOL'S FRANKENSTEIN or ANDY WARHOL PRESENTS FRANKENSTEIN, this early 1970s film is associated with Warhol only in the sense that the pop artist put up the money for the project and because it featured several actors--particularly Joe Dallesandro--who had appeared in various Warhol "factory" films. The film is a calculated effort to create a cult film, even down to deliberate courting of the X rating it received at the time of its release.

The Baron Frankenstein (Udo Kier) is married to Baroness Katrin (Monique van Vooren); they have two children and reside in the obligatory isolated castle complete with secret laboratory, where Frankenstein and his assistant (Arno Juerging) conduct their work. In this particular case, they seek to create both a male and female "monster" for breeding purposes. Unfortunately, when Frankenstein collects a shepherd's head for his male monster, he runs afoul of the shepherd's friend Nicholas (Joe Dallesandro.) The film gives every character a far-out sexual spin: the Baron and Baroness are actually brother and sister and their children are not only the result of their incestuous relationship, they themselves give every appearance of following in the family tradition; the Baron's sex life consists of unfastening the stitches of his female monster and... ahem... shall we say enjoying the pleasures of her internal organs; sexually abandoned by her husband-brother, the Baroness takes lovers (and they are spied upon by the children)--and then decides she wants to fool around the male monster; the lab assistant wants to imitate the Baron's explorations of the female monster; Nicholas rolls around naked with every woman in the village. And so on.

The film is obviously intended to be a bloody, grotesque, and erotic black comedy--but while it's certainly bloody enough and quite grotesque, it isn't greatly erotic and it's not particularly funny. It is also very sloppily made, and worse still it is as slow as molasses in January. The absolute best thing that can be said for FLESH FOR FRANKENSTEIN is that Joe Dallesandro, who can only be described as a rough-trade dream, has a scene where a lizard runs across his naked [behind]. One star for Joe and one star for the lizard. Recommendation: rent it before you buy it, because for most people one viewing will be more than enough.

WARNING: Do NOT Eat While Viewing This Film
One would be well-advised to heed my warning. This is one of the most violent, perverse, and laugh-out-loud (intentionally) funny versions of the Frankenstein myth. It's also one of my favorite movies (I like it better than its sister production BLOOD FOR DRACULA, though most tend to rate that one a bit higher) and, as far as I'm concerned, the best film to come out of the Andy Warhol-Paul Morrisey collaborations of the 60s and 70s. Udo Kier is astounding as the mad Baron Frankenstein, Arno Juerging is great as his idiot assistant Otto, and Monique Van Vooren holds her own as Frankenstein's wife-sister, whose insatiable sexual appetite is fed by hunky Joe Dallesandro. Poor Mary Shelley could never have imagined that one day her Gothic horror novel would one day evolve into something as hideous as this. But it's all in good fun, as the Baron and Otto sew up beautiful corpses and talk science in the lab. One of the Baron's hobbies is to make love to his female zombie (Morrisey mercifully spares us the more graphic details in this scene). He and Otto go to a bordello for the perfect male "whose overriding urges are sensual". But - oops! - they pick the wrong stud to behead. Instead of Dallesandro, they pick his friend, an aspiring monk who really didn't want to be at a bordello in the first place. When the Baron and Otto find that their male creature is frigid, the plot thickens. This film is NOT for people who are squeamish. The sex and violence is all of such a perverse nature that it isn't the kind of thing you want to sit down and watch with grandma. It's filled with campy humor and super-gory FX (imagine it as it premiered in 3-D!). But, in spite of the usual Warhol-crowd tomfoolery, there is a very real sense of quality to the proceedings. Gorgeously photographed, with a sumptuous score and fine period detail, this is a little too well-mounted to be written off as simply "a camp comedy". Ironically, the final scene is genuinely tragic! Interesting bit of film-buff trivia: This film (as well as DRACULA) was shot at the same time, in the same place (Italy), and with much of the same crew as Polanski's little-known sex comedy WHAT?. Polanski, who has a brief but hilarious cameo in DRACULA, let Warhol's crowd move into his Italian villa, but their eccentricities eventually drove him off. (As he has it in his autobiography: "They were a nice enough bunch, if a bit camp...")

Ain't got nothing if you ain't got love
Udo Kier, Udo freaking Kier. Perhaps my absolute favorite bad actor bringing new life to the story of Frankenstein, utterly unshackled by any semblance of the book itself. Here, we have the anthropomorphic vision of a petulant, tantrum-throwing Baron Frankenstein and his plan to create not one but TWO wombies, male and female, to procreate and spawn a master race of wombies to answer to the will of Udo Kier alone. This scheme is more or less similiar to the one favored by Bela Legosi in the Ed Wood saga, Bride of the Monster. Playing devil's advocate, I never pictured a male wombie with too many active sperm cells, nor a female wombie with an overly active reproductive system, but, who's splitting hairs.

At the outset of the movie, Udo does in fact have the female wombie fully completed, but he needs the final component to complete her male counterpart. To finish his male wombie, Udo in fact needs the proper "nazzum", and nazzums, evidently, are reasonably difficult to acquire. So, Baron Frankenstein, with his sidekick, Otto (the same guy that played his sidekick in Blood for Dracula) sets out for his nazzum. He needs a vigorous nazzum, the kind that frequents brothels and enjoys fornicating with any and every type of woman. At this stage, we have the same slouching Communist stable boy from Blood for Dracula, and his good buddy who wants to go join a convent or something. In the dark, Udo mistakes the the buddy, rather than the whoremongering Communist, for the nazzum he wants, and ends up, much to his despair, with a homosexual nazzum. Great Scott!!!

So, Frankenstein throws the two wombies together, kiss him, kiss him, kiss him, kiss him, KISS HIM, but unfortunately the male wombie with the insufficient nazzum ignores the female wombie. In desperation, Udo throws the male wombie to his wife, Baroness Frankenstein (who looks a little bit like Skeletor with a blonde wig), but, not only does the wombie fail to become aroused, he kills the baroness as well. Good golly miss molly, what a waste! Simutaneously, Otto, the hackneyed sidekick, learns that he has his own Mortal Kombat Fatality--pull out their guts and let them see them before they die trick--which he promptly launches against the housekeeper and the female wombie when they both dispassionately spurn his groping Torgoesque affections.

Udo, disenchanted, runs into the laboratory, kills Otto, then fails to defend himself against the vengeful male wombie. My favorite line: "My experiments will go on. I will not die in wain..."

Campy and gory telling of the famous story
Apparently "Flesh for Frankenstein" has become some sort of a revisionist masterpiece for the high brow set or those impressed by the Eurotrash excentricities of the Andy Warhol moniker that was once attached to this film. Well, I really love this film, but I refuse to accept all the vapid praise that is now being gushed about the genius of the film and its director: Paul Morrissey.

Flesh for Frankenstein is a retelling of the famous Mary Shelley story. Mary Shelley wrote it as a heavily veiled allegory for the evils of then modern science and the hubris of Man. In the DVD extras, Morrissey and some film historian would have us believe that Morrissey was consciously attempting to throw his own slant on the allegory angle. He would have us believe that he was intentionally going over the top with the gore and the sex as an affront to the liberal hippy movement which was clamboring for more of it. This sounds delightfully poignant until you take a closer look at how this film got made.

Morrissey was given creative control to direct several Andy Warhol financed films in Europe. The money that Warhol provided was certainly not without its strings attached though. In fact, Warhol was the king of creative marketing. He and his Factory were making films for fun not profit. That they made money was due to the fact that he had already engratiated himself with the artsy crowd in New York with his airbrushed art and his advertising art (i.e. the now famous Campbell's Soup can). Warhol never took himself all that seriously. He laughed himself all the way to the bank.

Morrissey was doing the same with these films. He was pushing the envelope in gore and sex, but was it for noble artistic intentions? I seriously doubt it. However, since he narrates that it was all intentional, we have no other factual basis to counter his claim.

However, I think, as with many of the now famous artists and poets, writers and filmmakers - their work is famous not because of its original genius, but rather because somebody who has the ear of those who are in power, yet gullible, promoted them as such at the time of their creation or after the fact.

Allowing the film to stand on its own is no crime. When we take a historical look at how cinema was being presented at the time, Morrissey was actually far ahead of his time. That much is true. Hammer Films in England had long been derided as going too far with the gore in their horror films and since they were still going strong at the time this film was made, they really were still the only company doing such films. Along comes Morrissey and he really blew the established film standards to pieces by making this film. Excessive gore, nudity - both male and female, sex acts only slightly veiled, and foul language - it was all in this single film.

The sets and costuming are really masterpieces. The clothing is dynamite when you think of the budget that Morrissey had to work with. And even moreso, the sets are out of this world. They are authentic locations throughout Europe. The set aspect also has me wondering when this film was "really" made. I ask this because the Dr's laboratory is obviously the inspiration for Lou Adler's Frankenfurter's laboratory in "The Rocky Horror Picture Show". TRHPS actually duplicates this set in great detail, down to the glass tank, the tile walls, and the statuary in the room.

What makes this film unable to hold the title of great is the acting, the script, and the editing. I don't buy it that the poor acting is intentional. I think it was all they could get and since the people in charge didn't have any real filmmaking background or lots of money, they simply couldn't get capable actors. Udo Kier, they would like us to believe, is intentionally acting over the top. I've directed lots of regional theatre and I can assure you he's not acting over the top - he's just not a good actor. He has proven that in the 30 years since this film that, while he is better now than before, he is no actor. Dallesandro - he was Warhol's personal pet project. Warhol insisted he be used - and arguably, because of "Flesh", Dallesandro was popular in Europe. Monique Van Voohren - is only one of the worst actresses ever to be filmed. As the both the Dr's wife and sister, she simply cannot do much other than bear her body with belief (the sister/wife aspect is yet another aspect taken for TRHPS). The character of Otto is the only one who can get away with the poor acting in this film - because his over the top style is somewhat expected for the mad scientist's assistant. The "monster" is intended to be more of a stud puppy hunk than a monster (another steal from Richard O'Brien for TRHPS, I think). In fact, the creepiest aspect of the film are the Dr's children. They creep about like little ghouls throughout the film.

The extremely gory climax of the film is, frankly, Morrissey's masterpiece for the flim. With this scene, he obviously takes a page from Shakespeare. The set is simply strewn with bloody corpses in various states. And then there is the anticipation he leaves of with - of what is to come - as the children menacingly begin to come into their own scalpels gleaming.

I won't give it all away, because it is a really fun film. I've bought it for myself and I know I'd previously seen it five times. So my harsh criticism of the high brow aspects of it don't diminish my enjoyment of the film as a whole. It's really a cool film to see, if you know what history is involved in its making.

an interesting and disturbing film
this review is for the Criterion Collection edition of the film.

This film along with "blood for dracula" were filmed back to back in Italy. This one the more controversal of the two originally received an X rating by the MPAA. Is is based very loosely on Mary shelly's novel and follows Dr. Frankenstein creating a male and female zombie and his attempts to get them to breed.

Udo Kier playing the role of Dr. Frankenstein is excelent because the actor is German and has a great German accent.

The Criterion collection has audio commentary and an 18 minute slideshow with photos from the film and its production along woth an audio soundtrack of music from the film. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Director Sam Fuller's biggest success of its time (and, superficially at least, his most conventional film) is the 1953 noir effort Pickup on South Street. Candy (Jean Peters) has her purse picked on the subway by small-time thief and ex-con Skip (Richard Widmark), neither of them realizing that the purse contains microfilm bound for Communist spies and that they are being watched the whole time by Federal agents. The New York police and the Feds catch up with Skip and try to cajole him into turning over the microfilm, but as he's one of Fuller's "outsider" antihero protagonists, the patriotic angle cuts no ice with him. He plays both sides against the middle when he finds out that the Communists are involved, hoping to make a big score off the deal, but eventually he comes around when he realizes that he's smitten with Candy. Finally Skip plays ball with the authorities, but is it out of his love for both his friend Moe and Candy, or is he swayed by the patriotic urgings of the FBI, or does it just come from some inner core of decency? You decide. When Skip is asked, "Do you know what treason is?" he smirks, "Who cares?"; when the Feds try to appeal to his patriotism, he sneers through several layers of Sinatra cool, "Are you waving the flag at me?" Pickup is set almost entirely in the garbage-strewn alleys, grimy subways, seedy waterfront dives, and gloomy streets of New York City; it's marked by extremely lengthy takes and fluid, mobile camera work. The closing scene when Skip tracks down another character in the subway and administers a brutal beating to him is one of the more violent scenes you'll find in '50s film noir. --Jerry Renshaw ... Read more

Reviews (20)

"You know people who know people."
"Pick Up On South Street" is yet another great film from cult director, Sam Fuller. Pickpocket Skip McCoy (Richard Widmark), a three-time loser, is on probation for only a week when he picks the wallet from a woman's handbag on the subway. He thinks he's lifting money, but he actually steals microfilm--copies of classified government documents containing a patent for a chemical formula. The woman, hard and mouthy, Candy (Jean Peters) is unaware of the true nature of the envelope she is about to pass to a communist agent. She thinks she's just doing her old boyfriend, Joey, a favour.

Soon Candy's ex, the police, and communist agents are all looking for Skip. Everyone--sooner or later--contacts the best snitch in town, Moe (Thelma Ritter). Moe's dread of being buried in Potter's field when she longs for a fancy plot in Long Island ensures that she'll sell information--after all, "every extra buck has a meaning of its own." Moe may have her price, but she doesn't do business with 'commies.' The film emphasizes the idea that thievery is one thing, but treason is a different matter. In the film, the criminal characters (Skip, Moe, and Lightning Louie) all live on the fringes of society in out-of-the-way dives and hovels. Their survival is based on not being too picky about how they make ends meet, so they have a certain tolerant co-existence with each other.

This film works so well due to the fine characterizations. There's Skip--he's not fussy who buys the film--and the whole patriotism argument just doesn't matter as far as he's concerned. The police detective in charge of the case isn't exactly an old friend, and so Skip's not about to hand over the stolen film. This is my personal favourite of all Sam Fuller's films. On the surface, it may seem that Fuller is paying court to the fear of Communism with this film's plot. But protagonist Skip McCoy isn't part of the society he's suddenly supposed to respect and protect. He's on the outside looking in, and his "what's in it for me attitude" leads him to make some tough choices. He's not a patriot--he's a survivor. Candy is as hard as nails--she's hardly naive or innocent, but even she's shocked to find herself mixed up with Communists. Thelma Ritter in an Oscar nominated role for best supporting actress is amazing. Her scenes are incredible. I love the scene when Moe questions the police detectives about Skip's technique. Also the amazingly violent subway chase was brilliantly executed. This Criterion DVD contains many extras that make the extra expense worthwhile for the film aficionado. There's an interview with Sam Fuller and trailers for his films (some of them are now sadly out-of-print). For the Sam Fuller fan, this Criterion DVD package is both fascinating and essential--displacedhuman

top-level film noir
Better than most film noir entries, Samuel Fuller's PICKUP ON SOUTH STREET explores the life of a pickpocket who gets in over his head. Skip McCoy picks a pocket on the subway, and gets classified government documents for his troubles.

The police convince a woman to help them find Skip and the microfilm, and heavy drama ensues. Thelma Ritter is especially good as the informant. Today her acting would be considered over-the-top and unconvincing, but for the time, it was a standout performance. Widmark is excellent as the pickpocket, with his portrayal only rivalled by his work in KISS OF DEATH (also a must-see film noir).

As a landmark film for Widmark and Ritter, as well as for director Samuel Fuller, PICKUP ON SOUTH STREET is a must-see for fans of 1940s cinema and film noir.

ken32

missed opportunity
Made during the height of the cold war hysteria,
this film gets sidetracked by mindless red baiting.
It also descends into cheesy melodrama on a couple of
occasions marring the pacing of the movie. It's too
bad but pickup doesn't live up to its reputation as
top notch noir.

A 1950's classic
For those who appreciate the fine acting of Thelma Ritter, this film is a must-have (along with Alfred Hitchcock's "Rear Window"). Her portrayal as the informant is a classic role for one of the best supporting actresses Hollywood has ever seen.

Richard Widmark also lends one of the greatest performances of his career, right up there with his roles in "Kiss of Death" (1947) and "Judgement at Nuremburg" (1961). The Criterion release provides a magnificent restoration of this underrated film noir gem.

I am rather baffled as to the clueless wonder at Amazon.com who tagged this motion picture with an NC-17 rating. Either that person didn't see the film, or the lights are on but nobody's home. "Pickup on South Street" isn't a skin flick. It is one of the greatest dramatic thrillers of the 1950's.

Get this DVD on Criterion. It's an essential classic for any serious film collector.

A top notch film noir
Skip Mc Coy (Richard Widmark) is a person without colective importance; a rough pickpocket , a scroungy pretty gangster who sneeks a look into a woman's handbag, turns up some microfilm and finds himself dealing with communist agents.
This is a well made film, with a lot of issues. Moe (Thelma Ritter)overtakes this role as a street peddler who sells information.
A film which reveals as a few, the sordid and sinister underworld linked with the spy world which is blackmailed by a pedestrian thief.
Fuller's view is incisive, bitter and ironical. Nevetheless the film has unforgettable funny situations.
Thelma Ritter was a very talented actress and bowever, she never won an Academy Award ; but her shinning presence gives to the clever script that touch of class and outrageous fierce character; and of course don't forget adding the charismatical performance of Richard Widmark.
One of the most imaginative and powerful film noir made in any age. ... Read more

Reviews (185)

A few scenes more
Sergio Leone proudly served up his finest spaghetti Western to a Roman audience in the final days of 1966. The premiere print of "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" sprawled over three hours in telling its tale of three desperados in search of gold amid the chaos of the Civil War.

The men from United Artists also were on the trail of treasure. American audiences, they knew, would not sit for a 178-minute Western, especially not an import starring a TV actor (Clint Eastwood).

Out came 17 minutes, and so was breach-born the version of "Good, Bad, Ugly" that has endured as a male-bonding touchstone for four decades. Looking to make things right (and to mine more gold), MGM a few years ago decided to re-create the storied film that unspooled in Rome that night. The restored, full-length English version of Leone's epic is worth every dollar in this two-disc DVD Collector's Set.

Sure, Leone's film loses much on the small screen -- its borderline-surrealistic vistas shot in Spain are legendary -- but the DVD's visuals are clean, with decent contrasts (anamorphic widescreen, 2.35:1). Compared to MGM's 1998 release, there's a dramatic reduction in flatness, speckling and miscellaneous wear. The 5.1 Dolby Digital audio has its moments but isn't up to the standards of the imagery.

The DVD medium is, of course, unrivaled at presenting the history of complicated productions like these. MGM's set gets that job done, for the most part. Eastwood biographer Richard Schickel does the heavy lifting in a commentary that, amazingly, runs on fumes only near the end of three hours. The 2002 restoration project is covered in an 11-minute docu that goes over the added/restored scenes. They mostly just smooth out the narrative, but it's hard to reimagine the film without them.

"Good, Bad, Ugly" is as closely associated with composer Ennio Morricone as with Leone. Film music historian Jon Burlingame talks about the maestro in a short featurette and in a more-detailed audio lecture. No explanation is given for Morricone's lack of participation on the DVD, and you get the feeling he's been downplayed for not playing along.

There are two types of people, my friend......
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly is the classic spaghetti western that completes Sergio Leone's Dollars Trilogy. This is personally my favorite over the other two, although all three are great. The movie follows three men in their pursuit of $200,000 in gold. The story is set in the Civil War in southern Texas. The adventures of the three characters include a Union prison camp, a huge battle reminiscent of World War I, and of course the famous showdown in the Sad Hill Cemetery with Tuco running frantically around the graves looking for the one marked "Arch Stanton."

All three main characters give excellent performances here. Clint Eastwood stars as Blondie, Eli Wallach as Tuco, and Lee Van Cleef as Angel Eyes. The fourth star has to be Ennio Morricone's soundtrack. The music is fabulous throughout and well worth buying the soundtrack. Also starring are Mario Brega, Luigi Pistilli, and Aldo Sambrell. Leone's use of extreme close-ups and epic landscapes are excellent throughout.

The DVD is awesome and well worth the purchase. It contains the widescreen presentation, excellent color and sound, theatrical trailer, and 14 minutes of never-before-seen footage with English subtitles. This footage includes scenes that help explain how Angel Eyes ends up in a Union prison camp and also how Blondie later joins up with Angel Eyes' gang. After seeing the movie so many times without this footage, it was odd to see it, but still very entertaining. A must have for Spaghetti western fans!

Brilliant Restoration!
"The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" is Sergio Leone's magnum opus. An audacious undertaking, it would have flopped miserably in any other director's hands. Only someone so commited to his artistic vision as Leone could have pulled off this bombastic pageantry of human nature in all its facets, its capacity for cynicism, greed, bloodlust, revenge, heroism, redemption and honour.

This movie must be *experienced.* Put the DVD in, turn the stereo all the way up and let it pummel you from the moment the Lardani titles blast onto the screen in a blaze of Technicolor fury. The montage of colour, interspersed by stark black and white visages of Eastwood, Van Cleef and Wallach is a tough act to follow, like Saul Bass' mesmerising titles for Hitchcock's "Vertigo."

The wait is now over! Last year, MGM/UA issued a restored 35mm print, which showed at the Film Forum in Manhattan. First restored in Italian by Cineteca Nazionale, the English-language restoration was spearheaded by Martin Scorsese, whose efforts with the Film Preservation Foundation have helped fund preservation of America's celluloid heritage. Both Eli Wallach and Clint Eastwood returned to the sound studio to dub new dialogue for approximately 20 minutes of restored footage. Both sound a little older and scratchier, but these added scenes help to explain both Tuco's and Angel Eyes' gangs and some plot points that were previously unclear. However, they both sound great! (Van Cleef's voice was dubbed by a professional voiceover artist, and sounds almost on target). The movie now has the true feel of a sprawling epic, one that's earned its right to take its time.

This special edition DVD features the movie restored to its original length in the Italian version, and comes jam packed with interviews with Eastwood, Wallach, producer Alberto Grimaldi and -- most importantly -- Mickey Knox, who wrote the English language dialogue. Knox crafted lines that lived up to the larger than life screenplay. You'd swear the original was in English, the dialogue is so perfectly tailored!

But the vision is singularly Leone's. It starts slowly, as a band of bounty killers home in on their prey, small-time bandit Tuco Ramirez (THE UGLY, played by the venerable Eli Wallach). They pile through a saloon door, then the camera imediately pans away laterally. Suddenly, his body hurtling through the front window in a rain of glass, Tuco bursts onto the street -- in what has to be the most absurd grand entrance in screen history -- revolver in one hand, a chicken leg in the other. It's total chutzpah on Leone's and Wallach's part.

If you think *that* can't be topped, watch Wallach's entire performance. Animated is putting it mildly. More than a performance, Wallach is a one-man band, nay, Army. Never has such a selfish, petty, ratty and shifty little man been played so larger than life. Wallach smirks, scurries, grimaces, chuckles, shouts, bellows and slyly oils his way across the screen in what has got to be the hammiest performance ever by a method actor. Or *any* actor: He makes Orson Welles, Burt Lancaster and Charles Laughton look like the grey and sullen cast of Woody Allen's "Interiors," he's so alive with passion that he literally sweats his performance out through the filthy pores on his stubble-ridden face. And he's wonderful!

If that's a tough act to follow, you haven't met the bad. They don't come any badder than Angel Eyes, Lee Van Cleef's hired killer who's got ice water running through his veins. Van Cleef is ruthless, bold and heartless. Riding out of nowhere onto a doomed man's rancho, Angel Eyes pays a visit, carrying out a murder for hire. The price: $500. But the victim offers him $1000 to look the other way. No dice: Angel Eyes isn't in it for the money. Rather, he's a man who loves his work, and always sees the job through. So, the poor sod dies anyway.

Clint Eastwood is as cool as a cucumber as The Man With No Name (but really one with sort of a name, in this case "Blondie," which is Wallach's moniker for him). It's fun watching the ongoing relationship between Blondie and Tuco as bounty hunter and prey. In another life, they would have been great pals, but in this life ("we're all alone in this world," Tuco confesses to Blondie, half seriously, half cynically) their love of money is thicker than friendship. So, they invent ingenious and cruel ways to exact revenge of each other.

It's during one of Tuco's sadistic plots - in which he marches the pale-skinned Eastwood across 100 miles of scorching desert - that the plot finally comes to a head: A driverless stagecoach full of wounded Confederates happens across their path, and through a twist of fate, Tuco and Blondie each have two halves of a secret which, if put together, will make them a quarter of a million dollars richer. But, without each other the two halves are worthless. Thus does Tuco do a 180 from brutal executioner to Blondie's would-be saviour. Now that he could be rich, he suddenly realizes how valuable their friendship is.

It's not before long that they wind up with Angel Eyes, as they're captured by Union soldiers. At the prisoner of war camp, a deadly game of cat and mouse begins. Van Cleef is now more restrained and less thuggish as he deals with Tuco to extract the secret; his henchman Wallace (Mario Brega, a Leone stalwart), pummels it out of Tuco.

In epic fashion, after a shootout in a deserted town and a bridge demolition that explodes across the screen, Tuco, Blondie and Angel Eyes make their way to the cemetery where the treasure is buried. In a fanfare of brass, percussion and chorus, the three face each other down in the cemetery plaza. It's a gorgeous and cathartic set piece. Credit must go not only to composer Ennio Morricone but also to musical director Bruno Nicolai, who conducts the score con fuoco.

The West as it never ws
It took an Italian to revolutionize the American Western. Everything was strange and new about the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Perhaps the strangest was that it was not a contest between good and evil -- the white hats and the black hats -- as was the typical western, but instead had a plot driven by the greed of the three characters -- one of whom is charitably called good, the other two certifiably bad and ugly.

The music is extraordinary -- one of the best and most original soundtracks ever. The photography is weird -- no one had ever focused so close-up on people's eyes or the pores in their skin. The violence is brutal and surreal. The three-cornered gunfight is one of the great scenes from cinema. The scenery is off. It doesn't look like the American west -- and in fact it isn't. The movie was made in Spain. The characters are incredibly seedy. Most of them look like they took a bath about a decade ago and haven't changed their clothes since. And nobody gets the girl -- because there isn't any girl.

I love this movie! It makes my all-time top ten list. Clint Eastwood is cool beyond belief; Eli Wallach is a hoot; and Lee Van Cleef is really, really bad.

"Such ingratitude after all the times I saved your life..."
"The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" is Sergio Leone's epic masterpiece. While it is part of his Spaghetti Western Trilogy( all three films have different characters and plots), the film stands on its own and really shows you how good a movie can really be. This movie has it all. It has action, drama and even some comic relief in it. It is a timeless classic that is unforgettable. When I first saw it, I was a little kid and couldn't truly appreciate it as I can now at age 22.

Blondie (The Man with No Name) isn't your typical good guy. He mainly does things that suits his own agenda. However, when compared to the murderous Angel Eyes and the greedy Tuco, Blondie is saint. This tale involves bloodshed, shoot-outs, search for treasure, and double-crossing. And it all takes place while the Civil War is going on, which makes things a lot more "interesting" for the notorious three. The West has never been wilder or more unpredictable than it is now. With an incredible score, excellent acting, and superb story-telling, this is one memorable film that you will never forget.

As I said in the beginning, the first time I saw this was when I was a little kid. When I just recently purchased this new edition of the movie, it truly was like I was watching it for the first time. Coming from a guy who isn't a big fan of Westerns (I don't mind them, but I don't watch too many of them), I absolutely LOVED this film. In fact, I wanted to give it a standing ovation when it was all said and done due to how moved I was by it. This really is filmmaking at its finest. I wasn't terribly impressed with Leone's "Once Upon a Time in America," but he is absolutely flawless with this amazing and timeless Western. It is slower than the second film ("For a Few Dollars More"), but I think that makes this all the better. The build up of tension is much more present in this film, and you really get the sense that these characters are real people. Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef and Eli Wallach are brilliant in their roles, and a lot of props need to go to Lee Van Cleef as he is absolutely chilling in his role.

This new edition really does the film the justice it deserves. The film has been restored to the director's original vision as much as possible, giving you an extra 18 minutes. You will notice the added scenes as the voices have been re-dubbed (the first time you will notice this will throw you, as I think that specific part has the worst re-dubbing, but the other added scenes are done a lot better, even if you still notice it). The picture looks incredible and the sound is great. Extras included are commentary from Richard Schickel, a couple of documentaries and featurettes, poster gallery, deleted scenes and the original theatrical trailer. Along with the nice packaging, you get an 8-page booklet that includes pictures from the film along with Roger Ebert's most recent review of the film. And, you get some mini-posters included inside the packaging as well. A superior edition of the movie, without question.

"The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" is a pure triumph in filmmaking and should be seen by everybody at least once. Don't let the fact that this is a Western throw you. I think this can be enjoyed by everybody, and even by those who are not big fans of Westerns. A film filled with authentic emotion and action, this is one that shouldn't be missed by anyone. I LOVE this movie, and I cannot express that enough. -Michael Crane ... Read more

Amazon.com

Poor Joan Crawford just can't get a break. She hacks her husband to pieces and is sent away to a mental hospital; then after she comes back and tries to adjust to a normal life, there's more ax-swinging and more noggins rolling. Her pretty sculptress daughter (Diane Baker) just wants Mom to return to society and a happy, well-adjusted life... or does she?The plot is a little trite and predictable, the direction a bit staid, but it's all Joan's show anyway. Obviously director William Castle told her to play up her character's insanity, and Crawford turns the knob on the acting meter up to 10, then breaks it off and throws it away. She spectacularly mugs her way through the whole film, abruptly changing from severe schoolmarm to trampy vamp and back again several times. The scene where Mom meets her daughter's fiancée for the first time is particularly memorable; Mom guzzles half an iced-tea glass full of bourbon, then crawls all over the boyfriend while the viewer squirms uncomfortably. Back in '64, lucky moviegoers were given little cardboard axeswhen this feature made its run in the theaters. Sadly, the cardboard axes arelong gone, but this is still highly recommended for fans of Crawford, Castle,and high-powered thespianism in general. --Jerry Renshaw ... Read more

Reviews (47)

Whatever Happened to Mildred Pierce?
Joan Crawford plays Lucy Harbin, a woman who has been institutionalized for 20 years, after having hacked her unfaithful husband and his girlfriend to pieces with an axe. She is reunited with her estranged daughter, Carol (played by Diane Baker, who specialized in playing devious females at the time). Carol encourages her mother to dress like she did 20 years earlier,i.e. flower-printed dresses, jingly charm bracelets, and a black, 40s-style wig. Lucy does, and watch out! In what is my favorite scene in the film, Joan, looking like the world's oldest hooker, comes on to her daughter's handsome YOUNG fiance. It is almost obscene to watch this, but try and take your eyes off the screen! Mysterious axe-murders begin to take place. Joan's psychiatrist, (played by Mitchell Cox, Vice-President of Pepsi!)sleazy farmhand Leonard Kraus, played by George Kennedy, and then Carol's future father-in-law, played by Howard St. John. Naturally, we assume it's Joan, right? Wrong! I won't tell who the real murderer is, but I DID drop a clue earlier on. William Castle directed this Robert "Psycho" Bloch- scripted opus, and it is just what you'd expect from Castle-low-budget, full of cheap shocks, and just plain FUN. Miss Crawford is a hoot to watch, especially in her later films, such as this one. The film also has an entertaining cast, which includes Rochelle Hudson, Leif Ericson, and Edith Atwater, as Carol's bitchy future mother-in-law.

Mommy Dearest Loses her head, and so does everyone else!
This was Joan Crawford's big comeback film and she puts her all into this Camp Classic! If she doesn't get her way heads will roll. Written by Psycho creator Robert Bloch and directed by William Castle, Crawford gives an Academy Award performance in this B horror film. Her daughter played by Diane Baker takes her in after Lucy Harbin (Crawford) gets out of a mental ward after having chopped off the 6,000,000 dollar man's head (Lee Majors).
When her doctor (played by a non-actor Pepsi executive) comes to take her back to the asylum axes and heads again meet each other. We even get some good scenes with a young and non-fat George Kennedy as a lowlife who does his own take on Marie Antoinette.
The DVD version has some classic head-chopping outtakes as well as a "making of Straitjacket" short.
This was 1963 and though the plot and especially the "twist" ending is ridiculous its got some good surrealism that proved a harbinger of better films later in the decade. If you want to see one of the most hilarious Camp Classics this is the one. If you want to see Crawford in a great performance in a less than great role here it is.

Joan Crawford as Norman Bates
When William Castle (the director of the gimmick classics "The Tingler" and "13 Ghosts") saw Psycho, he liked it so much that he hired the writer (Robert Bloch) to create this gem. Unlike most of Castle's other famous movies, this one doesn't really have a cheesy gimmick, unless you count Joan Crawford decapitating people with an axe as a gimmick. Yes it has definite camp value, but it's a surprisingly well made horror movie that contains many genuinely suspenseful scenes. Joan Crawford's over-the-top performance in this movie is a great example of why she has such a strong cult following today.

The DVD is enhanced for widescreens and the print is in very good condition. Although the audio is only mono, it sounds very good. The DVD also contains a very good documentary on the making of this movie titled "Battle Axe".

MOTHER AND DAUGHTER
In watching this movie for the first time in almost 40 years, I found myself wondering why I liked it the first time around and again in re-watching. Joan Crawford was undoubtedly a "star" in the truest sense of the word; in the special features, William Castle and Diane Baker both confirm the many demands and conditions Ms. Crawford placed on the film. Her performance is definitely camp, but watching her play someone yearning for her youth, it hit home how Crawford's real life was shaping into the fall of a movie goddess.
But in the film, notice the strength Crawford and Baker give in their reunion. Without a word, the two actresses strongly display the range of emotions they are both feeling.
Diane Baker, who unlike one reviewer mentioned, had to this point played the innocent young ingenue, e.g. Best of Everything, Journey to the Center of the Earth, and in this one, she capitalizes on this innocence, so that when the venom comes, it's quite a transition. Seeing a young Lee Majors in his pre Big Valley days just reminds me how much time has elapsed!
Castle's films were gawdy, manipulative, but above all, they were entertaining.
Joan Crawford and Diane Baker are to be commended for rising above the inevitable and making this a classic camp film.

Fascinating, embarassing, and ultimately sad.
Strait-Jacket was one of my very first Joan Crawford movies. I had seen The Damned Don't Cry, Mildred Pierce, and Baby Jane by the time I was 11 and was absolutely in love with Joan Crawford from seeing her movies on AMC. To me she was the most beautiful, talented, and rather tragic of creatures. Of course, I expected Strait-Jacket to be of the same quality as Baby Jane. What a disappointment it was to me at that time, but now that I look back I see that this film introduced me to another side of Joan Crawford; the rather lonely, sad last years of her life.

The Crawford of Baby Jane is remarkably different than the Crawford of Strait-Jacket. Gone are the subtlety and the last remnants of a great beauty that were still apparent in Baby Jane. Gone is the masterful acting of Mildred Pierce, Humoresque, and even Queen Bee. What is left is a tired shell of Joan Crawford, clinging to the last remains of the glamour; the faded star. Of course, Joan's star has never faded, even 25 years after her death. Her fame was just too great to ever really die during her lifetime or generations after. But although Strait-Jacket appears to be nothing more than a cheap B-movie thriller, it is actually a striking look into the fateful last years of a legend. The movie will leave you thinking for a long, long time after you've seen it. The image of Crawford at the end of her career will burn in your mind. You'll be captivated and repelled at the same time, but what will remain is the fascination. Who was Joan Crawford really? Will we ever know? ... Read more

Reviews (278)

A CLASSIC! THE BEST ROCKUMENTARY FILM EVER!
This is Spinal Tap is the brilliant rockumentary/mockumentary chronicling the band Spinal Tap's tour of the United States. This was Rob Reiner's debut film, and what a film to begin with. This is Spinal Tap remains somewhat of a cult classic, but its hilarious characters, awesome music, and brilliant storyline comes to life on screen, and everyone could enjoy this movie. Michael McKean plays the lead singer David St. Hubens to perfection, while Harry Shearer plays Derek Smalls with great finesse. A young Christopher Guest plays Nigel with a quiet brilliance, and Guest would incidentally go on to direct and star in two of his own mockumentary films, WAITING FOR GUFFMAN and BEST IN SHOW, which I must say, are equally genius, especially the recent sleeper hit BEST IN SHOW. Also great is Tony Hendra, as the cricket-stick wielding manager of the band. June Chadwick is strong as David's girlfriend Jeannine, and Bruno Kirby makes a great cameo as the limo driver. The other supporting cameos are fantastic, coming from Fred Willard(who won a Best Supporting Actor award from the LA Critics for his role in BEST IN SHOW), Dana Carvey, Billy Crystal, Fran Drescher, Angelica Huston, and Paul Shaffer. This utterly hilarious movie is excellently directed by Reiner, who plays the director of the mockumentary within the film, Marty Dibergi! Fantastic!

Original Rockumertary
This Is Spinal Tap pokes fun at documentary films with what faux director Marty DiBergi calls a rockumentary. While MTV took this title and actually had rockumentaries, VH1's wildly successful Behind The Music series is a take off (albeit a serious one) of Tap's concept. Michael McKean, Christopher Guest & Harry Shearer star as a fictional English heavy metal band Spinal Tap. The film follows them around on their concert tour and the hoopla surrounding the release of their album Smell The Glove. The three stars are hysterical. They conduct themselves with a mock seriousness and that better than everyone attitude that stars often assume. The concert sequences are great as the Tap's songs are great spoofs of the metal genre with titles like "Stonehedge" & "Big Bottoms". The movie is woefully short, so the extra footage is a welcome addition. Tony Hendra is brilliant as the band's put upon manager and a young Fran Drescher shows up as a record label executive while Dana Carvey and Billy Crystal have a small bit as mime waiters.

Fantastic
The classic This is Spinal Tap is truly the greatest depiction of a rock band in cinematic history. I remember watching this for the first time with my buddies...everything thats happened in this movie has happened to me. The guy getting stuck in the pod, the tour dates being cancelled, playing under a puppet show, all of it!! And my buddies are sitting there laughing and Im like....this isnt funny. And THATS what makes the movie so great.....its SO realistic.

The definitive rock and roll band movie.....get it today!!

Big and stupid. And clever. VERY, VERY clever.
Alright, I'm not going to bore you with the details or story of this sublime Reiner "documentary," nor am I going to babble on and on about how spot-on a parody of NWOBHM (that's "New Wave Of British Heavy Metal" to the uninitiated) this is.

Instead, I will offer you some quotes. Those alone should give you plenty of insight as to why this is one of the greatest movies of all time. To wit:

"Oh, there actually is, uh... there was a Saint Hubbins?"
"That's right, yes."
"What was he the saint of?"
"He was the patron saint of quality footwear."

"You know, just simple lines intertwining, you know, very much like - I'm really influenced by Mozart and Bach, and it's sort of in between those, really. It's like a Mach piece, really. It's sort of..."
"What do you call this?"
"Well, this piece is called "Lick My Love Pump".

"As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll."

"Here lies David St. Hubbins... and why not?"

"Dozens of people spontaneously combust each year. It's just not really widely reported."

"It's like, how much more black could this be? and the answer is none. None more black."

"We are Spinal Tap from the UK - you must be the USA!"

"You can't really dust for vomit."

"This pretentious ponderous collection of religious rock psalms is enough to prompt the question, 'What day did the Lord create Spinal Tap, and couldn't he have rested on that day too?'"

And of course: "Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
"These go to eleven."

Not laughing? Well, the visuals are even funnier--malfunctioning stage props, a guitar solo that probably singlehandedly gave birth to the "neo-classical" shred style, unique ways to use a violin, and of course lots and lots of retarded sexuality and bad poetry. Christopher Guest, Michael McKean, and Derek Shearer absolutely NAIL it. Everybody should have this film. Especially metalheads who aren't afraid to have a good, long laugh at themselves.

Rockin' and Mockin'
When this film was originally released, its targets were hard rock bands like Whitesnake and Dio, along with overly pretentious concert films like The Last Waltz and Song Remains the Same. 20 years later, the film still holds up - and practically everything in it could apply to newer bands like the Darkness, and VH1's ridiculous Behind the Music TV series. Why? The cast and creators manage to walk the fine line between satire and homage while staying in love with the spirit of rock n'roll. Sure, band members Nigel, David, and Derek may be half-witted hacks but we love them because they reflect not only most of our rock heroes - but our rock fantasies as well. There's a sense of joy in this film that's absent in many 'serious' rock bands and films that are soon forgotten. Director Rob Reiner was also smart enough not to aim for a constant barrage of one-liners and slapstick. There's actually a story and a subtext here that most parody films totally lack. The DVD comes with a grab-bag of Spinal Tap goodies, including a hilarious commentary track and rock videos. This one's a comedy for the ages. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Though this film is a relatively minor one in the massive canon of Peter Sellers, it has moments of absolute hilarity. Written and directed by Blake Edwards, one of Sellers's most fertile collaborators, the film stars Sellers as a would-be actor from India (let them try to get away with that today) who is a walking disaster area. After ruining a day's shooting as an extra on a film, he finds himself unintentionally invited to a big Hollywood party. That's pretty much it as far as plot goes, but Edwards and Sellers know how to milk a simple idea for an unending string of slapstick gags. The result is a film that is episodic and sketchy, but also frequently loony in an inspired way. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (92)

misinterpreted, by far
I'd like to point out a thing or two about this movie, that most of our "would-be" reviewers, like myself, have missed. First off a grand Excellent performance by the great Peter Sellers. Yes, "Birdie num-num's" and all that aside, he made his character very loveable, as a bumbling East Indian actor, who is mistaken for some acting wizz. Unfortunately for the producers of the in-movie movie, he is not that at all, he is not good with lines, and he does some physical humor and actions that have the movie management up in arms, "who is this guy?". Perhaps the most incredible aspect of this Edwards/Sellers movie is the fact that they were trying to make a political statement at the last half hour of the movie, with the party hostess' hippy daughter and her friends, the elephant, and all that. Yes, I said Peter Sellers was in a politically based movie. One thinks, "poking fun at authority"? Well, yes, what in the world motivated the whole Pink Panther genre of movies? Blake Edwards was a political activist and liked to reflect that at certain points in lots of his movies. All in all, with that in mind, now, watch the movie and understand, and finally you can laugh with the movie. Nothing less than 5 Capitol stars from me. Just a thought!

"Birdie Num Num"
This is one heck of a funny movie. I have seen it a few times and it always cracks me up. Peter Sellers plays an character by the name of Hrundi V. Bakshi, an Indian actor, who accidentally gets invited to a posh, exclusive, Hollywood party and proceeds to inadvertantly make a shambles of the entire affair. There are so many gags in this movie, you really have to watch it more than once to appreciate it. One interesting fact about this movie I recently read..."The Party" was improvised from a 40-page outline. Each scene was shot in sequence, and built upon the previous scene. To aid in this experiment, the film's producers had a video-camera tube attached to the Panavision camera and connected to an Ampex studio videotape machine - allowing the actors and crew to review what they had just filmed. Thus, "The Party" was the first movie ever shot with the now-standard "video assist" system.

If you enjoy the Pink Panther movies, then you will most likely enjoy this. Instead of a bumbling French detective, Sellers portrays a bumbling Indian actor, and look for a great performance by Steve Franken as Levinson, a waiter at the party who likes the drink a bit too much. Also, I though Denny Miller was great as 'Wyoming Bill' Kelso. This was directed by Blake Edwards, and is the only non Pink Panther movie he and Peter Sellers made together. Original music by the Great Henry Mancini. Just a whole lot of fun!

Simply put...The best of Peter Sellers
The first time I saw this movie I was already a Sellers fan. What I liked most was that Sellers talent did not go to waste on meaningless chatter....just 100% PURE Sellers at his best! I purchased the movie at the same time I bought my first DVD player! Better than all of the Pink Panther movies!

my favorite sellers movie
I stumbled upon this movie when I was a freshman in college and walked into a room where everyone was stoned and watching the party. It is simply a riot. One of my all time favorite movies.

Hilarious.
I've seen this movie like 50 times and everytime that I watch it makes me laught out of control.
You may know Peter Sellers from the classic movies "Pink Panther" from the 60's.
"The Party" is about an indian actor (Sellers) that comes to America for a leading role in a movie but he's so clumsy that ruins a whole location. So when the director calls the boss to inform him about the mess that had been made, he writes Hrundi's (Sellers) name in the guest list of a party that he was having at home.
When Hrundi arrives to the party finds out the his white shoes are dirty with car oil so he cleans them in a water canal of the house entry making him loose his shoe. Then he gets bored because anybody knows him, so he starts to talk to the people but they're not interested in him so he explores the house while making disasters. Then he doesn't even have a place in the dinning table and well I can tell you that he goes from that to ruin the master's room bathroom.
Honestly if you buy this movie you won't be sorry AT ALL, it's not very long and you can listen to it in English, French and Spanish. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Inspired more by Disney's 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea than the Jules Verne novels it purports to be based upon (1896's Clipper of the Clouds and 1904's Master of the World), this American International Pictures production is a mildly diverting period fantasy adventure, buoyed mainly by leads Vincent Price and Charles Bronson. Nineteenth-century government agent Strock (Bronson) hires Prudence (Henry Hull), a munitions maker and balloon enthusiast, to help investigate the source of a mysterious voice that emanated from Pennsylvania's Great Eyrie. With Prudence's daughter Dorothy (Mary Webster) and her fiancé Philip (David Frankham), the pair flies over the mountain, only to be shot down and taken captive by Robur (Price). Using his colossal airship Albatross, Robur plans to end world warfare by decimating any country that refuses to lay down its arms. Despite solid efforts by Price and Bronson (who reportedly disliked each other), a thoughtful script by fantasy author Richard Matheson, and a lively score by Les Baxter, Master never takes flight. Miniature effects by Tim Baar, Wah Chang, and Gene Warren (a.k.a. Projects Unlimited, which created creatures for "The Outer Limits") are hobbled by AIP's infamously low budget, and B-movie vet William Whitney's direction is painfully lethargic. Lacking the necessary super-sized scope and star power of other Verne adaptations, including 1958's Around the World in Eighty Days and 1959's Journey to the Center of the Earth, Master is for AIP and Price completists only. MGM's digitally transferred full-frame print looks fabulous and includes the original theatrical trailer. --Paul Gaita ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Vincent Price is the master
This film could be classified as a fantasy adventure with horror elements when you factor in Robur's wish to end all war. His method? He'll simply fly over oceans and seas in his airship Albitraus and bomb war ships until all war has stopped. Vincent plays Robur in this mad-cap film that begins with a history of aviation. Henry Hull is cast as a cynical judge and the great Charles Bronson is cast as a mysterious passenger who appears to be Robur's accompolice... but looks can be deceiving. Mary Webster and David Frankham play the other "prisoners". David's character isn't likable and you'd wish that Vincent or Charles would throw him off the Albitraus!! The film is sort of an in the air version of James Mason's "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" with it's stop all war message.

Unusual, but likeable movie
The plot of this movie is a bit unusual, but I found it likeable because of the actors, such as Vincent Price, Henry Hull, and David Frankham. Charles Bronson also stars, but is probably miscast here. The scenery and music are also well done.

Worth catching, but probably not seeking.
Disappointing and tepid acting seems to be the most stand-out quality in this film. Bronson, playing the hero Strock, obviously gives the part some effort. But his effort falls far short, coming off cold and unemotive. Contrary to the legendary collaboration of Price and Bronson in "House of Wax," Bronson's part might have been better served by a cardboard cutout. The film's hammy and dispassionate special effects certainly make one believe that that option may have been considered. Most film-makers of the period were far more creative with their few resources, and even if the effects were a little corny, they were at least charming. The effects in this movie are parallel only to your local middle-school's performance of "Oklahoma!"

Vincent Price saves the film from ruin, however, by delivering one of the most convincing and provoking performances of his career. Working with a decent script, Price plays perfectly Robur, an idealistic and madly brilliant conqueror, giving the viewer a perfect portrait of deeply-concealed rage and good-intention masked with vitriol and salted with madness. The character of Robur is somewhat metamorphic, and Price conforms to the part on demand. Demonic, honorable, diabolical, repetent -- Price shows all sides of Robur in perfect color.

Fans of Vincent Price and Jules Verne will love this film, and I would highly recommend it to them. Everyone else, however, might consider watching this one only if the oppurtunity presents itself on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

Its no "20,000 Leagues Under The Sea........................
This movie is awful. The only good thing about it is Vincent Price, but even with his masterful presence the movie sinks well before the actual airship does. Jules Verne must have run out of ideas by the time he wrote this, simply because it borrows heavily from 20,000 Leagues (minus the good stuff, I might add). Charles Bronson is at his worst here delivering such an emotionless performance. How he ever became a star with this on his record is beyond me. How did these people keep a straight face while filming this waste of talent? The special effects hurt the film very badly, to. The airship is such a ridiculous looking machine that you can never get past gawking at it so that you can even try to take the film seriously! Avoid this movie at all costs, or suffer the fate of the Albatross crew you will!!!!!!!!!!!

Honestly, this film gets no stars at all.

Solid Jules Verne Adventure
Vincent Price brings dignity and class to the role of the "mad" idealist Robur, the Conquerer, would-be MASTER of the WORLD. From his airborne 19th century wonder-warship, The Albatross, Robur intends to rid the world of war by literally destroying all armies of any nation that refuses to comply with his demand for total disamament. Viewers of "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" will recognize similarities in plot and even in the role of Robur to the more renowned Captain Nemo. Charles Bronson plays government agent Strock whose job it is to bring Robur and his warship-for-peace down. There really is no comparison between the Walt Disney epic and this film other than theme. Disney produced a masterpiece. This is, nonetheless, a good solid Jules Verne action sci-fi/adventure with reputable special effects which permit Vincent Price to essay a role that is favorably comparable to James Mason's driven commander of The Nautilus. In my estimate, "Master of the World" is good viewing for just about anyone who has not yet been jaded by the modern FX men. For families, it is a very good piece of entertainment that does not devolve into a mindless display of violence and pyrotechnics. It's a good flick, and Price's role as anti-hero Robur is worth watching... ... Read more

Reviews (120)

Good Remake!
"Their coming to get you Barbara", but this time Barbara is ready for them. A remake of the original classic "Night of the Living Dead". A modern retelling based on a updated scripted by George Romero and directed by Tom Savini.

This is pretty much the same story as NOTLD '68, but with better effects and a few new twists. The recent dead have returned to life and now seek the flesh of the living. Seven strangers are trapped in an isolated farmhouse struggling with the horror that awaits them on the outside and the tension that will eventually destroy them on the inside. Romero re-introduces all our favorite character: Ben (Tony Todd), Cooper (Tom Towles), etc. There are even striking reminiscences between the cast in 68 and 90, and that wasn't a coincidence. Barbara (Patricia Tallmen) has been miraculously been transformed from a comatose broad into a female Rambo. She seemingly being the only one with any grasp of the situation and this time she's not waiting for Johnny.

Not overly gory, but the zombie make-up was fantastic. The twists breath new life into this classic movie. Tom Savini did an exceptional job in his big screen directorial debut and maybe someday we'll be lucky enough to see his director's cut of this modern classic.

NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD - TONY TODD
DEFINITELY A GOOD ZOMBIE MOVIE AND VERY WELL DONE,BUT NOT A GOOD REMAKE OF THE ORIGINAL.THE BARBARA CHARACTER WAS A BIT ANNOYING, AND NOTHING LIKE THE ORIGINAL,THE STORYLINE WENT OFF SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY. ASIDE FROM THAT, THIS IS A REALLY GOOD ZOMBIE FILM AND IS WORTH A WATCH.

Excellent remake!
I felt compelled to comment on this flick. I loved the first one. And, I love the remake. The addition of color and a bolder, sexier Barbara only adds to the film. They didn't change the original theme of the movie. Just enhanced it! I own the Millenium edition of the first film. And I own the 1979 remake. Lov'em both, but prefer the remake!!!

A Fairly Pointless Remake
It's been said before but, just for the record, I'm gonna say it again: If it ain't broke, don't bother fixing it. In other words, if you've already got a movie that's widely regarded as a classic of the genre it can safely be said there is little point in trying to improve upon it. So quite why anyone thought Night of the Living Dead needed a remake is beyond me, especially when you consider the iron clad rule that applies to remakes as much as it does to movies with a '2' in the title: nine times out of ten, it's gonna suck.
However, to its credit, NOTLD remake is at least done with the support and input of those assosciated with the original film (including Romero), unlike the recent spate of Hollywood remakes, which seem to almost take perverse glee in undermining the original film without any consultation to, or recognition of, the original film makers (stand up Texas Chainsaw Massacre). Yet, despite Romero's input, the film is still just not terribly good.
The main problem with this remake, in my opinion, is the new portrayal of the characters. In the first film, you could sympathise with, to some degree, all these people trapped in the farmhouse, you felt sorry for them, and understood their actions because of the predicament that was facing them. In the remake, they're all a bunch of whiny bitchers, and any remaining sympathy is gone; every single one of them is shown to have a mean or annoying streak a mile wide and it comes as something of a releif when one of them gets killed. Also gone is any semblance of intelligence: what kills the characters in this remake is, more often than not, their own stupidity. Maybe that's the point, but still, it makes you feel as if they deserved to die, not something good for character empathy, which is a nesscessary ingredient of a horror movie.
The ending, too was a dissapointment, especially compared to the extremely downbeat, depressing ending of the original. That ending left you with a feeling of hopelessness and a question mark over the fate of humanity. The new ending leaves you with little doubt over how humanity will fair in the struggle against the undead: We'll win, no question.
My final major gripe with this movie is with the zombies themselves. In the original, they were terrifying and mysterious, unstoppable killing machines. In the remake, they seem comically weak and monumentally useless. As Barbara says at one point (an intensely annoying version of the original character, by the way, i spent the entire movie hoping her fate would be the same as that of the original): "they're so slow... we could just walk past them, we wouldn't even have to run.". You see the problem? how are you meant to be afraid of something that couldn't pose a serious threat to a three year old on a trike?
However, despite all the above, and the monotony of some of the zombie attacks (how many times can you watch the undead come smashing through a window the heroes were JUST about to board up? Well, if you want to watch this movie through, make sure it's at least four) Night of the Living Dead the remake is still a watchable film, a much shallower version of the first, that requires much less attention or thought. As a popcorn zombie movie, it works very well, and, it goes without saying, the special effects are quite fantastic for this version, though perhaps not used to their full potential.
Overall, this film is one to watch if your looking for a quick splatter-horror film and is reasonably entertaining. However, if your looking for a horror film with some depth, or one that creates a genuine feeling of unease and tension, then watch the original. There is a reason, afterall, why that is considered a horror classic and this isn't.

Night of the living remake
Ok, this is a rather pointless remake of the original classic. What makes it so bad is that it was directed by Tom Savini, who collaberated with George Romero on "Dawn of the Dead" and Day of the Dead". Savini, a noted make-up artist specializing in gore and blood, left this movie pretty dry. The plot is the same, a group of strangers are wholed up in a farm house that is besieged by zombies. There are no big stars here, except Tony Todd, who went on to be the Candyman. He is obviously the hero, or so you'd think. The end is different, and not for the better. The acting is pretty wooden, but you were expecting that, weren't you? The gore is graphic, but like I said, I was expecting more from Savini. The moral of the story is pounded home too hard. But it's fair, and not too long, so it's barable. It is a good movie, just not great. I only wish that they would stop remaking the classics and give Romero the money to do the fourth 'Dead' movie. ... Read more