Amazon.com essential video

If Franz Kafka had been an animator and film director--oh, and a member of Monty Python's Flying Circus--this is the sort of outrageously dystopian satire one could easily imagine him making. However, Brazil was made by Terry Gilliam, who is all of the above except, of course, Franz Kafka. Be that as it may, Gilliam sure captures the paranoid-subversive spirit of Kafka's The Trial (along with his own Python animation) in this bureaucratic nightmare-comedy about a meek governmental clerk named Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce) whose life is destroyed by a simple bug. Not a software bug, a real bug (no doubt related to Kafka's famous Metamorphosis insect) that gets smooshed in a printer and causes a typographical error unjustly identifying an innocent citizen, one Mr. Buttle, as suspected terrorist Harry Tuttle (Robert De Niro).When Sam becomes enmeshed in unraveling this bureaucratic glitch, he himself winds up labeled as a miscreant.

The movie presents such an unrelentingly imaginative and savage vision of 20th-century bureaucracy that it almost became a victim of small-minded studio management itself--until Gilliam surreptitiously screened his cut for the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, who named it the best movie of 1985 and virtually embarrassed Universal into releasing it. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (302)

the definitive look at this masterpiece
Brazil is, arguably, Terry Gilliam's crowning achievement. Originally called 1984 1/2, this film was embroiled in an infamous battle to be distributed. The studio didn't like Gilliam's version and cut together one of their own. Gilliam went to the press and got the L.A. critics behind his movie and finally shamed the studio into releasing his version.

Criterion's 3-DVD set documents the struggle Gilliam went through to get his film shown. Disc One contains his cut of the film with an informative and entertaining commentary by the director. The second DVD contains the bulk of the extra material. Not only is Gilliam's struggle documented but also various aspects of the production are examined -- including the screenplay, costumes, art direction, etc. The final disc contains the studio's ....py cut with a film historian's audio commentary documenting why this version sucks.

Once again, Criterion comes through with an exhaustive look at an important film of modern cinema. Brazil is a brilliant satire of a dystopian society run amok by pointless bureaucracy. Anyone who has worked a souless job in an office will immediately empathise with the protagonist's plight. Like any great work of science fiction, Brazil offers more questions than answers -- not everything is wrapped up neatly, instead the viewer is left questioning certain aspects of our modern society. Great stuff.

Great movie about dreams and hope
Brazil, despite the science fiction, social commentary and surrealism, is at it's core a film about a man who trapped by the mundanity of life, imagines himself in a more fantastic world.

Jonathan Pryce stars as a tiny unimportant member of a vast hyper-capitalistic society. Life is cold and dreary for everyone. All his spare time is spent dreaming of magical romantic worlds and the beautiful woman who lives there. One day, a simple beaucratic mistake causes a monumental disaster. Not that anyone cares... they just don't want to be blamed. Sent to solve the problem, or maybe to be a scapegoat, Pryce accidentally meets the literal woman of his dreams. As he pursues her, he brings suspicion on himself of being a terrorist (the scourge of the government), and his dreams begin to invade his waking thoughts.

A suprising list of talent lend themselves to the film and is written, minus Kafka and Orwell themes, by Monty Python's Terry Gilliam so expect some obvious humor and much biting satire throughout. Depressing and magical without losing it's hope, any person who can identify with the main character should find themselves entranced.

Despite being made in 1985 the special effects prove to be suprisingly effective (although easily noticed). I personally think this movie is the second best Science Fiction film, 2001 being first, and the best 1984 type movie ever made.

Much loved, but I never got it ...
This is a cult classic, but I find it over-rated. It delivers the zaniness, surreality and crazy camera work, but the film has no interest in its characters -- you'll feel nothing for them, and for me that leaves a big hole in the center of the movie.

For a movie with a similar feel but considerably more heart, try Barton Fink instead. Or even Amelie.

Boring
This movie is really disappointing and boring.

a bizzare and frightening film
If you enjoy futuristic Sci-Films then I would heartily reccomend this, as it presents a number of interesting and imaginative concepts.
The setting is the far future.The world is a polluted wasteland. A strange network of wires covers the ceiling of every room.
A corporation-government, Central Services, controls all trade enterprises. Any who indulge in the businesses they control (which are almost everything) without the proper paperwork are labeled terrorists. So, unfortunately, are those who criticize Central Services' inane policies.
Their Cops, clad in spacesuits that look like they came straight out of David Lynch's adapatation of "DUNE", frequently capture these "terrorists" to be interrogated, tortured, and/or executed with bizarre devices.
The "food" eaten by the characters in this film is premasticated garbage, into which are stuck pictures of what the characters believe they are eating.
The rich and powerful under Central Services rule get daily facelifts and parties,
and they strike the viewer as stupid and frightening.
The plot of the film concerns a daydreaming young paper-pusher (Jonathan Pryce) for Central Services' Ministry of Information who discovers a glitch in some paperwork that led to the wrongful arrest and unfortunate execution of Archibald Tuttle, who was mistaken for Archibald "Harry" Tuttle (Robert DeNiro), who has fallen out with the law because of his entrepeneurial fix-it man services.
Soon, a truck-drivin' gal(Kim Greist) who witnessed Archibald Buttle's wrongful arrest pleads for his release to the Ministry of Information, who label her a terrorist.
Later, The young MOI employee notices her picture in the lobby of his workplace, and decides to pursue her. He saves her from being arrested, and, in doing so, is labeled an enemy of society, which eventually leads to his tragic end at the hands of his friends(Ian Holm and John Palin).
This frightening look at the evils of technology, corporations,wrongful arrests, and totalitarian governments is not to be missed by any except the very young(if it gave ME nightmares, imagine the effect it would have on a seven-year old boy!) . ... Read more

Reviews (211)

Masterful restoration of 60's Classic
After reading the New York Times article about the restoration process for Yellow Submarine, I had high hopes for this DVD. I was not disappointed.

The color saturation is sumptuous. There are some imperfections, but on the whole this is a first class restoration. If you want appreciate the restoration, look at the original theatrical trailer or the "making of" documentary extras.

The re-mastered audio brings new complexity and detail to familiar Beatle material (even on my strictly middlebrow home entertainment system). The opening a cappella chorus of "Nowhere Man" sounded like it was recorded yesterday.

For a generation that has not seen this film, Yellow Submarine is a perfect time capsule for 60's psychedelic era. The film begins in under the sea in Pepperland, an idyllic musical community, which is attacked by the music-hating Blue Meanies. "Young Fred" manages to escape the attack in the Yellow Submarine, which takes him to England. He recruits the Beatles to return with him to Pepperland to join the battle between the forces of order (the Blue Meanies) and the forces of creativity and love. The plot is pretty much as hokey as it sounds, but it is merely a vehicle for the music, humor, surrealism, artistic and social sensibilities of the psychedelic 60's. And it is there that the movie emphatically succeeds.

The animation is certainly not as sophisticated as some more modern efforts, but it stands up remarkably well. There was a lot of revolutionary (for the 60's) integration of animation and live action. The colors are gorgeous. Visually, this is still a very entertaining film.

If you don't like the Beatles music, or are bored by animation, stay away. If you are on the fence about getting this DVD, buy it. You won't be disappointed. And if you love the Beatles, this DVD should move to the top of your list.

Fab
More of a series of Beatles videos than a film, this is excellent for what it is, and it has Beatles music in it, so it can't be bad. I'd forgotten how good 'Nowhere Man' was, in particular, until I saw this again on DVD. George Harrison does a really good guitar solo near the beginning of the song, so top marks to George. The other songs are usually described as lightweight throwaways, although I think that's a bit harsh. 'Hey Bulldog' is fun, and although 'Only a Northern Song' and 'It's All Too Much' aren't as good as 'Eleanor Rigby', they fit the images very well. 'All Together Now' is dire, though. The extra DVD bits are nice to have, but not really worth buying the disc for on their own. The 'Making of' documentary is from 1968, doesn't tell you much, and only goes on for 17 minutes. The commentary is a bit dull too, and Heinz Edelmann only appears for five minutes at the end. The 'isolated music score' simply turns off the speaking voices and sound effects - you don't actually get the full soundtrack in order, you get snatches of George Martin's instrumental music and the Beatles' songs. The remastering is a bit iffy in places - there are film scratches and blobs were there shouldn't be any - and although it could be my speakers, the Beatles' dialogue seems to be drowned out by the orchestral score. As for the film, you've probably already seen it. It looks and sounds wonderful, but it has a long, dull bit in the middle; there isn't really much of a plot; and I still can't make out what the Beatles are saying most of the time. But that's just me. The bit at the end, where the Beatles appear, makes me wince, as they seem so self-conscious and embarrassed.

My daughter is 5 and loves it!
I never thought the movie was great until my 5 year old started watching it. I am hooked (or re-hooked on the Beatles). The music and images are far better than anything on TV. Sure, squint your eyes (or ears) real hard and find some type of references to the 60's - but the're not there if you simply enjoy the feast.

My daughter now hums the songs, we have a Beatles poster in her room - - an no more Sponge Bob, Scooby Doo, or those Princesses. YEA!

The music was great but the movie wasn't
I just don't get why people love the movie. Yes, the music in it is exeltnet and it did introduce three new great Beatles songs (All Together Now, Only a Northern Song, and Hey Bulldog) but the music OUTDOES the movie. I don't care what other people say, the animation is bad, and the plot is confusing. The movie is really just an excuse to get the Fab Four back on the big screen. They were barly involved anyway. They added three new songs and didn't even do the voices of their characters. THe movie is decent and is worth watching once. I give it three stars becasue the music is good and I like the message that good will always win over evil and greed (even if it has been proven wrong by big corperations taking over everything and MTV manipulating everyone ages 7 - 17 its nice to think good will win out in the end.) If you want a good Bealtes movie I recamend A Hard Day's Night.

Perfect for those that keep the inner child alive
Turn off your mind
Relax and
Float down stream

¿Do you wanna watch a movie...
with no blood, no bad words, no nudes, no witchery, no romance, and... no Hollywood?

Sounds boring?

Well, my nephews love this movie. Perhaps it's because it's quite the same style as Sesame Street cartoons. I love it, too. But my pop-music-fan brother... He just can't stand it. It's too psychedelic for his simple mind. Some of my friends hate it, too. But strangely, kids love it! Could it be that there is a something about appreciating this kind of things that most adults seem to loose when they grow up?

If you still can appreciate things like you did when you were a child, you'll love this one. ... Read more

Reviews (84)

Trippy
Zardoz is an extremely heavy-handed social satire. Like most head movies of the early 1970s, it is worth watching, if for no other reason, than as a relic of a period of time when directors really started experimenting with the medium of film (with quite varied results), e.g. using psychedellic images, etc. And, like many such films, while it often comes off as pretentious, it is never actually boring.

The society in Zardoz is an analogy for our own and you get a general picture of its setup in the first 20 minutes (so I'm not giving away any surprises). Sean Connery is part of a gang which is provided with weapons by a flying figure-head (literally speaking). This gang's role is to go around killing people, raping and pillaging and, consequently, they help control the population and keep it weak. The rest of the population does things like grow food and give it as offerings to the flying head, partly because it offers some semblance of control over the brutal gangs it created (and maintains) in the first place.

Sean Connery decides to jump on board the flying head for a ride and learns that it is not a god, but a machine built by an elite race of immortals who have all their needs provided for (via the flying head) by the rest of society while they live in leisure. The immortals also have (exclusive) access to all recorded art and knowledge, but seem incapable of producing any themselves. In other words, there are clear analogies to inner-city gangs, police states, law and order government, capitalism, media control, and their interdependence. The rest of the film is then concerned with Connery's interaction with the immortals, learning their weaknesses, etc., and the immortals' reactions to Connery when they realize that he is mentally and physically superior to them when freed from their continued interference and control of the rest of society. Like I said, rather heavy- handed satire, but definitely not unrealistic. People from the inner-cities will recognize its accuracy the most.

There are many campy touches, however most (not all) I believe are intentional. And the film has Boorman's usual stunning cinematography. This film is a cult classic which is at least always interesting if not always good. And keep in mind that Boorman, that whiz (wink wink), is not being entirely serious.

Zardoz does it!
No matter how critical an attitude I bring to it, I simply cannot dislike this film! Its premises, performances, and images are a godsend to a lover of "thinking person's" science fiction. I have no idea what previous reviewers mean when they talk of a hippie sensibility pervading the film. I saw it twice during its initial release and have just seen it again after twenty some odd years; it still holds its special relevance and the satire still connects. Plus, it's a pleasure watching a science fiction film without a surfeit of gratuitous computer generated effects. Most of the story is told with the use of splendid cinematography, interesting sets, and a simple straightforward script with a few compelling twists. Some may argue that the actors' lines are trite; they are, but to wonderful biting effect. The masks worn by the Exterminators are marvelous, as is the floating head of Zardoz. The aerial photography and sound effects are also used to great effect near the beginning of the film to set the stage for the entrance into the Vortex and Zed's "big boy adventure" among the Immortals. Though Sean Connery's Zed chews most of the scenery, my favorite character was Friend played by John Alderton, especially after he received his sentence and was banished to the world of the aging Renegades. Hilarious!
Even the time lapse ending was effective. Normally this device is used as a crutch for a filmmaker simply because he/she doesn't know how to develop a denouement. Not here; it works perfectly!
This DVD release is crisp and vibrant with stunningly saturated colors and fine sound. I concur with a previous reviewer; this has to be the finest use of the Second Movement of Beethoven's Seventh Symphony ever in a film, heard in both it's original scoring and in a special choral arrangement--slow, stately and at a funeral march tempo, the way it should be despite the composer's score markings! I haven't heard the director's narrative track and am in no hurry to do so; the film speaks well for itself.
In my opinion, this rightfully ranks as a "must have" for fans of lovingly-made, imaginative, and thought-provoking films. Bring an open mind and a sense of humor along with the popcorn; you're in for a treat!

Something to Think About ¿ Burt Reynold Was Originally Sched
One afternoon, 10 years after it was released, I saw Zardoz in a moviehouse in Georgetown and didn't get it - except that Sean Connery was still very sexy. Recently, the serendipity of watching The Swimmng Pool with Charlotte Rampling suggested giving this Boorman allegory another chance. I finally get it and had fun seeing it again. Three reasons to watch Zardoz are John Boorman's emerging vision and personal iconography, the power of Sean Connery's presence and acting (especially at the point in his career when he was trying to break from the Bond type-cast), and Geoffrey Unsworth's masterful photography.

Boorman and his actors put their hearts and talent on the line. Connery pulls off wearing the red loincloth and wedding dress, pulling a rickshaw and effectively performing scenes like the lecture on libido with subtle irony. Charlotte Rampling, Sara Kestelman, and other actresses can survive wearing go-go boots or performing nude while portraying strong women in conflict reacting to Zed's mojo. The whole cast of immortals are such good actors that you can giggle about the horror of wearing macramé tops and overly foofed hair, but they suspend your belief in the nightmare society these characters have created. Unsworth not only films this movie; he validates the vision with clear images that indulges Boorman's penchant for setting archetypes and going all Jungian on us. It is beautiful to watch and mostly poetic.

Boorman stuffs the movie with cinematic references like Welles and Peckinpah, much like the immortals have stuffed their museum. In his commentary, he admits putting too much in the film and that he would do things differently with more money and experience. At the beginning, there are moments that almost feel like Monty Python's Holy Grail or Woody Allen's Sleeper, but the movie progresses past that. The set design was interesting, but I felt that the costuming was just a little too groovy. He also admits that some of this cult classic is laughable, but the actors and the camera take it seriously enough to trap us in the Vortex and follow Zed as he searches for the truth. I am a sucker for personal films, and everybody involved made this personal to their truth.

Given what has been going on in Silicon Valley, Zardoz is still very pertinent. The irony is that celluloid projections on glass, superimposed images on film and light refracting from faceted crystals simulated computers, which were used to depict John Boorman's vision of 2293. In any remake, instead of green bread, Boorman's successor would have to direct the brutals in assembling green pizzas, and a notion of a religious mystery commanding the terminators would be named by the corruption of the phrase - Stock Option. Their god would be called Ckoption. Nyahhh! Just watch Zardoz.

Strange, uneven and often beautiful
This is a very strange work, a large-scale but highly personal film with many beauties as well as some dubious elements. The opening fifteen minutes are among the most memorable: Boorman begins the movie with numerous striking compositions (greatly enhanced by this pristine DVD edition), and a dreamlike, largely silent progression which highlights his storytelling talent; Zed's 'learning sequence', later in the film, is also remarkably put together. The main character's quest for truth and knowledge is mostly compelling, but brought down a bit by Boorman's simplistic, rarely subtle views on sexuality and spirituality. On the other hand, his use of mythology, classical art and fairy tales is adept and intelligent, and the twist he gives to the Indo-European functional tripartition famously noted by Georges Dumezil (sovereign-religious / physical strength-war / fecundity) is quite provocative. 'Zardoz' is a cult movie par excellence: flawed but ambitious, its weaknesses are as definitive as its strengths in defining its special flavour. This unique film should be seen by adventurous viewers.

Director John Boorman's Classic
ZARDOZ is director John Boorman's classic tale of future events. This came at a time when Sean Connery was giving up his James Bond image. ZARDOZ was one of the greatest "sleepers"of its time. This DVD combined with the film's shocking ending is very good. ... Read more

Reviews (26)

More famous for the soundtrack
Zabriskie Point is probably more famous for the soundtrack than it is for the movie. The main attraction of the soundtrack was three Pink Floyd songs, written before the album, Atom Heart Mother. It also contains a nice 7 minute Jerry Garcia acoustic instrumental. The soundtrack album was always a must have for any Pink Floyd/Grateful Dead fan. The odd thing is that this movie is almost devoid of music. The movie starts and ends with a Pink Floyd track, and most of the Garcia track is played during the psychodelic love scene. Other than that, there are only snippets of the songs from the soundtrack album. There are large stretches of the film where there is no music at all. You would think that a movie that was supposed to be a reflection of the times in America would need a background of music, since music was so important to the whole scene. Forget about the music....is it a good movie? Not really. It starts out good, with students discussing politics. But, the debate sounds false, like something an outsider would write. It almost reminds me of how Dragnet would portray hippies; a parents view of how young people were acting. Then the movie goes off on a tangent about the hero stealing a plane. Most of it has nothing to do with the times. There are some beautifully filmed sequences in the movie. However, alot of it is just a travelogue, with long, silent passages, or just the drone of an engine. The whole thing might have worked better if there was background music to pull it all together. The love scene is very good. And the ending is pretty spectacular (but kind of a let down after reading all the raves about it). But this a great example of how the music from Pink Floyd adds so much power to the scene. Note that this scene was featured on the Oscars telecast a couple of years ago. The soundtrack was originally released as a single LP. There is a new version of the soundtrack that contains a second CD. The second CD contains 30 minutes of Jerry Garcia and 25 minutes of Pink Floyd music that was not used in the movie. It is a shame. The music could have gone a long way to making this a better movie. Last interesting thing to note is that a lot of the reviews for this movie are just as arty, pretentious and vacuous as the movie itself.

A Flawed Classic
Poor Antonioni! People that took him and the film apart in 1970 -- and now -- seem to forget Antonioni was never a master of plot or performance, but texture and color. Z\"Zabriskie Point" stands up better today then 1970, since the decades gives the viewer a distance. Yes, the leads are blanks and the dialogue weak, but it's an IMPRESSION of American youth in revolt. Not answers. People who claim it's "boring" are the actual boring people. There are so many fantastic and unique images that any film watcher should be able to appreciate Antonioni's vision. And imagine a big studio today giving 7 million dollars (at the time a chunk of change) to a minimalist film artist. Appreciate this folks, because now studios wouldn't dare finance this film. And that end....Wow! Oh, nice music too.

...
Actually you needn't to say any word about this movie, you see and you experience pure nature, pure freedom, the power of the own intention breaking through all limits. Amazing!

one of the finest movies ever made
A great film that focuses on and exposes many things about what is wrong with amerikkka, especially the oppression of women. The final climatic scene is pure wish fulfillment as Daria through pure force of will does with her minds what all of humanity wishes to do to this rotten system. Great music too. Buy it, watch it, and wait for the day that it will be triumphantly broadcast 24 hours a day in celebration!

The only point is in the title
This has to be one of the dumbest movies I've ever seen. The plot seemed random at best, with gaping holes and many contrived scenarios. The anti-police/anti-establishment propaganda was laid on so thick and one-sidedly that nobody could really have ended up taking this movie seriously.

I guess this movie was made simply to exploit the growing number of naive flower-power morons around at the time and other types who would relate to the "heroes" of the story: the plane-stealing idiot and the vacant girl. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Cheech & Chong's first cannabis comedy is also their best, a souvenir from the more carefree days before "Just Say No," when people did not feel so defensive about inhaling. In 1978, the prevailing spirit was more like "Just Say Blow." Even New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael liked it (the movie, that is), adding that it was "an exploitation slapstick comedy, rather than a family picture, such as Blazing Saddles or High Anxiety--which means that it's dirtier, wilder, and sillier." The story has to do with bumbling potheads Cheech & Chong searching for primo bud, while being tailed by a team of inept law-enforcement officers, led by Sgt. Stedenko (Stacy Keach). Sample dialogue: When a cop pulls them over to ask if they are any illegal substances in his vehicle, Cheech replies: "Not any more, man." Up in Smoke is an irresistibly silly and charming movie that--despite, or perhaps because of, the national furor over drug use--plays today like a relic from a bygone era, a sweeter, more open, more innocent period in our history. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (76)

A tokin' cult classic
For those of you who grew up in the 70's, Cheech & Chong where the Laurel & Hardy or Abbott & Costello of those times. Seeing this film in DVD is a joy, since I must have seen it on tape more than a 100 times, till it was unwatchable. Now, for the first time we can see the film in it's original panoramic (widescreen) format, and for those who saw it before on tape, you'll see all you've missed before. The copy is pristine clear, and it includes a load of deleted scenes, some actually funnier than what we saw on the original run of the film. Included on those missing scenes, is the infamous one featuring Harry Dean Stanton, who doesn't remember ever appearing in a Cheech & Chong film. Plus there is an audio commentary by Cheech himself and Lou Adler, the director, who prior to this, had never directed a film before. You'll be astonished to learn how much this film influenced other people, guys like Quentin Tarantino, for example, not to mention the numerous rock groups who grew up watching this guys and re-recorded their music. All in all, a real pleasure to discover this seminal gem from the 70's, given it's full use or advantage on DVD. If you saw this guys' films way back then, do yourself a favor, and get hold of this DVD. For those too young to remember them, but who heard of them from an older brother or "stoner" uncle, get hold of it and discover what kept us laughing during those daze, er, uh, days. Filmakers of today, take notice that films can be made without a million cuts per second and only with long continous shots.

Plot-Free Pot-Fest -- Big Whoop about Very Little!
Definitely DATED, this film has 70s "High Times" written all over it. These guys have not much more than "pot" on their brain. All jokes lead to the same subject...dope, man!

Cheech and Chong, already celebrated novelty song artists with several best-selling albums to their credit just had to take their "message" to the next level. "Up In Smoke" gave them plenty of exposure and secured a solid fandom. 25 years later, though, the laughs drop drastically on the dime-bag-scale.

When I was still in high school (and I didn't give in to the smoking of anything, then or now), I may have enjoyed this sort of nonsense more. As a middle aged intellectual, I can offer only a few tired smirks. Give me Laurel & Hardy instead!**

best stoner movie ever!
hello cheech and chong fans i may only be a teenager but i have been a fan for like 4 years now and this is the funniest movie i have ever seen might be the best comedy ever!.and if ypur going to order a cheech and chong movie get this one but if i were you and you had some money to spend buy all of them and all of there cd's.and im so glad chong is finaly out of prison and to all of you die hard c and c fans the new cheech and chong movie is going to start production in september chong and cheech were both on jay leno on july 9th so there back together for awhile. anyways dont get to high later.

THIS IS A PARODY, DON'T YOU PEOPLE GET IT?
This film does not advocate drug use, this film, and Cheech and Chong's act are parodies of people who do drugs. If anything it takes every stereo type of all kinds of drug users and makes fun of them. If you watch this movie again and think about what I have said you will actually think this film is even funnier than you did before. I have known most of these types of people and think this movie is halarious, one of the funniest films ever made and I do not do drugs.

ALL Pot and NO Plot makes this ONE DULL MOVIE!
Campy trip back to the smoky 70s. Definitely DATED, this film has "High Times" written all over it. These guys have not much more than "pot" on their brain. All jokes lead to the same subject...dope, man!

Cheech and Chong had already enjoyed celebrity as novelty song artists with several best-selling albums to their credit. This effort of "Smokin' Dope - The Movie" takes their "message" to the next level. "Up In Smoke" gave them plenty of exposure and secured a solid fandom. 25 years later, though, the laughs drop drastically on the dime-bag-scale.

When I was still in high school (and I didn't give in to the smoking of anything, then or now), I may have enjoyed this sort of nonsense more. As a middle aged intellectual, I can offer only a few tired smirks. Give me Laurel & Hardy instead!** ... Read more

Reviews (279)

Amazing
I saw The Wall because I really like Pink Floyd's music and was curious how the movie would look. I'm sorry to anyone who disagrees, but I think that this movie is amazing and Roger Waters is a genius. Bob Geldof was awesome in this role and I really liked the little kid who played him as a child. The movie is basically an analysis of how we build a figurative wall around ourselves to block out the world which everyone, like it or not, can relate too. The movie is insane, it doesn't stay put or follow the conventional setup of how we think a movie should be done, very much like Pink who is basically going crazy. It was a very imaginative and creative venture. Pink Floyd's The Wall makes you pay attention to what's going on, you get wrapped up in trying to figure out what exactly is happening and I must admit it can be confusing at times but it's well worth the trouble. The music really adds another dimension to the movie that you don't normally get with dialog. And of course, Pink Floyd is super-cool and amazing, so the music is very beautiful and full of life and vivid emotions. The animation is just incredible it flows in an odd fluid sort of way, it seems very different from what you normally see. Some of the themes are (gasp) dark and to watch it you're going to need an open mind, sorry! This movie may not be for everyone but I think everyone should at least try it and see what they get out of it. It's very different, very confusing at times, but very worth it. Buy the soundtrack too!! This is an incredible movie, it's different, like everything about Pink Floyd and so incredibly original it blows my mind. Watch it!!

"Spectacular Failure???" What movie did THEY see?!
I don't get it...how can film critics continue to fail in their reviews of the conceptual film that so perfectly visualizes Roger Waters' utterly brilliant concept album "Pink Floyd The Wall"? Why can't they seem to appreciate a movie that all Pink Floyd fans I've ever known (including myself) find to be such a tremendous interpretation, albeit it at times an admittedly depressing one?

What we have is a character study of A Big Rock Star who could be anyone but is actually a combination of two former founding Pink Floyd bandmates, Syd Barrett and (project mastermind) Roger Waters. The rock star ("Pink Floyd", played by Sir Bob Geldof, pre-"Band-Aid" and knighthood) has had a rather interesting life which is shown in flashback (and the occasional animated hallucinatory) sequence to World War II (where his father, like Roger Waters' own dad, was killed in action in Italy). Awkward in childhood without a father (unusual in those days) and castigated by schoolmasters (at one time busted during class for writing "poetry" -actually the lyrics to the Floydian signature piece "Money"), Pink eventually hits it big, marries...and then begins to lose control of it all, eventually leading to the meltdown that is occurring in...what is supposed to be a hotel room in the Hollywood Hills during yet another tour.

It's a bit mainstream to be considered an "art flick", but it has settled comfortably into "cult flick" status, deservedly so. Roger Waters' original inspirations that led to the Wall" album -increasing distance between the artists and their fans, alienation from societal institutions such as school, the death of a father Roger Waters never knew, the eventual insanity of close friend Syd Barrett- are all well-covered and simply enough portrayed so that subtle symbolism is never needed. The movie stands as a perfect visual accompaniment to the album...and in fact is a bit broader, particularly considering the extra themes written for the flashback scenes involving Pink's father.

For me the best of the smorgasbord of extra features is the commentary track, if only to actually hear Roger Waters' input and insights (and his brilliant Irish accent when mimicking Bob Geldof). Waters has a deserved reputation for being a bit reclusive when dealing with the media, so getting a chance to hear him discussing one of Pink Floyd's defining moments is particularly enjoyable for me as a Pink Floyd fan. He DID make it a point to mention that he thought the film was a bit too dark and didn't reflect the humor that he felt was found throughout "The Wall" as an album. I listened to "The Wall" again after hearing that comment and have yet to understand what the hell he was talking about. If there's any humor in "The Wall" at all, I've never heard it. It always seemed as brilliant and as heavy and darkly depressing as the movie is...which is probably why I've always liked the movie. See it if you haven't. If you've ever wondered what Pink Floyd was about, see this movie. Like the band itself, you'll either love it passionately or you just won't get it at all.

Cynicism run amuck...
It seems to me that Roger Waters has us all fooled, that this was actually a parody of the highest order. If you watch the interview with him on the bonus materials on the DVD, you can almost see him smile when he discusses the inspiration for this film. It's a film that we read into it what we will. To a small degree, it is autobiographical (most everyone knows about the incident when he spit on a fan during the Animals tour).

Taking that as a leaping off point, he takes the conclusion of the absurdity of the rock star life to its logical end. And it is brilliant. Pink Floyd was simply not the same after the breakup.

It is visually and viscerally stunning. I used to watch this over and over again and it seemed to tap into what I was feeling at the time and it provided comfort, a sense that someone else could relate to the isolation and loneliness I felt, even in the midst of people. I had to replace my vinyl record several times because I listened to it so much. The movie provides eye candy for the songs.

The plot is quite simple: Pink ('by the way, which one's Pink?') is a rock star whose about had enough of the excess and snaps, journeying into his brain way too far. We see the meltdown unfold and follow the transition to something much more frightening, gaining a vision of just how far human vanity can take us. The songs and the visuals form a cohesive whole.

Sure it's pretentious and takes itself too seriously at times - but isn't that the point? It works.

It's one of the darker takes on this life but it nails it brilliantly. You'll find that many of the scenes are bigger than the context of the film. Many of them could be related to events in the political or social sphere of then and today.

It's a bit dated, perhaps, or I've merely gotten older. But the extras on the DVD make it worthwhile, including the video for 'Hey You' featuring footage that didn't make it into the film.

This movie screwed my life up
This movie screwed my head up.You probably have to be stoned to wach this.I will never look at anything the same again.

still looks and sounds fresh after 22 years
I have owned this film on VHS for many years, so I was not in a big rush to buy the DVD...but I'm sure glad I did ! This is one of the rare instances where a movie complements the music instead of diminishing it (unlike Quadrophenia, for example...)

This is one film that I can't stop watching - once it starts I'm hooked until the end. The 90 minutes really fly by. And to those who say the real life and animation do not comfortably coexist - I say "rubbish !" the transitions are smooth and seamless. My favorite part is when the school kids, with their faceless masks, are marched through the factory and into the grinder. Classic Pink Floyd. And I say Bob Geldof's portrayal of Pink is flawless. Buy this DVD - you won't regret it ! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

You are now entering Interzone, William S. Burroughs's phantasmagorical land of junk, paranoia, and crawly things. Best travel advice:"Exterminate all rational thought." In David Cronenberg's superbly shot, unnerving warp on the Burroughs novel, the novelist himself becomes a main character (played in an implacable monotone by Peter Weller), with elements from Burroughs' life--including the shooting of his wife during a "William Tell" game, and bohemian friends Kerouac and Ginsberg--added to frame the book's wild visions. This is, ironically, a somewhat rational approach to an unfilmable book (and it makes a hair-curling double bill with Barton Fink, another look at writerly madness, with both films sharing Judy Davis). Cronenberg is a natural for oozing mugwumps and typewriters that turn into giant bugs, of course. But in the end, this is really his own vision of the artistic process, rather than Burroughs's hallucinatory descent into hell. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (62)

It's a literary high
Cronenberg's version of Naked Lunch is a brilliant combination of Burroughs' novel and Burroughs' life. He blends the true story of Burroughs life (and his reason for writing) with the surreal dark-comedy 'routines' of the novel until they become one story. The story is a quiet hallucination featuring exterminators, addiction, typewriters in the form of insects, typewriters that grow genitals, a global conspiracy of intelligence agents, the drug trade, homosexual ambiguity, writer's block, accidental murder, and literary paranoia. None of these elements is explored completely. Instead, Cronenberg touches on each one until they form some strange, underlying logic.

This edition of the DVD has enough extras to make it the only version of Naked Lunch you'll ever have to buy. (They won't release a bigger, better edition later.) The BBC documentary is okay. It's about 45 minutes long, giving Cronenberg and William Burroughs a lot of time to speak. (Burroughs is particularly good, with a dry sense of humor and a habit of saying obvious truths that make people uneasy.) The second disc also has stills from the special effects team, showing how the various creatures and organic typewriters were developed.

But it's the first disc --- the movie itself --- that makes it worth buying and watching. The special audio track, shared by Peter Weller and Cronenberg, adds a lot of useful background information. The film itself is bright and sharp, a perfect example of DVD clarity. I highly recommend this DVD to anyone who is interested in the best films of the 1990s. Naked Lunch didn't make as big an impact in theaters as it did in book stores, but it should have.

"It's time to do our Wiiliam Tell Act"
Talking slithering strangely sexual typewriters, addicts of cockroach-exterminating pyretheum powder (who like to breath on cbugs and watch them die while on it), thick-fluid sipping mugwhump creatures, an assortment of strange parasitic characters to represent the sinister parts of you you never knew ere there, and a high as a kite protagonist to narrate it all. What more can I say? This is both a brilliant representation of William S. Burrough's no-holds-barred dark imagination and director Cronenburg's as well, both with the twisted audascity to take all these horrific atroscities of reality and fantasy and breath eroticism & mystery into them...

Impossible to describe or even explain (almost but not quite as incomprehensible as FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS), the movie is not exactly a telling of the book Naked Lunch (even though some characters, namely the vile mugwhumps, show up) as it is a telling of Burroughs writing the book and what he may have imagined while writing it.

THe film starts out with the main character William Lee and his even more "creepy" (if anyone in the Burroughs line ever wanted to label what's inside themselves) wife, Joan, are addicted to the roach powder pyretheum, which Lee obtains thru his job as an exterminator. After playing a drunken William Tell act with his wife and blowing her head off so to say (which actually happened to Burroughs and his wife, and is said to have sparked the writing of Naked Lunch), he escapes to Tangiers, Mexico (with a "ticket" which actually appears to be a syringe). There he flows into a seemingly hallucinatory Interzone--a place populated by all the things mentioned above and tons more weirdness. He also meets the wife of a bisexual author who looks almost identical to his wife...and they engage in a particularly freaky sexual practice in which a typewriter tries to join in. If I say any more, the plot will be totally given away, so just watch, and compared to all the elaborate twists and turns on this unreal path to hell, I've said very little.

Great performances from Roy Sheider (who plays Dr. Benway, another character direct from the book), Paul Weller as Lee, Judy Davis as Joan and the other Joan, and Robert A. Silverman as a truly unique black centipede meat salesman with a disquieting manor (the black centipede meat, as well as Burroughs' thoughts on how centipedes controlled many Interzone lives, were from the novel). You'll either be completely confused or completely tripped out of yr. mind, but you won't leave the film unchanged...just like Burroughs' writings.

welcome to interzone!
In my opinion, Cronenburgs best film, or at least that i've seen. Amazing movie, Peter Weller (robocop) does an awesome job too. One of those joints you pop in the player and are thinking about it a week after you've viewed it. Runaway to Interzone with talking typewriters, giant sea centipedes, and the innermost sanctum of paranoia, bizarre eroticism, delusion, hallucination, and beautifully depressing schizophrenia. It's something else. Tough movie to describe, definitely required viewing for anyone with oddball tastes like mine and a good respect for a true artists unique vision (in this case two artists, Cronenberg and Burroughs). p.s. (just don't ever try the William Tell party trick)

Out to Lunch
If you're going to watch this film then you pretty much already know what you're in for. Take Cronenberg and Burroughs, mix them together and you've got yourself a pretty weird film. And it is weird, but it's also so much more. It deals with addiction like no other film has. Specifically how addiction effects the creative process. This is far from youre average nice Saturday night film viewing, but it's a real treat nontheless. Criterion has once again done an amazing job. I'd be surprised if there's ever a better release of the film.

David Cronenberg's Very Best
Before you even try to watch this movie, realize that David Cronenberg's films are among the most bizarre and perplexing films you will ever see. If you like your films to stick to traditional narratives and standard plot devices you will probably hate 'Naked Lunch' (and any other David Cronenberg film you chance to come across). If, however, you are extremely open minded (as in, "I'm open to watching a movie where people have sex with typewriters that turn into giant insects") you may find yourself addicted to Cronenberg's surreal style of film making.

'Naked Lunch' follows the story of a bug-exterminator-cum-secret-agent who...you know what, forget it...because the plot in 'Naked Lunch' isn't really what this movie is about. I'm not going to say that the movie is plot-less (it's not), but the story (an insane organic blend of sections from Burroughs's novel and episodes from his life) exists mainly as an alibi for Cronenberg's signature style of subconscious imagery; more specifically, for his metaphoric exploration of writing as an erotic addictive binge to "exterminate all rational thought." If that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, don't blame me. The fantastic thing about this movie is that it has a twisted logic that is entirely of its own making, and it sits with you. 'Naked Lunch' is a film that is difficult to deal with. It's a movie that I love, and I don't know if that's going to come across in this review. But, 'Naked Lunch' is nothing if not ambiguous, and that's what makes it great art. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

This 1983 science fiction oddity, set in the subterranean world of heroin addicts, performance artists, and androgynous models in New York's East Village, became a staple of the midnight movie circuit and college campus film societies. A tiny UFO lands on the roof of a grungy penthouse apartment inhabited by androgynous model Anne Carlisle and her drug-dealing lover Paula E. Sheppard (the former child star of Alice, Sweet Alice). As explained with deadpan gravity by hilariously naive alien hunter Otto Von Wernherr, the UFOs congregate in areas of intense heroin concentration and feed off the highs of addicts. This alien has found a better high: orgasms. Russian émigré Slava Tsukerman's punk sci-fifeature takes the alien in alienation seriously, charting the mentaldisintegration of Carlisle as every sexual partner dies in climax and she turns herself into a heroine-chic angel of death. Easily the strangest to come out of the New York indie explosion of the early '80s, this low budget classic is talky and overlong at almost two hours, but remains an imaginative use of bargain-basement effects (heat aura photography, stop motion animation) for a tale of a most unusual alien encounter. Tsukerman co-composed the minimalist electronic score (in the Laurie Anderson vein). Carlisle, who cowrote the film, also appears as a surly gay male model. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (37)

DVD is nice update of a very odd cult film
I first saw this movie in a theater during its original release, and my immediate reaction was to loathe it. I was horrified. But after a few days I decided that, after getting over the shock, I enjoyed it in a quirky way. It is a great snapshot of a subculture of the 1980s. It does move a bit slowly compared to other modern films, but the costuming and characters are engaging. The music is a perfect companion to this weird piece. It is not for everyone -- there are some flashes of violent sex, adult language, and a lot of casual drug use. The DVD adds a few extra behind-the-scenes stuff, though not as much as some other DVDs. Plus it is a better quality copy than my VHS. This movie is for people who like movies like "Repo Man" or "Eating Raoul", and makes a nice addition to a collection of cult movies.

Everyone wants to be a performance artist
An extremely thin premise stretched across a tight budget...that's what you are, baby. Yet this movie gives us valuable insights as to what the early 80's "New Wave" culture was like, and along the way we are treated to bad acting and fluorescent paint and a clunky script and lesbians and little tiny aliens and a woman rather obviously playing both a "boy" and "girl" part.

Nonetheless, Liquid Sky will remain with you, even though you did not live in Greenwich Village at the time and missed the whole party. I still quote lines from this film, and it reminds me of our shared experience of the 80's past in a way that its imitators like "Valley Girl" do not.

Wow This was everything but amazing
This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.

Painful to watch, even more painful to know I paid for it
This is by far the worst movie that I've ever seen in my life. If it turns out that we all live more lives after this one, it's the worst one I'll see for all of those lives. The only reason I watched it was because I bought a vintage poster of it at Goodwill for 49 cents and wanted to see what it was about. I felt more uncomfortable watching this than I felt when a proctologist gave me my virgin exam. Honestly, for all directors and actors who have ever made a beautiful movie, throw this out and burn the trash can to the ground. If you aren't convinced that the movie is that bad, go ahead and watch it and then you can regret for the rest of you life that you will never get those two hours back. But, if you are going to be wise and not watch it but still want to know how bad it is...stick your head in a rest stop toilet that hasn't been flushed and breath and swallow at the same time. After you've done this, cover your body in peanut butter and lay down near a giant mound of ants.

Liquid Sky is the biggest mistake in a movie rental I ever made, if I ever feel compelled to do so, I might just start a world campaign to dispose of every copy until the world has been ridden of such trash. Godspeed.

80's fashion, music and fantasy flick: bizarre characters!
I have loved this movie since 1984. It's a cult classic that rivals films like THE WALL, REPO MAN & THE ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW. And it's better than any of the above, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION. I never known a film-maker with such a bizarre, fantastic imagination, a native sense of pure shock-factor and just plain fun!!! The dark atmosphere/mood is unparalleled.

Basically, LIQUID SKY is the irresistible story of a gorgeous, androgonous, female fashion model who is addicted to heroin (or something equally bad news), and who gets her drugs from her female lover Adrian. She dresses as both a man and a woman--the height of 80's beauty and mystery. The actress, Anne Carlisle, who plays the protagonist could not have been better cast. In fact, I think she helped write the screenplay and the novel on whivh the film is based. She's pure genuis and pure sexuality.

There are elements of sexual & chemical adiction, male-hatred by lesbians and lots of voyuerism.

Thhis movie is so far out, nothing has even come close to its allure since 1983, when it was first released on VHS.

YOU MUST SEE THIS FILM!!!! ... Read more

Reviews (47)

Restored edition, fantastic!!!!!!
The movie Reefer Madness seen by itself is really nothing to brag about, but this special addition for this best-selling cult classic is fantastic. It's a must buy, because for how cheap it is, you really get your money's worth. For the first time ever, I can say that the colorized version (complete with multicolor smoke and over saturated psychedelic color schemes) is better and looks better than the original black and white, and both versions are available to watch which is considerate of the DVD producers to give us both, and it looks as good as we can ever expect. Extra features are fantastic highlighted by a hysterical commentary by Mike Nelson, formerly of Mystery Science Theater 3000, which is the sole reason why I bought this edition. The commentary by the people who colorized the film is also worth a look. I highly recommend this new edition.

Reefer Madness IN COLOR for the First Time - Fire UP!
Reefer Madness is the quintessential cult classic. Originally made as a 1930's propaganda film, it was meant to scare America's youth away from drugs, showing them that one puff of the "demon weed" turns teens into raving reefer addicts. Now, years later, this ham-fisted effort to warn you off weed has become the height of camp entertainment. A 'must watch' film among students, Reefer Madness continues to entertain today's youth with the edgy exploits of their high school predecessors. This movie is so beautifully bad, it's great!

Finally someone has released Reefer Madness the way it should be: Beautifully restored, in color for the first time, and in 5.1 surround sound. Both the color and black-and-white versions are on the disk. Plus this DVD has loads of fantastic bonus material. Mike Nelson of Mystery Science Theater 3000 does a hilarious commentary track, cracking wise from start to finish. Grandpa's Marijuana Handbook, A short film by Grandpa Ganja himself, graces this edition and tells us everything we need to know about dope.

No question this is the "FEEL GOOD" DVD of the year!

TELL YOUR CHILDREN!!!
After hearing about this movie for years I finally picked it up, and its better than I ever expected. This one dude smokes a reefer and appears to drive around the block 2 times then hits this old man and then he drives away. oh, yeah, this other guy named Ralph really loves his reefers, he smokes a few hits, then laughs, then he falls in love with Mary, he tries to win her heart by ripping her clothes off and groping her. It doesnt really work out for Ralph, because his fanciful advances cause Mary to get capped, and then Jimmy gets blammed for it because he's a total dork. In the end everything works out, because this stupid girl spills the beans to judge turtlehead, and Jimmy gets aquitted then the stupid girl jumps out of the window. all in all I loved this movie, it really opened my eyes to the evils of the demon weed. thanks for saving me from a life of crime and dispair Reefer Madness!

Re Urban Legend
To address xerxes59's question about the urban legend:

I never heard any evidence about Dupont funding Reefer Madness, but they would have a motive.

Dupont was facing enormous loses because their inventions rayon and nylon could not compete with natural hemp (in quality, cost effectiveness, not to mention environmental friendliness). Andrew Mellon, US Treasury Secretary and chairman of Mellon Bank, one of the major financers of Dupont, did appoint Harry Angslinger (who was also married to his niece) as Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. As seen in Ron Mann's documentary "Grass", Angslinger was an extremist zealot who managed to criminalize marijuana and create ridiculous sentences for smoking pot. One of Angslinger's methods was to demonize pot with completely false evidence throughout the various media (newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst, whose financial interests in paper mills was also being hurt by hemp, was a great ally). Of course this is a tenuous connection between Dupont and Reefer Madness, but Dupont clearly had a direct financial interest in demonizing reefer, just like the movie attempts to do.

Pointless
You mean they used to think pot was bad!!! Wow! Actually I saw this film and it was boring. It wasn't suprising, it had no point. It probably wasnt even that great back in '38. This movie is for children who just learned how to roll one and now they want to be cool. This movie SUCKS!!! ... Read more

Reviews (46)

Nice DVD Remaster of Award-Winning Sci-Fi w/ Great Cast!
A sci-fi favorite of mine, this Academy Award winning film had fallen into obscurity on the video shelves, but is now back with all its original impact in a sharp, well-colored remaster with a brilliant digital 5.1 rendering of the Oscar-winning soundtrack. Ken Russell directs one of his more accessible films (compared to, say, THE DEVILS) based on the novel by Paddy Chayefsky, who, in a move remeniscent of Stephen King on THE SHINING, had his name taken off this movie because he didn't like the director's interpretation of his subject matter.

The film boasts a high-quality cast of young actors from William Hurt in his major film debut to John LaRocquette in the small role of an X-ray technician. Whoever cast this knew whom to select from the period's roster of young talent. Charles Haid, frankly, has never been more impressive as the fast-talking and brilliant skeptic and Bob Balaban is outstanding and self-assured in the role of the supportive friend who forgives Hurt his eccentricities but worries that he may be going crazy. Blair Brown is sexy and appealing and frequently nude as Hurt's just-as-brainy wife anthropologist, and one of the most interesting aspects of this movie is the dialog between these two intellects from the moment they first begin their sizzling sexual liason through their matter-of-fact decision to marry, then divorce, then finally redeem their relationship -- while nearly losing Hurt's character to his high-risk experiments.

Among other interesting subplots is Hurt's spiritual ambiguity since his father's fearful death, Hurt's notion that schizophrenia and related conditions may be "altered states" rather than diseases, Blair Brown's pragmatic decision to love Hurt's character, and marry him, despite the fact that he appears not to be wired to love her in return.

For the sci-fi fan there is the once-removed-from-reality premise that man may be able to physically alter his reality through changes in consciousness, whether via the isolation tanks Hurt utlizes in his experiments, or through complex hallucinogenic drugs he researches after an experience with an obscure indian tribe in Mexico. The special effects and the special make-up for Hurt's "throwback" missing link are first rate for their time and still look fairly stunning today. One of the things that impresses me about this movie is that the hallucinatory sequences, while wowing us in a post-psychedelic kind of way, also make sense in terms of the protagonist's life and experience; far more than just kaleidoscopes, the content of the montages are grounded in the story, rather than detouring us from it with eye candy. Ken Russell's religious viewpoint plays a part in the choice of imagery here, but the symbols of crucifixion, the beast and the Bible do not seem intrusive or sensational because they fit seamlessly with the Hurt character's internal struggle.

For the student of sociology, this movie offers a peek into the "turned on" 60s idea that drug experiences actually led somewhere -- a notion we now know to be tragically false. But at one time there was speculation that some drugs "expanded the mind" and deepened the life experience, either in terms of increasing one's understanding of the meaning of life or in some fashion maturing one's personality. The only reason this movie still works today is because the movie makes clear that in some tribes, there are substances that are traditionally and successfully used in spiritual rituals, and it is one of these that Hurt uses, in combination with sensory deprivation techniques, to try to get in touch with his own "genetic memory", for lack of a better term.

Again, this movie has much to recommend it, and the DVD release makes possible an experience in the home viewing much like we enjoyed in the theater on first run. Popularly priced, I snapped it up without hesitation for my collection and was rewarded with a very nice presentation of an old favorite. Not much in the way of extras here, just trailers and some text screens for cast, crew and background, but it's still a value, and you get to see the whole 1:1.85 image.

Alterations
The sci-fi film Altered States, is on the one hand, a landmark for the genre, while at the same time, it's not quite a classic either...

Research scientist Eddie Jessup (William Hurt, in his first film role) believes other states of consciousness are as real as everyday reality. Using sensory deprivation, then adding powerful, hallucinogenic drugs, he explores these altered states and endures experiences that make madness seem a blessing.

While Altered States features a solid cast that also includes Blair Brown, as Jessup's wife Emily, Bob Balaban as Arthur Rosenberg, and Charles Haid as Mason Parrish, Professor of Endocrinology at Harvard Medical School, as well as stunning visuals. Thanks to problems with script and the original novel's author Paddy Chayefsky displeasure with the way things were being done, the film does have a certain amount of choppiness to it at times--covered up by those effects I mentioned earlier--the impact of the film is less than it could have been. Director Ken Russell fortunately uses his best asset, the cast, to their full potential.

The DVD has very limited extras. There are only a few production notes and the theatrical trailer on the disc. On the technical side, the film boasts a soundtrack remastered in Dolby Digital 5.1 that sounds awesome. Viewers can watch Altered States in either the full-screen or widescreen formats.

The DVD is recommended, but the film's fault lies in covering up its weaknesses with albeit good looking eye candy.

Dont Believe The Hype!!!!
I'd happily soak up endless gallons of SWAK with my tongue, rather than watch this festering pile of crappola ever again!!!

Intriguing albeit silly at times
My mother recommended this film to me and I found it was definitely worth watching at least once. The premise is that a brillant scientist desires to transcend our human limitations and conducts experiements using himself as the subject in isolation chambers. He visits a Spanish speaking tribe who offer him a potent drink that has halluncinatory side effects and it is extremely freaky to see the healthy, tan tribe members turn to ghost white ash when the scientist glances at them under the influence of the drink. The visual assault certainly is stunning and I thoroughly enjoyed explosions of fire, religious scenes, crazy images a wild imagination would reel out. I found it diffuclt to sympathize with the scientist because his desire to pursue his experiments overrides his commitmment to traditional values such as family. He does manage to change into a fierce, primitive creature that reminded me of a cross between a rabid wolf and a prehistoric caveman. The change lasts a short while before he reverts to his human form, however, his skin tends to shudder and undulate helplessly after his first regression and he watches in interest. It's a good movie to see at least once because it explores a realm not dealt with often and the often outright silliness of the film downplays any terror one might be consumed by otherwise.

Something you should know about Altered States
by most reviews on here, i bought this DVD thinking it was some movie about the psychedelic trip of an experimental scientist and all the good fun he had with going back in time. FALSE. im going to be a little bit of a spoiler here, so if you dont wanna know exactly what the movies about, dont read the rest of this.
altered states is about a scientist/psychologist who is wandering about the reality of schizophrenia. that maybe its a connection that is not of insanity, but pure gift of the mind (my theory from day one). so he ends up in this dark water tank with some f-cked up voodoo LSD or sumthin from mexico. he goes back in time and evolves into an ape-man. he escapes from the tank and kills a man and eats a goat to be found sleeping naked (returned to his human form) in the zoo. his wife agrees to let him try it again. this time, it makes his face bubble up and deforms his entire body. the light and gas from the tank (how the hell it got their? some supernatural sh-t i guess) knocks out his wife and 2 scientists. the wife awakes, finds her husband, the experimenting scientist, in a swirling portal and he is screaming with an extremely disfigured face/body. she saves him from the portal of nothingness and they go back to the house only for him to turn into the deformed master of nothingness again and make her one of them (some fire girl---accident by the way), then he saves her from her nothingness. he tells her he loves her and thats the end.
yes, the movie has some trippy drug sequences but thats not what its about, really. its very impossible. i thought i was in for some good ol psychidelic fun and a guy with altered states of conciessness. i gues thats what i get for buying a movie before i see it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This 1968 oddity is probably a film only a total Beatlemaniac couldlove, but it carries both musical and historical resonance. It also givesintimations of what would happen in the next 30 years as artists gained more andmore power over how they were presented. The roots of virtually any rock star'svanity project (including Prince's Under the Cherry Moon) can be tracedto this little Liverpudlian home movie. Fresh from the success of their filmsA Hard Day's Night and Help!, and still under the influence of theintoxicants of the era, the Beatles set out to make their own fancifullypsychedelic project. What they got out of it was, essentially, a knock-off album with a few goodsongs and a lot of filler, which is more than can be said for this alternatelyself-indulgent and mildly amusing British version of Ken Kesey's magic bus tour.Using some of their favorite actors (including Victor Spinetti, who was in theirfirst two movies), the Beatles make an alternative British travelogue, stoppingoccasionally to sing songs like "I Am the Walrus" and "The Fool on the Hill."Strictly for completists. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (105)

Insane!
Someone hit it right on the head when they said: "It doesn't make much sense, but that's why it's great!" That IS the point. It was about destroying plot in a movie. It was meant to be a movie of interesting and funny part that were only very loosely connected. People who don't understand this totally fail to understand the Beatles or the sixties in general. It was meant to be a creative, interesting, funny movie.

Unfortunately, it didn't live up to its promise. It was so impropmtu that the acting wasn't brilliant and some of the skits weren't too funny. The kind of person you are will determine how you react to the various. The camera work and directing could have been better. It could have been a masterpiece, but ended up being an innovative (but sometimes weird to the point of boring) film by a bunch of amateurs. It is essential because of its music, its humor, the fact that it contains the first music videos, its ideas, and the fact that we get to see the Beatles goofing around at the height of their powers.

P.S.: The music videos for "I am the walrus" and "Blue Jay Way" are outstanding.

Shamefully underrated and quite enjoyable
When I first saw this film I simply couldn't understand why so many people ganged up to trash it. I've seen it two more times since then with friends and my opinion has only strengthened.

To me this is a far more interesting film than overrated boomer nostalgia like a "Hard Day's Night" because it gives a better look into their personalities--this is their film, and the truest test of just how much you're on the Beatles' wavelength, which means a liking for Goon-show type humor and pop surrealism. Therefore people who expect every movie to have a "point" or nice understandable plot should go back to kino-kindergarden and skip the film. (The sort of people who beat words like "self-indulgent" and "weird" into the ground to describe what isn't instantly understandable) MMT is basically a set of music videos loosely held together by the various goings-on during a Ken Kesey-esque coach trip. And at 55 minutes it's too short to be boring anyway. The entire point is to sit back and not bother--to quote Bob Dylan--shoveling each dream into the ditch of what each one means.

The film of course has large flaws. There are quite a few comic situations, but the Beatles don't really develop them.(John and George are more out of it than Ringo and Paul too.) Some of the lightly sketched sequences do drag a bit as a result.But the movie's strength lies in its resolute silliness--like an overlush, parodic seaside "love affair", John dressed up as an Italian waiter endlessly shoveling mud-like spaghetti for a obese woman, or the Beatles capering around in wizard's outfits like kids who've eaten too much sugar. That silliness shades into genuine pop surrealism with the primitive, excellent videos for "I Am the Walrus" and "Blue Jay Way," featuring the most captivating use of superimposition, odd props in even odder locations, children, extreme lighting, and fleet-footed but purposeful intercutting.(McCartney made for an occasionally clumsy but effective director) They live up to the mood of the songs--they seem genuinely dream-like and make a good match with the Beatles' captivating videos for "Strawberry Fields" and "Penny Lane." Those videos, especially the former, freaked parents out in their day, and an extended music video like "Magical Mystery Tour" still manages to irritate people to this day. (Especially all those poor souls who begin by saying "I'm a huge Beatles fan but...")

On (off) balance not THAT bad
Of the many reviews of this film, those approaching it from the perspective of Music Videos tied together with comic interludes exhibit the best approach. Recall, in the UK the music was originally issued as a double EP (only the five songs in the film). Those who comment on songs being left on the cutting room floor are confusing themselves due to the UK LP having a second side of previously only available as singles material.

However, if the Beatles invented MTV (as George opined in Anthology), they did so by accident. Consider, many of the AMAZON reviewers have complained that "Strawberry Fields Forever," "Penny Lane," and "Hello Goodbye" were 'cut' from the film -- but they have it all backwards. Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were released prior to the release of Sgt Pepper, and so also their repsective promotional films. "Hello Goodbye," the song and the film were recorded and released after Magical Mystery Tour, if I'm not mistaken -- the Sgt Pepper gear an embarrassing attempt to buy back some good will with the fans and press. And these songs were include only on the US version of the LP (as noted above)

Also, the selection of songs themselves are not quite up to par. "Blue Jay Way" drags on too long (Don't be long, don't belong..." ad infinitum), "Your Mother Should Know" just isn't the kind of show topping finale for which one would hope, and "Flying" simply rumbles on, in a nice but going nowhere sort of way. Indeed, only "I am the Walrus" and "Fool on the Hill" stand out -- the Title track being okay, but certainly not proto-MTV video quality.

All in all, it's a nice film and quite off-balance, and nowhere near as bad as many have painted it (expectations way too high on this one); however, it's also nowhere near as good, nor as interesting as many have suggested. As Beatles products go, it's worth a viewing, and perhaps a purchase (if properly warned, disposed, and prepared). One would hope that it will be re-issued in a restored edition with much additional footage to give the unitiated a better perspective (and maybe the 'cutting room floor' songs, eh?).

A good movie
When I first saw this movie I liked it. Even though I wasnt taking drugs and smoking pot. So what if the beatles made a movie about a trip across England that made no sense. I LOVE THE BEATLES evan if they came up to me and beat me up I would still love them. So dont say your a huge beatle fan and you hate this movie.

Great band, great album, horrible film
INTRODUCTION:
In 1967, the Beatles released the third of their five movies, Magical Mystery Tour. It was accompanied by the release of their studio album of the same name. This film is the one that tends to get bashed the most. Are the bashers correct, or is this film an underrated masterpiece? Read on for my review of Magical Mystery Tour.

BASIC PLOT:
The four members of the band have gotten onto a tour bus and basically go around acting silly. That's about it for the plot of this movie. And, of course, like every Beatles film, there are some music videos (known as promotional films back then) thrown in various parts of them movie.

FILM OPINIONS:
I love the Beatles. I love the Magical Mystery Tour album. But this film is the band's biggest blunder of all! The movie has no true plot, and there is absolutely no character development - we don't even know if the members of the band are supposed to know each other in the movie! The only real reason I gave the film two stars instead of one is because of the videos for the band's songs that appear throughout the movie - some of these are actually quite entertaining. Likewise, some of the film's scenes are pretty funny (the scene of John shoveling pasta onto a large woman's plate in a restaurant is particularly amusing), but you're going to be left dazed and confused most of the time. If you don't believe that the Beatles ever did drugs, watch this movie and your mind will be changed.

DVD:
This DVD version of the film contains a newsreel and some behind the scenes footage. These are good extras, but I was really hoping that the DVD would contain both the color and black and white versions of the film (the film was made to heavily emphasize color, but it was originally aired on British TV in black and white, much to the band's dismay.) Having both versions of the film would have been great for comparing the two.

OVERALL:
It pains me to speak so harshly of my favorite band, but even they made a few mistakes - and this was the biggest mistake of all. Unless you're a die-hard Beatle maniac, I recommend steering clear of this film. Of course, even some die-hard fans of the band hate this film with a passion (myself included.) Don't be expecting much from this film - you're not going to get much. ... Read more

Reviews (114)

I can dig it!
I am 21 years old. My mother raised me with the monkees music and tv shows. I did not see this movie until 2 years ago. I was impressed. And so should everyone else be that called them a "fake" band and so on. The talent is remarkable, as well as the direction and the writing. This film involves all of the angst and emotion of their personal lives as well as the sign of the times. They were trying to find love and peace in a world ridden with war. At the time they were so passionate about their beliefs, as well as with trying to strip off the stereotypes that people put on them by thinking that they weren't original or by comparing them to the Beatles (with whom they were friends with and hung out with on a regular basis). Everyone will have a different opinion after watching this movie. My opinion is that it is thoroughly enjoyable and an absolute shame to never see. There are so many different scenes and wonderful actors and great music! I think I am going to watch it again right now. Oh, and remember:Nobody ever lends money to a man with a sense of humor.

The Ultimate Acid Trip
Bob Rafaelson and Jack Nicholson were at a party with the monkees while all of them were stoned and asked them questions about their fame, their desires, and their fantasies and the result was Head, a psychodelic, plotless mindtrip which flows like a good Monty Python Episode.

Those tuning in to see the rapid-fire improv-filled laughtrack which was the TV series are in for a shock as this has none of their ultrasticom comedy, but hey! Hey! it's still the monkees....everything is just a bit more abstract and surreal :) And let's not forget the music! Wow! The monkees have never sounded so good, writing nearly all of their material. Mickey shines on Psychodelic "Porpoise Song" (while we see him jump off a bridge into a mermaid-filled sea) and the sweet ballad "aas We go Along. Mike Nesmith really rocks on "Circle Sky" and Peter Tork gives us more songwriting weirdness with his rapid fire "Long Title: Do I Have To Do This All Over Again?"

This is a good movie to sit back with your friends and watch entranced at its path. Lots of fun cameos by the likes of Teri Garr, Frank Zappa, and of course Victor Mature and his hair!

Groovy!

cult classic
All I have to say is if your a true monkees fan your wasting your time I'ts terrible. How ever if your a huge fan of Rocky Horror Picture Show, Shock Treatment,J-Men Forever and any movie that director
Ed Wood did "except" Orgy Of The Dead (thats just asking for punishment.)than this movie is awsome.
I don't under stand why Peter Tork is the star of the movie ,he's on the least compared to the other guyes.

Head is a trip!
What is so unique about HEAD is that it's dreamlike in a way that few movies are. A uniquely crafted film inspired by the underground films of the 50s & 60s. Few movies manage to be entertaining solely on the strength of editing, but here a series of dreamsequences are seemlessly strung together in a fun and innovative way. The most