Reviews

Ok, so the plot has some holes in it but the cast does very well with what they have to work with. Jack Lemmon and Darren McGavin turn in above average performances which are quite believeable. Same goes for Christopher Lee, Joseph Cotton, Olivia De Havilland, and Brenda Vaccaro. To me it seems that most of the cast came to this project with a professionalism which was lacking in Airport 1975 and The Concorde: Airport '79. Christopher Lee stated in his autobiography that this movie was what it was-a disaster movie. I can't argue with that. But he didn't let this stand in the way of giving a performance that he should be proud of. It was these performances which lent to this film the air of believeablity which lifted Airport '77 to one of the better disaster movies of the 1970's. The Universal Terminal Pack which contains all four Airport films is of excellent picture and sound quality and contains theatrical trailers from all four films.

Nosferatu is the best version of Dracula around. Some nine years before Lugosi and about 5 years before sound was used in film Murnau created a surrealistic nightmare and I'm still not sure how he did it. Take a look at the ship board sequences. These were filmed with a bulkly crank action camera and the scenes were shot totally on location. A great feat for the early 1920s. And who can forget the demonic image of Max Schreck at Graf Orlock. He is the stuff that some of my wildest nightmares have been. I'll admit that his acting may leave a little to be desired but I can guarantee that if I ran into him in a dark alley one night it sure would scare the hell out of me. And has anybody noticed that Ellen (the Mina character) is the one who figures out what is going on and kills the vampire-granted at the cost of her own life? Did the Germans realize that they were making a feminist statement? Nah, probably not. It just worked out that way. Nosferatu is a symphony of shudders, terror, and images. A 10 out of 10 for me. A must for any horror movie fan.

Long live the cat!!!! Er, sorry about that I meant Long live Basil, Sybill, Polly, Manuel, and the rest!!!! Fawlty Towers is not only one of the best British Comedies ever, it is one of the greatest comedies ever. John Cleese plays Basil Fawlty ("Faulty? What's wrong with him?" A loaded question if ever there was one)to perfection. The same can be said about the rest of the cast. Although there were only 12 episodes produced "Fawlty Towers" goes a long way to proving that quality and quantity are not always the same thing. From what I understand John Cleese and Connie Booth would spend up to six weeks per script---and it shows!!!! Sure there are some misfires but as Groucho Marx once said "They all can't be funny." But the bits that hit the mark right on outnumber the misses by a huge margin. Out of the 12 episodes the only one I didn't like was "Waldorf Salad". Maybe it's because I'm an American and the guy playing Mr Hamilton just didn't pull it off. Next time use an American. Anyway, I just don't watch that episode. But in the other eleven, they are a treat. Just one final thought. I just wonder what would happen if Basil were to meet up with Hychiccin, Hycathin, Hyachitin, You know the Bucket woman. We can only hope and imagine.

I just browsed the message board for this film and couldn't believe all the negative responses. It's a kid's film, nothing more, or less. As for it being worse than "The Blair Witch Project" at least "Stuart Little" had a mouse in it! Where in the entire "Blair Witch" was there a witch? (Ok, there could be an case made for the female lead, but I was referring to a supernatural witch). The special effects were really good and Michael J. Fox was the perfect choice for the voice of Stuart. Nathan Lane (as usual) turned in a wonderful performance as the cat. As a matter of record, my cat was not offended. I think he slept through most of it. Bottom line, for a good film for the kids to see, check out "Stuart Little".

Ok, so Raise the Titanic isn't the greatest film ever made, but it's not the worst. Cussler was having Dirk Pitt raise the Titanic and save the world when Tom Clancy was still selling insurance. I wish the film makers had stuck closer to the book, which is part Titanic, part James Bond. It's as if they decided to take the (very) basic plot of the novel and spend about $50 million on a film that looked like about $1.99. The acting is fair considering the script Robards and Jordan had to work with. From an appearance stand point Richard Jordan is Dirk Pitt for me. I can see him in the part. It was just that the part wasn't written for one of Jordan's talent. Read the novel, rent the movie and compare the hatchet job Hollywood did on it. At least they would do better on the next major Titanic movie. Not much consolation to Clive Cussler I'm afraid, but hey that's show biz!

Casablanca is my favorite film of all time. It's as close to perfection as a movie can get. The movies of today could learn a lot of lessons from Casablanca. Casablanca is perfectly scripted. Every scene is perfectly timed to where each builds on to the next never dragging on or using needless words that bog down the plot. The direction is also flawless. Just watch the final scene at the airport for proof (After, of course, seeing the rest of the film). And the acting. Humphery Bogart, Ingrid Bergman, Claude Rains, Paul Henreid, Conrad Veidt, Peter Lorre, need I say more? If you have seen Casablanca, you already know what I mean, if not, SEE IT! Run right out to the video store and rent it. You will not be disappointed, As a matter of fact, as time goes by you see the beginning of a beautiful friendship. I know I did.

Here's the film that put Vincent Price on the horror map and redefined his career. His wonderfully unhinged performance as Professor Jarod is one that you should not miss. Price chews up the scenery and has a great time doing it. It would have been great to see it in 3D but I don't even know if you can get 3D on home video. But don't let that stop you from checking this one out. There is also a fine supporting cast including Frank Lovejoy, Phyllis Kirk, and a very dasterly Roy Roberts. Price plays a scuplter who takes his work just a little too seriously, especially after Roberts sets his wax mueseum on fire with Vinnie in it. The rest of the film focusses on Price's revenge, as it were. Also check out a very young Carolyn Jones (the future Morticia Adams). Check it out, you won't be disappointed.

In many ways THE ANGRY RED PLANET is a typical 1950s sci-fi flick. The mighty Earthers going "where no man has gone before" (apologies to Gene Roddenberry) to explore Mars. And there is, of course, the evil looking space creature (the peeping tom alien). And we can't forget the less than ILM special effects. But, on the other hand, THE ANGRY RED PLANET is not a typical sci-fi film from this period. The headache producing red filter effect used when the on Mars, while it isn't STAR WARS quality, I found it rather creative for the time. Also here is a film that has a female in a role other than the usual damsel in distress. Again, we're not talking Susan Sarandon or Rene Russo here, but for late 1959 early 1960 it certainly was cutting edge. If you happen to catch it on American Movie Classics one night, throw some popcorn in the microwave and kick back and escape for a while. There are a lot worse ways to spend a evening.

Dracula A.D. 1972 is not a great film, but it's not a bad one either. Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, as always, turn in great performances. The rest of the cast make the best they can with a dated (even for the time) script. The party scene is great, as is the black mass scene, Ok, so it's not Horror of Dracula, or Dracula Prince of Darkness, but if you've got an hour and a half to kill, check it out. I loved the music, but then again, I've always loved the classics.

I came out of "The Blair Witch Project" feeling as if I had missed the punch line to a joke. I had heard that was a contemporary "Night of the Living Dead" and "The Exorcist" and I decided that I had to see it. I wasn't very impressed. Sure there are some scary moments and watching the three students' predicament get slowly but surely worse provided some good psychological scares as well. However, I expected more. All the hoopla the media has made over this film just isn't warranted. Maybe I'll try my luck with "The Last Broadcast". Go see "Blair Witch" if you wish but if you come out feeling like you missed something, I warned you.

I consider myself somewhat of a Jerry Springer fan. I am drawn to his show like one is drawn to a car wreck, you don't want to look at it, but you can't help but watch. I have waited several months for "Ringmaster" to finally come out on video since it never made it to the theater here in my hometown. After watching it last night I now know why it didn't make it here. It's terrible, awful, horrible, enter your adjective of choice here. The plot is nonexistent, I didn't care about the characters and the language makes a Quentin Tarantino film look like a Disney film-and that's one of the classic ones like "Snow White" or "Sleeping Beauty". If any aliens in outer space happen to run across "Ringmaster" in watching our world, we need never worry about them ever making contact with us. Take my advice: rent "Pulp Fiction" instead!

Airport '77 is one of the stronger entries in the Universal Airport series. It is not as overblown as Airport 1975 and not as ridiculous as The Concorde-Airport '79. While the plot line is a little hard to believe (a 747 sinking in the Bermuda Triangle with everybody still alive) it is the solid acting of the cast which pulls it off fairly well. Jack Lemmon turns in a solid performance as the Captain. The rest of the cast includes Darren McGavin, Christopher Lee, Olivia de Havilland, and James Stewart, and they all turn in good performances. While it's no Titanic, it's not The Swarm either. If you have a couple of hours to kill and Schindler's List is just a little too heavy, try Airport '77.

I remember watching "Gargoyles" when it orginally aired in 1972 and getting scared half to death by it in the first fifteen minutes. It took me several years before I actually saw the whole thing. The film starts out wonderfully paced and full of scary moments, although the last ten minutes or so left something to be desired, "Gargoyles" is still a very good film, especially for one that was made for television and in the early 70s. A must see for any horror fan.