Reviews

I own many of Akira Kurosawa's films. I have Ran, Throne of blood, Seven Samarai, Roshomon, Dreams, Hidden Fortress, Jojimbo, Snajuro, Red Beard, and even "Kurosawa" the documentary. I guess you can say that I like his work. The "Kurosawa" documentary narrated by Sam Shepard and produced by thirteen / WNET I recommend for anyone at all interested in Kurosawa's films as it will really wet your appetite.

Of all of his films, Dersu Uzala is my favorite. It is also one of my favorite films by anybody. It was done shortly after Akira had went through a very dark time in his life and had attempted suicide. It was his first film afterwards and the content of the film appears to reflect more than a little of his mindset at the time. Dersu Uazla is both a feel good film and also a sad film. It touches the way that people as they grow older have a more and more difficult time adapting to life as it changes and has its affect on them. The end of the film can certainly show light on the inhumanity that appears to be growing more prevalent in our society. But, I think what you remember from the film is the love between two individuals, and that is what feels good.

Many of Kurosawa's films have a great deal of spectacle, and he is perhaps known best for his Samarai films. There is none of that in this movie. Dersu Uzala is a statement by Akira of life. Akira was fighting to keep making films and was not having an easy time of it. If Akira Kurosawa could not make films, he could not feel that he was living. As a result, he attempted suicide. He survived to make this film plus many others that we all enjoy today. Dersu Uzala may be the most important of his films and the one that shows the great director's true personality. Just perhaps, it shows more about humanity than any of his other films. Again, it is my favorite.

I saw this film when I was just a little kid. I saw it close to the time that I saw "Curse of the Demon," and thoughout my life I always wondered if these two films were real films or some kind of nightmare I remembered that I just thought were movies. I found "Curse of The Demon" a few years ago for sale, and I was able to record "Curse of the Pharaoh" about a year ago when it was shown uncut and without commercial breaks on the Tele.

Now, as a grownup, I have a little of a hard time finding just what scared me so awfully much in "Curse of the Pharaoh." I guess I was very young at the time. However, I still rate the film as better than most others rate it and have watched it about four times since I recorded it. That compares with many of the new films on DVD that I have watched on once after purchasing them. Perhaps it is just that I remember it as such a good film from when I was little, but I still enjoy it today. Many of the early "classic" horror films are not as scary as it is, and they certainly move even slower. I feel that the audience for a good mummy film was not there when it was released back in the late 50's.

In closing, I can truthfully say that I enjoy an average horror film much more than an average film of any other genre. I can spend a whole evening watching horror and mystery movies. How weird?

I have seen this film many times. I own it on DVD. So I guess I could say that I enjoy it, but I don't feel it is anywhere near the greatest film of all time that many people have said it was. I have never liked Scarlett, and to me the film is a great film in spite of Scarlet, who is nothing but a spoiled brat that never appears to grow up through out the entire film. GWTW was the first of the really great color films that was ever made, and at the time there were still many people who were alive during the Civil War. The only other film from its day that is nearly as epic is "All Quiet On The Western Front."

When I lived in Georgia, GWTW was shown almost every summer, and I can remember seeing it at a drive-in movie in the Atlanta area. The little speaker did not do it justice. The soundtrack is extrodinary and the sweep of the film from its opening is something that takes you along on the wind. Some of the scenes from the picture you cannot ever get out of your mind. I just wish I could get over Scarlett O'hara being such a complete bitch. I really hate her.

It would appear to me that its place in great films is slipping more than a bit. I think this is justified. I saw the film first when I was a wee child and I was more than a bit reserved about it and I saw Scarlett as a zilch then. As my mother used to tell me when I started dating girs: "Beauty is what beauty does." A lot of the southern character was captured by the film and it is a shame to me that it has became not politically correct to appreciate anything about the south from the Civil War era. Beautifully made film that was ahead of its time. 1939 was possibly the most landmark year in the history of film making; The Wizzard of Oz, Goodbye Mr. Chips, and Gunga Din are just some of the spectacular films released that year.

I am like a lot of people who are not real Jim Carrey fans. Fortunately this film did not drop to the level of being just another vehicle for him to make faces in. For a bit I thought it might do that when he first got the power but it got on to tell a pretty cute story.

No, it was the funniest movie I have ever seen but yet it kept me smiling all the way through without dropping down to the toilet bowl humor that is so often protrayed in films and music today. Where are we going to go after everybody gets used to the proper words for genitalia being used as the punchline?

I have heard some complaints about it being to much like some of the other classics from yesteryear. However, there is nothing completely new anymore unless you refer to genitalia, as referenced to above. It's a Wonderful Life follows this film a bit, but it is much different in the actual scene structure. A film that leaves you going home with a smile on your face needs to have a happy ending, and Bruce does that; and to do that, you need a certain amount of drama before the happiness results. There are only so many ways you can do that, so a certain amount of simularity is certain to be there.

I thought Morgan Freeman was just about perfect, as were most of the others in the cast. My wife and I both enjoyed it and would not be afraid to show it to most anyone. If your faith is so weak that you must protest any reference to God, then you are to weak to pass any test.

Perhaps I was expecting something much more from this film. I had been waiting for it to come out on DVD so I could buy it and see it on my 57" widescreen. It took me two starts to get through the picture as the first half hour for me was disjointed and didn't make a lot of sense as to a plot. After seeing the whole film I have to say that it reminded me a great deal of what you would expect in MTV videos. Johnny Depp? When he first came on screen I thought he was drunk. He acted throughout the whole film as would be expected of a person who had about a 2.0 blood alcohol level. His speech was always slurred and it certainly appeared to me that he chose to play his character as though he was drunk. It got to be a little irritating.

I did enjoy the film and will watch it again, no doubt, and can recommend it. However, it seemed to me that they just attempted to cram too many segments than was necessary into the film in attempting to constantly perk your interest. It was almost as though there were two films edited together in the time space of one. Perhaps when I sit down again to see it I will know what to expect and will not be jerked around so much. Good film, but certainly not one of my 100 favorites.

There are a few flaws in the film, to my way of thinking. The first two segments could have been left out for the most part, and they could have been covered in the film; which in fact they were. I couldn't help but be reminded of "Predator" for the start of the film, and I rather feel that it would have worked out better if the werewolves were introduced in like matter.

The middle of the film concerning the farm house reminded me a bit of "Night Of The Living Dead." D.S. does move off into its own direction for the end.

Some of the parts are more than a bit difficult to take. The early part of the film where the soldiers are supposed to be commando types is a bit hard to swallow. Campfires, whistling, and loud voices/laughter don't cut it if you are attempting to be not known. The part of the steer falling on them was also a bit much, as the steer appeared to have been quite dead long before the fall. But, I thought the werewolf transformation of one of the most pleasant of the characters was quite well done and also timely.

I spotted the film in a discount rack and liked what I saw and thought it would be worth the price, which was quite low. All in all I am very happy with my purchase and rate it as a well worth seeing film of it's genre. However, if you don't like these type of films you should probably leave it alone as it is highly gory. Quite a surprise to me as to how good a film it was, and I would recommend it to those that like the genre. Not perfect, but the good parts outnumber the bad parts and if you can concentrate on what the film is try to do you will not be unhappy

This film is one of my all time favorites. There are some things in the film that I am less than happy about, such as the attempted rape in the hotel room in Reno. I don't believe it actually happened. I have read a few biographical books on Cobb and even though few people ever liked him, there were some things he would not do. Its strange, but many people will see somebody who is detestable, in most respects, and that person is therefore guilty of anything that can be said about him. Ty Cobb was a "son of the south" who never got over his father's murder, and he also never, ever, got over the Civil War. As I recall, he entered the major's in 1904 or 1905.

As I said above, the movie "Cobb" is best viewed as a comedy; and I think it was intended to be seen as such by the film makers. I compare it to the film, "A Clockwork Orange." In A Clockwork Orange you had a story of a guy name Alex who had things happen to him, often humorous, because of who he was. At the end of A Clockwork Orange, in the last scene, you have to admit that you could only snicker at what was on Alex's mind listening to his beloved 9th once again, since he had now been "cured." I also remember the scene in the film that you see from the Bible where Jesus is carrying the cross and is being flogged. The camera pans back to the Roman who is doing the whipping, and it is Alex.

In Cobb, the first part of the movie is one of the funniest I have ever seen; especially the ride down the hill in the snow to Reno. The film has a lot of truth in it but it actually leaves out a lot. The Scene in which you see Cobb beating up the fan who is crippled is true. But what is not said is that the whole team put itself on the line in backing Cobb in what he did; they went on strike against Cobb's suspension. So, Cobb was not hated quite like he was shown to be in the film, and the film did a discredit to Cobb in some areas. Oh, by the way, that fan that was beatup in the film was Jimmy Buffet from "Lost in Margaritaville" music fame. Jimmy is a good friend of Tommy Lee Jones.

Actually, I rather doubt that you could make a real true film about Ty Cobb that could be saleable at the box-office. Ty Cobb was not funny, and he had little sense of humor; he absolutely had no sense of humor about himself. He was a bigot. You did not dare make fun of him to his face. He could explode into a life threatening altercation at the drop of a hat. However, I do believe he was courteous to women for the most part, and that is another area I have problem with what is depicted in the film. Cobb was a Redneck and a great deal like many other Rednecks from the south at that time. In his time there was a great deal of KKK activity going on in the South and the rest of the country for that matter. Cobb reflected his times, and never changed.

Also, baseball was a lot different then than it is today. It was a completely different time. Baseball was the ticket for the poor and exploited to get out of the coal mines, the iron mills, or the farm fields. It was much more of a dog eat dog world than it is today. The average player today can move into some other endeavor if he didn't make it. In Cobb's time, it was back to the coal mines and an early death. To quote Ty Cobb: "It's no pink tea, and mollycoddler's had better stay out." Baseball was a do or die affair and there were no holds barred as long as you could get away with it.

Cobb, in many ways was not that different than many, but he was the best baseball player of his time, and quite possibly the greatest that ever lived. And, he played baseball with a fury that nobody else, before or since, has played with. Unfortunately, he could not turn off that fury when he wasn't playing the game. For Ty Cobb, baseball was absolute war and he devoted himself 100-percent to playing it that way and he also devoted his mental capacities 100-percent to the study of getting the edge on his opponents. He would do or say anything to get you out of your game. Cobb could also circle the bases faster than anyone who has ever played the game, with his spikes sharpened. He was rather big for his time and was about the same height as Babe Ruth. Couple that size with that speed and the grit in his demeanor and nobody ever enjoyed or looked forward to playing against him. "What a ballplayer."

This is a movie for people who love really happy movies, and also love happy endings. If you are in the mood for something that will almost bring tears to your eyes with joys. This is it. If you want a dark, ugly, and scary film, this is not for you. I can appreciate both, although for either I have to be in the mood. It is rather precious seeing Christina Ricci as a young teenager wearing hiking boots throughout the whole film, as opposed to the way she looks in "Sleepy Hollow." Although I can certainly appreciate the eye-candy she was in Sleepy Hollow. I guess its just neat to see her as a teenager about to bloom in someone extrodinarily beautiful. In Casper she was sweet and quite loveable. The whole film was sweet and lovable. If you didn't like this film, I will bet you really hated "The Sound of Music."

The depiction of life shown in "Reloaded" almost makes you believe that it would be a blessing to be no longer having to put up with the B.S. Beyond that, the action scenes are some of the best I have ever seen, and may in fact be the best. But, you are forced to sit through much longer than I think was necessary minutes until the action starts again. This is a film which really is nothing but a B-Film plot for the purpose of having special effects. Still I can say that for the most part I enjoyed it, even though the "ORGY" scene depiction of Zion also makes you wonder what the purpose of life had become.

Is it really better to live inside a Roman Orgy than have a normal life inside the Matrix, even though you are not really living? However, you are sublimely ignorant of this fact. What type of food do the humans eat. Now that I reflect on it, I don't recall any of the "humans" in and around Zion eating anything. Go to the market? Sanitation? I don't think so. Pretty much a mindless vehicle for special effects. Kinda reminds me of "Independence Day" in that regards. Still, I think it was worth seeing for the special effects. How rediculous was the wife of the game-player having to have a kiss, a kiss just like Trinity got? If you want a good plot in films, give it a 3 out of 10. If you like nothing but special effects, give it 8 out of 10. Just be aware that you must sit through a whole lot of B-Movie to get to the special effects.

Before watching this, I thought that "The Dead Pool" was his worst film. The film does follow a plotline, but then so did "Plan 9 from Outer Space." I have Plan 9 also, and I have to say that I enjoyed it more than "The Gauntlet." In Plan 9 about the only thing really bad was the cheap things Wood had to resort to in order to make his film. He couldn't use real actors and had to make do with a lot of things that to say was second rate would be to be complimentory.

Nothing in "The Gauntlet" was at all plausable, nothing. Hundreds of police officers were in on a mob hit. I ride a bike and I can tell you that the last thing you want to do is to ride your Harley out on a dusty dirt road. At the end of the movie after hundreds of police officers have been shooting to ribbons a non-threatening bus, when the bus finally stops on the steps, Eastwood and Sandra calmly open the door and proceed up the steps with the officers who had been shooting seconds before allow them to go unmolested.

Absolutely stupid film. It is rather scary to me that there are that many people who have a high opinion of this movie. For them, it would seem, all you have to put in a movie is lot of violence and the quaility of film art is not even desired; not wanted. Until another film comes along, I will have to rate this as the worst film I have ever seen. Why? Because you should expect more from a man who has indeed made some very good films. I am sorry, I and my wife sat through this on a digital wide-screen, on DVD. We both looked at each other at the end and said "Turkey."

I read the book by F. Paul Wilson. It was an outstanding book and I rate it as the best horror novel I ever read. The movie had a limited budget and was edited into a much shorter time-frame that the story required. The book was a fairly long one. The film was much too condensed and lost way too much of what made the book such a good read.

If it could be redone now, with the full story done justice, it could be an outstanding film. It begs to have the length that the first instalment of the Lord Of The Rings has. The travel of the keeper of the Keep accross the sea and land is one of the best parts of the book. You really don't know who or what he is, but as things and people attempt to stand in his way you learn that he is no normal person, indeed. The actual end of the book could now be done which is much better than the simple way the existing film did.

I bought the book (The Shining) just before the original movie came out in 1980. I started reading the book but then decided not to finish the book because I didn't want to ruin watching the movie. I enjoyed the first movie very much, but always had a problem with the silly blood scenes coming out of the elevator, etc. Also, the scenes with Wendy standing there scared to death seeing all this stuff degraded the film for me.

This film filled in some of the holes that were in the original and also had many things that were not in the first film, the animals on the lawn for one. In my opinion, this remake is actually the better of the two films, however it would have been nice if Jack Nicholson could have reprised his role. He is the only thing I missed from the first film. As I understand it, Kubrick took two weeks to shoot the scene with Danny and Halloran in the kitchen. Mr. Kubrick I believe wore down people so much quite often to the point the there was no more emotion left in their performance. As a result, many of his films show a rather dead interplay between the characters. Still I enjoy them both. I have both films on DVD, and I will enjoy viewing them separately in the future. Both great, but the latest I may like the better.

This is a truely "lovely" film. All of the ladies in the film find true love other than the girl who is taking care of her father, but he survives, so all is love. Even the bear gets a couple hugs in the film. The leading lady finds Treat Williams. A lady writer on the plane meets the leading ladies father, and the young couple patch things up and are about to go off into the sunset. The bear didn't fare quite so well in the end, I am afraid.

Most of the scenery was shot next to a forest service campground about two miles from Rock Creek Lake in California. I have been there lots of times. If you look in the beginning you will see a couple of the outhouses in the pic. They found the magic box there. They crashed their plane there, and they treked and trecked to get away from there but never got accross the highway. But, Mount Morgan is always in the picture. Rock Creek Lake lies in the valley where all the trees are. Rock Creek Lake is only about 30 miles from Bishop, CA. And that is where some of the street scenes were shot. I bet the crew all stayed at "Tom's Place" which is at the entrance to Rock Creek Canyon. Tom's has a bar, a restaurant and quite a few rooms. I had fun with the movie.

Actually I rather enjoyed the film. At times it was so bad it was funny. The wild ride in the Bronco with Williams cracking jokes all the way was stupid and because it was stupid I had to laugh

There are certain books and certain movies that capture a period of time in film. Sometimes the period of time isn't what we wish it had been now, but that doesn't change facts. They have recently wanted to rewrite some of the Hardy Boy's Mysteries because of words that are not thought not acceptable. And Disney has completely removed "Song of the South" from circulation because it shows African-American's in a place and time that some people do not wish to comprehend.

Song Of The South is a rather joyous film. I think everybody really needs to study the times back then. The slaves did sing, they partied, had children, and had a lighter side. It is within the heart of humanity to be joyful, if possible, regardless of the situation. Song of the South is a depiction of those time that does not concentrate on the ugliness; it attempts to show the good of the black's existance. The good was the songs, the tales, the joyful humanity that was in the heart of the African-American. That is, in fact, where the joyous African-American culture came from. Nobody wants to go back to those times, but there are things that should be remembered. The story has a lot of humanity in it. It deserves to be available.

One of the absolute classics of the genre. I think that movies like Frankenstein; Dracula; Bride of, etc., came when there was not a glut of those type of films. They had a distinct advantage over those that followed, such as the subject film. When Curse of the Demon/Night of the Demon came out there were many other monster type films out there and few were anywhere near as good and most were forgettable.

If you were to find this movie in a rental store it most likely will be using the "Curse of" title. The scariest things are created in your mind and this film really accomplishes this. It was made when the movie had to be good enough to create the terror in your mind and could not use special effects to carry that part of the movie. The original movie, "The Haunting" is like this, and I find them to be the most satisfying of any type. I have this film, and I watch it at least twice a year, and there are few films that I can enjoy seeing on a regular basis. I feel sorry for those who can only appreciate a film if it is loaded with special effects as those special effects are always the same each and everytime you see them. With a movie that creates them in your mind, the picture you see can change each time you see the film. Yes, you see the Demon a couple times in this film, but the movie would be just as good, if not even better, if the Demon had never been shown.

There have been few films that disappointed as much as this one did. I didn't expect "Shawshank Redemption," but with Stallone, Palance, and Russell, I thought the script, etc. would be pretty first rate. When I saw the two guys fly out through the windshield of their truck, because of braking too hard, I said to my wife, "I hope it gets better." I can't say that it ever did. I suppose that it really didn't get any worse, if that means anything.

How Tango and Cash were set up, and that the police department etc. swallowed it all is ludicrous. The battle with all the felons and Mr. Palance inside the prison, ditto. . As I watched the film it became apparent that it was not going to change, and I began thinking how the different things could have been done well, without changing the basic story. It could have been much better. It certainly could have been a better movie. And yes, I have seen worse. I managed to sit all the way though it, and there are some films I could not. But with the quality of the actors involved, it was a waste of their talent and time; very disappointing.

I appear to be one of the few, besides my wife, who like this film very much. Although it doesn't have the cute story that Jurassic Park did, its effects are on par and the story takes very little time to get cooking. It is a long film and at times in the middle parts of the film it drags just a little bit due to plot development. However, as is the norm with pictures like this, there isn't a whole lot of plot. It is meant to be an exciting picture and that it does well. I can think of two other pictures (Independence Day and Twister) that received better reviews but had plots no better, and I have to say, in my opinion, worse.

It also seems that with pictures like this, to really enjoy them, you need to see them in the theater of have a large screen television with most important: a great sound system. I have both and with a film like Godzilla the house really rocks and rolls.

It seems to me that one critic put the film down and then all the rest followed suit. I have my doubts if they actually saw the picture. I bought the film first for a reduced price on VHS. I liked it enough to purchase it a short time later on DVD. I seldom do this. If you can accept the idea that Godzilla came to New York City to have her children, you are half way there. Also, when you watch the film notice that she really isn't mean spirited until the end of the film. The picture starts fast as the story is really about Godzilla, and it is no time at all until you are in New York City with all hell breaking loose. The plot sorta develops around what Godzilla does. No, this picture would never be nominated for an Oscar. But, how many of those pictures have you seen that you could hardly get through. It took me three times to get through "Chariots of Fire." I kept falling off to sleep.

The interior of the castle was done inside the old hanger for the Spruce-Goose in Long Beach, California. The artwork and detail of the interior is outstanding. The special effects are also very good. I have the original film and although they are similar, they are enough different that you can enjoy one and then the other. Everytime I watch the new version I concentrate on the detail present, it is mind boggling. The ending of the film I think could have been a bit better, perhaps, but the rest of the film was good enough that the ending was OK; which made it a bit like the original film. If you have never seen the original, you should. It was super and it never really shows a creature or demon. But, you are convinced they are there, just the same. I should say that I have the advantage of viewing the new movie on DVD and with a very good sound system. With a big screen and a good sound system the film really gets you.

I think the summary about says it all. It has twists and turns and has you guessing all the way through it. And in the end, you find out you were possibly fooled all the time. It was scary at times and I would rate it as an excellent film of this genre. I must admit, that I am a real fan of this type of film.