Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Wild Hogs (2007)

Wild HogsI am not one to usually write reviews on movies, and I can't stand the people who try to analyze every little aspect of movies and write novels of their opinions instead of just enjoying them for what they are entertainment!! That being said, I saw this with my mom, and I thought we would fall out of our chairs we were laughing so hard! I LOVE funny movies, and VERY rarely do I see one that makes me laugh this hard, so I just had to write this since the critics were so awful to this movie. Travolta, Allen, Lawrence and Macy are great together, and I didn't know that Ray Liotta (one of my faves!) was in the movie. This just made it even better! The entire movie was excellent I can't wait to buy the DVD in August!

Wild Hogs is a typical midlife crisis movie. Four men, who have been friends for years and who suit up in leather and ride to the local bar and grill regularly to hang out, suddenly wonder what happened to their lives. They all realize, one by one, that they've hit middle age and fallen into a rut, and they decide to take a cross country trip on their bikes to get out of it.

This is one of the more entertaining movies I've seen in a while. What made it for me, however, was not the plot or even the comedic moments but rather the excellent performances by a great cast. John Travolta plays the cool-guy-in-a-midlife-crisis role perfectly, and Tim Allen pulls off his when-did-my-life-get-so-bland part flawlessly as well. Throw in great performances by Martin Lawrence, a man desperate to get out from under his overbearing wife's thumb, and William H. Macy, a geek who hopes he can FINALLY do something that will make him cool, and you've got a great group of main characters.

Macy's performance is probably the most surprisingly good of the bunch. He's downright hilarious in this movie as the 'rebel nerd.' And Ray Liotta is excellent as the villain, the antagonist who tries to refuse this group of "Wild Hogs" their right to ride on the grounds that they're not real bikers.

This is a very funny movie and is sure to keep you entertained. With a relatively unoriginal plot this may not have been a great film if not for the excellent cast, but these guys will have you cheering for the middle-aged suburbanite and longing for the open road yourself.

Buy Wild Hogs (2007) Now

Instead of listening to the critics who have savaged this film, check it out yourself and you may actually enjoy it. It's a story that almost anyone 40 or older who has ever dreamed of riding a motorcycle can relate to. The central characters are four middle aged guys, Doug (Tim Allen), a dentist who hardly knows the meaning of fun anymore, Bobby (Martin Lawrence), a henpecked plumber, Woody (John Travolta), a lawyer who, with his supermodel wife and lucrative career, seems to have it all but has secretly fallen on hard times and Dudley (William H. Macy), an extremely naive, geeky computer programmer. The four decide, once and for all, to live a little and to take a cross country road trip on their Harleys. Along the way, they have a series of misadventures that really get interesting when they run into the Del Fuegos gang who's leader Jack (Ray Liotta) takes an immediate disliking to this bunch of yuppies pretending to be real bikers. The guys later find themselves in a situation where they have to truly rely on each other as men and as friends and where they have to really be open and honest with themselves and each other.

The only real fault I found with Wild Hogs was the interaction with the gay cop which could have been completely left out. However I found the film as a whole to be fun to watch and made me want to get myself a Hog and take a cross country trip myself. This movie doesn't take itself seriously (It's a comedy for Chrissake!) so the critics shouldn't either.

Read Best Reviews of Wild Hogs (2007) Here

Hollywood needs to rediscover the lost art of movie comedy. "Wild Hogs" is "City Slickers on Harleys" minus the humor, inventiveness and overall good taste. The filmmakers take every conceivable wrong turn and waste a fine cast in the process. You may get a few chuckles from this inexplicable box-office smash, but you'll probably hate yourself in the morning.

Want Wild Hogs (2007) Discount?

This is a cute movie, kind of a First Wives Club for men. A movie where aging professional guys go on a week long motorcycle riding trip to reclaim some of their youthful exuberance.

The movie is a funny parallel to real life, as the actors in this movie are also aging professionals looking to inject a little excitement back into their careers.

There are a number of humorous moments along the way, many of them involving the shy William Macy.

But John Travolta, Martin Lawrence, and Tim Allen turn in good performances as the other Hogs.

I also enjoyed the antagonist Del Fuego biker, played by Ray Liotta, and the charming cafe owner Marisa Tomei, who plays the potential love interest for Dudley (William Macy).

Watch this movie and take a break from the serious side of life. Let out your inner hog!

Save 50% Off

Fanboys (2008)

FanboysAdmitting my bias, I am a big Star Wars fan and had been anxiously waiting the movie release since seeing a preview at ComicCon. The movie did not disappoint and had the family (boys at least) laughing harder than anything else I can remember. Some of the jokes are mature and maybe too vulgar for some. The number of inside references and "for fans only" jokes makes it fun. The guest appearances by Star Wars legends also adds to the experience. The best part is the humor is in support of a story beyond a throw away comedy with a compelling conclusion.

First and foremost, this film features and outstanding young cast: Sam Huntingon (Not Another Teen Movie), Chris Marquette (hilarious in The Girl Next Door), Jay Baruchel (funny and awkward as ever), Kristen Bell (gorgeous and talented as always), and Seth Rogan (whose mannerisms always seem to be funny). Who stole the show, however, was relatively obscure Dan Fogler. Part Booger from Revenge of the Nerds, part Jack Black without the tendency to irritate, Fogler absolutely stole every scene into which his hairy, obese body waddled (Do a Google picture search for "awesome none left" and you get a good idea of what he looks like).

Beyond the superbly blended cast is a heart-warming yet laugh out loud story of a group of twenty-something friends who have wanted one thing for years: to break into George Lucas's Skywalker Ranch and steal a copy of Phantom Menace before its release. Anyone in the sci-fi community can tell you that this release was HIGHLY anticipated, and executing this plan would have been akin to an Arthurian knight finding the Holy Grail. Watching the crew band together and embark on this perilous mission reminds me of, oh, I don't know, the crew from Star Wars minus the midget they should have had for Yoda perhaps? Although, it's a bit of a stretch to paint Kristen Bell as an obsessive Star Wars, sci-fi fan who dresses up as Leia and waits in line for the premiere of Phantom Menace; there can only be a handful of girls like that in the world.

For Star Wars and Star Trek fans (i.e. Trekkies or Trekkers, choose one), this movie is saturated with references, superb cameos, trivia, and enough "insider" moments to impress the true fanboys. If you waited in line to see the Phantom Menace and you haven't seen this, you're doing yourself a big disservice (they debate the inherently incestuous relationship between Luke and Leia). If you're just a random sci-fi fan and you haven't seen this, I highly recommend it. Even average movie fans should laugh enough to make this enjoyable.

Jason Elin

Buy Fanboys (2008) Now

Synopsis: Who in their right minds would concoct an insane plan like to drive across country to the estate of the great George Lucas, sneak in and spirit away with a copy of his soon to be released film Star Wars: Episode 1? It sounds like an idea that maybe a group of eight year olds would come doesn't it. That is if they could drive. Unfortunately this hair-brained plan is devised by 5 lifelong sci-fi, comic book fans who happened to be old enough to drive and stupid enough to attempt to do it. As the road unfolds before them, along with an endless series of insane encounters and unpredictable mishaps they experience along the way, their road trip begins to evolve into an epic quest for redemption and an unforgettable rite of passage that none will ever forget.

Critique: I didn't expect much from this film. I wasn't looking forward to wasting my time watching another dime a dozen crazy teenage road trip, low brow humor film. Well..., I was wrong. `Fanboy' is a well thought out, clever, immensely funny film is not only enjoyable on the initial viewing but will stand up well to the repeatability factor. I loved the cast, specially Kristen Bell (yes that's right, Kristen Bell) and Dan Fogler. Plenty of great cameos too! It certainly isn't Shakespeare but it sure is good for a lot of laughs.

Read Best Reviews of Fanboys (2008) Here

Four twenty-something childhood friends with a shared obsession for the greatest movie trilogy of all-time (Star Wars, for the clueless), reunite for the ultimate mission: To travel cross-country to George Lucas's Skywalker Ranch and steal a rough cut of "Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace" to view months before its official release. There's an honorable cause driving their madness though, as the group's most heartfelt member, Linus, is terminal with cancer and may not live to see the film otherwise. Together with rambunctious scoundrel Hutch (who drives a Star Wars fan's dream-van) and uber-nerd Windows, Linus and his "straying from the Force" best-friend, Eric, set out on the trip of a lifetime in search of their own, personal Death Star.

As the motley crew of rebels makes its way on the open road, naturally, they have a series of mishaps and misadventures. (*Mild Spoilers*) Their distaste for Trekkies leads them to a confrontation at a Captain Kirk statue dedication in Iowa. Soon after, they accidentally stumble into the wrong biker bar, have a strange experience with some marijuana-laced guacamole, Windows finally meets his internet dreamgirl, and an encounter with Harry Knowles of "Ain't It Cool News" sends them to Vegas for a secret meeting with a Skywalker Ranch insider, but not before they land themselves in jail and have to get bailed out by the comic shop hottie with a crush on one of the guys. Of course, it all leads up to one crazy infiltration attempt on Skywalker Ranch and a very touching finale.

So, that's the story of "Fanboys", quite simply, a film made for lovers of all-things Star Wars. Trekkies, beware; while this film may have some moments you'd enjoy, it definitely mocks the Trek. If you don't have a good sense of humor or acknowledge the fact that Star Wars is superior, you may just want to pick up a copy of "Free Enterprise" instead. Great film, but it's the Trek version of "Fanboys". "Free Enterprise" is more original and intellectual, and I love it because it goes beyond just Trek, but I gotta say, as a diehard, lifelong Star Wars fanatic, it made me anxious for something like "Fanboys" to come along.

Of course, "Fanboys" isn't perfect. The road-trip mission plot is anything but new, and the weak spots are some of those aforementioned misadventures. Two in particular come to mind. The gay biker bar bit seemed uninspired, though I liked the parallel with the Mos Eisley Cantina, and all the stuff right after that involving "The Chief" seemed rushed and awkward (don't get me wrong, who doesn't love Danny Trejo?). In general, there were times of missed opportunities to make things just a bit funnier. On the upside though, the film is still wholly enjoyable thanks to all the clever things that are included, mostly being Star Wars references, terrific cameos, and the humor of having a pop-culture obsession, thankfully treated here with total respect; something else that makes this a great film. "Fanboys" also has a great cast of rising stars, with Chris Marquette of "Just Friends" and "Race to Witch Mountain" as Linus, Sam Huntington of "Not Another Teen Movie" and "Superman Returns" as Eric, Dan Fogler from "Balls of Fury" as Hutch, Jay Baruchel of "Tropic Thunder" as Windows, Seth Rogan in multiple and hilarious roles, and the gorgeously stunning as always Kristen Bell as Zoe, the feisty comic shop princess. And, yes, girls like that do exist. There isn't one at my local comic shop, but I've seen them working the shop booths at Wizard World Texas(R.I.P.). I'll always remember a particularly cute one I saw the past two years from a comic shop in Plano. Though, I don't buy the filmmakers' implication that girls like that go unnoticed by the geeks around them because their interests make them "one of the guys". Nah, those girls are usually dating one of the comic shop employees, that's the problem, but I digress...

Yes, as I mentioned, one of the things that makes "Fanboys" great is that it treats the fans with respect (of course, that's what some critics seem to have had a problem with). It even cleverly handles the whole controversy of Episode 1 being... not good. Which is not my own opinion, just a seemingly popular one. In addition, the plot point of Linus's terminal condition adds a great depth to the whole thing that was nearly lost. Apparently, executive producer Harvey Weinstein wanted that left on the cutting room floor. Thank the Force that didn't happen. Fascinating that Director Kyle Newman seems to have gotten a taste of the very Dark Side George Lucas himself grew disgusted of having to deal with in Hollywood. And, before I forget to mention it, another very clever aspect of the film are the parallels with the Star Wars saga and its characters. It's not simple or overly in your face, thank goodness, as the characters even trade roles sometimes in terms of the parallels. Though, there's no question who Princess Leia is, and it's a shame she wears the gold bikini so briefly...

The DVD of "Fanboys" (currently, unfortunately, frustratingly, inexplicably not available on Blu in the U.S. at the time of this review) presents the film in widescreen with a PG-13 rating. It's nice to see a modern, 20-something roadtrip movie with a PG-13 rating, and I'm especially glad since Star Wars appeals to a wide age-range. Though, in all honesty, the PG-13 rating is misused these days. The crude humor (at least some of which I hear was producer-demanded in this case, though it's thankfully not excessive) is not something I'd call appropriate for 13 year-olds, ha. If memory serves, the PG-13 rating was created to deal more with violence than sexual and drug references, but now it seems to allow a very inappropriate amount of said material under its mantle. For such content, PG-15 or 16 would make more sense. But, hey, I don't really care that much, as I'm not a teen nor a parent. I just find it an interestingly disturbing thing what is officially considered acceptable for 13 year-olds these days. I prefer to avoid the whole issue and get "unrated" versions myself when available, ha. That way, it doesn't matter what your age is. Anyway, the DVD serves up a nice little collection of extras. We get deleted scenes (including the cut William Katt cameo; I wonder why they reshot that), a very entertaining and enlightening cast and crew commentary, a handful of behind the scenes featurettes and some behind-the-scenes webisodes as well. It's a shame they didn't try to get Lucas to let them put the Star Wars Holiday Special on there too.

So, I guess that's about it. "Fanboys" is not perfect, but it's still definitely great overall and thoroughly appreciated by myself and I suspect legions of others. However, if you're not a Star Wars fan, it might not do anything for you at all. It's probably not totally crucial to enjoyment of the film, but it certainly must help greatly. If you ARE a Star Wars fan though, definitely get this film. It's a MUST OWN!

Want Fanboys (2008) Discount?

This movie sums up what it is to be a Star Wars fan. Get off my land, Trekkies!

Save 47% Off

Snow Buddies (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo) (2008)

Snow BuddiesThis direct-to-video movie is a sequel to last year's Air Buddies. In this one, the five pups find themselves in Alaska, where they are soon befriended by Shasta, a Husky pup, and his owner, a young boy named Adam. The boy has big dreams of becoming a sled dog racer, and if the Buddies can get him to the finish line they will be on their way back home. They turn to a wise old Husky for mentorship, but on the day of the race, the Buds unexpectedly find themselves on their own. From what I've been able to see of the film I think many younger kids will love it (the puppies are cute), but adults will be bored.

Here are the bonus features:

* Audio commentary (from the dogs!).

* A blooper reel.

* A hip-hop-style music video of "Lean on Me" by "Hannah Montana" star Mitchel Musso.

* Behind the Scenes "dog-u-mentary," which gives you a tour of the set from the perspective of the video's canine stars B-Dawg, Rosebud and Mudbud.

* A featurette on the film's visual effects.

The movies are based in part on the 1997 feature film Air Bud.

I think people need to be aware that the American Humane Society WAS present during the filming of this movie and none of the animals were treated inhumanely. The same person who wrote one of the Amazon reviews also wrote the same review at several other sites and is spouting misinformation.

That being said, the movie is adorable, my child loved it. He's a fan of dogs and of dog sledding and he enjoyed every bit of it!

Buy Snow Buddies (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo) (2008) Now

My kids loved AIR BUDDIES--they watched it non-stop and are really excited for Snow Buddies. I've already purchased this one for them as a surprise--I'm sure they'll wear it out too!

Read Best Reviews of Snow Buddies (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo) (2008) Here

I am planning to rent the movie Snow Buddies to watch with my children. I was concerned about the several one star reviews that sited animal cruelty in the production of the film. I believe, based on reading the American Humane Society's press release, that the criticism is unfair and felt compelled to rebut those reviews. Here is a direct quote from the Humane Society's release:

"American Humane is conducting a full investigation on the trainer and breeders and following the progress of the puppies that have been retired from the production, many of whom have been placed in new adoptive homes. The company producing Snow Buddies has complied with each request from American Humane and has made changes so that working puppies will not be put in any position where they may fall ill. The film production company has been very cooperative and has suspended filming until further notice. All of the dogs in the production now have been checked and are being cared for by a veterinarian. We will continue to monitor the production and release our findings once the investigation is complete."

It may bother some folks that dogs were harmed for any reason and by any person in the making of a film. However, by the Human Society's own account, the film production company appears to have done their best to look out for the welfare of the animals. The problems seem to have been with the trainers and breeders. It seems unfair to punish the producers of the film by condemning their product when they appear to have been unaware of the possible improper conduct of the trainers and breeders.

Want Snow Buddies (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo) (2008) Discount?

My family loved this movie. Disney, of course, did take care of these puppies during the filming. I love the family experience that is so lacking in movies today, this one had it. It also helps to reinforce the friendship that children have with dogs and that all dogs with the proper love and care are good dogs and can be trained well. I wish there were more movies out there like this one. Thank you so much Disney.

Save 48% Off

BATMAN RETURNS (2001)

BATMAN RETURNSBatman Returns is very much a Tim Burton film. It is a stranger and darker film than Batman, netherless it is a striking film on several levels.

Michael Keaton returns as the stoic and haunted Dark Knight. Danny DeVito is Oswald Cobblepot aka The Penguin. In the comic book he's a short rotund man who has an affinity for birds and umbrellas. The character is reinvented here. Born grotesquely disfigured, as an infant, he's cast into the river where he's brought up in a criminal circus gang that lives underground in an abandoned Zoo. Michelle Pfeffer is Selina Kyle aka Catwoman, a beautiful yet mousy secretary who's been pushed too far (of a window) and is out for some serious payback.

These three disturbed characters make this Batman film more adult oriented than the first one. DeVito's Penguin is a tragic figure but is very evil and is looking to strike back at Gotham City any way he can. The grotesque make-up is impressive and DeVito delivers a powerful performance. Michelle Pfeffer is haunting as the mousy secretary who is pushed over the edge and finds herself battling with her new alter ego Catwoman. A nice chemistry is struck between Keaton & Pfeffer as the conflicted couple. Christopher Walken is on hand as the manipulative and power hungry businessman Max Shreck. Michael Gough returns as Alfred the butler as well.

The stunning production design by Bo Welch extends the look from the previous film and Danny Elfman's score is a bit more subdued but retains the perfect atmosphere. The story is solid but the plotline regarding the circus gang is thin.

Batman Returns isn't a film for small kids either. Between the overall look of the characters and some racy dialogue, this is a Batman film for more of a mature audience. If you're a fan of the first film, you'll enjoy this Batman film that has a few new twists to it.

The Dark Knight Bruce Wayne/Batman makes a roaring return in the second outing in the legendary Batman trilogy in a darker & much colder undertone with the mysterious hero now up against two menacing villains. One is a corrupt company CEO named Max Schrek (Christopher Walken) and the other is a deformed murderer named Oswald Cobblepot aka Penguin. A third rival character in this movie is difficult to categorize as a villain or a hero. That is the twisted seductive Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer). Although I don't categorize her as a dangerous murderess, it's very difficult to really say if she's truly a villainess but it's easy to say that she isn't exactly the light at the end of the tunnel in terms of heroism but on the other hand, she's an extremely complex character whose eccentric personality renders one unable to help but really pay a lot of attention to her.

The movie begins in the cold snowy & remote stretches of a haunted mansion somewhere I'm guessing in upper New York state where a couple are the parents of a young but very odd child. The oddness of the child becomes highly evident after he pulls a cat into his cage and presumably killing it. Unable to handle the psychological burden of raising him, the Cobblepots toss him in his crib into the river and flee into the unknown. Many years later on, Cobblepot also known as the Penguin, runs in the election for the next mayor of Gotham City. The citizens though are unaware that he's actually plotting against the population and is in fact plotting to take over the city and kidnap the city's children. Meanwhile, The Penguin attracts the attention of a corrupt corporate CEO named Max Schrek (Christopher Walken), who wants to team up with him against `both' Bruce Wayne, and Batman, considering how much "they" oppose his plans for a toxic waste power plant. Schrek on the other hand also has to deal with a more vicious foe, and that is Catwoman, formerly Selina Kyle, a former employee who he had abused and tried to kill, and she is now out for revenge against him and also for competition against Batman. Now, with three major foes butting heads against him, Batman now has a dauntingly dangerous mission to stop the three from causing havoc and destruction across Gotham City and protect the citizens.

All of the cast in this movie are superb beyond any words that I can muster up. Michael Keaton IS Bruce Wayne/Batman. Neither George Clooney, nor Val Kilmer (No offense to them. They did well too) could compete against Keaton in the role as the dark Knight Batman. Danny DeVito brings a truly chilling acting role that is worthy of remembrance with the deformed Penguin. Michelle Pfeiffer brings the odd and often extremely complex character Catwoman to life. Christopher Walken is totally awesome playing the corrupt CEO of the Schrek Corporation. Michael Gough is absolutely brilliant as Bruce Wayne's/Batman's caretaker and aide, Alfred and is the only one who I felt kept all of the talent of his acting intact throughout the entire movie series. Combine the brilliant cast with a dark and truly foreboding atmosphere, and you have what I considered Tim Burton's crowning achievement at this point in his career (Before he outdid himself with "The Nightmare Before Christmas")

I can easily remember how this movie seemed to shape this period in my life around late 1992 and early 1993 and now in its 11th year of existence, "Batman Returns" has lost none of it's power and continues to be a thought-provoking masterpiece. Tim Burton did stunningly well on the first Batman movie from 1989, but he blew me away with "Batman Returns". Although it may sound like "Returns" is better than the first one, it's actually a tight toss-up between the two movies. The first one has a more fun atmosphere combined with a dramatic overtone to it. The second one, has a much darker, much colder, and more bleak atmosphere. The two perfectly complement each other so well that one's movie collection would be incomplete without them. Although I thought "Batman Forever" was a great follow-up, the more flashy direction that the movie saga went into would sadly go in a nosedive, sacrificing the drama, thoughtful plot, and intelligent dialogue, for excessive hodgepodges of colors and excessive flamboyance, ultimately killing the movie series with the campy, god-awful P.O.S. that was "Batman And Robin". Even to this day, I still cannot believe that the Batman series went from the dark, brooding, drama of "Batman" and "Batman Returns", and even the fun of "Batman Forever", down to just lowlife cinematic sewage that was "Batman & Robin". I just hope that Batman will recover soon and someday in the future, bring back the dark undertones that defined this incredible movie. Perhaps it was the stupidity of the entertainment industry at the time that they were disturbed at the `failure' of "Batman Returns" with "only" 280M dollars at the box office. I mean come on! 280M is HUGE! That's far fram a failure. It was when they turned Gotham City into a giant circus that caused the franchise to fail later on. It might have also been the stupidity of a large part of the audience that caused the franchise to die off later on after this movie. Of course for me, I was loving this movie when I was just ten years old when it came out, and loved far more than I `enjoyed' "Batman & Robin" when I was 14 when that came out. Even with all this I'm writing with this review, there's so much more from this movie that I can be able to explain with this review. The series would take a nosedive into campy oblivion later on in time but for me, give me the dark, dramatic, thought-provoking, and depth of "Batman Returns" anytime over the MGM grand flashy colors of "Batman & Robin".

Buy BATMAN RETURNS (2001) Now

Though not recommended for viewing by children under 10, "Batman Returns" is a definite improvement over the 1989 blockbuster. It's obvious that director Tim Burton had more creative freedom this time around. The result is a genuine vision behind the camera rather than filmmaking-by-committee. Admittedly, the 1992 sequel is a dark, strikingly mature fantasy-adventure with three iconic psychopaths Batman, Catwoman and the Penguin sharing screen time. However, it is the disturbing characterizations that make "Batman Returns" a standout among mainstream comic-book adaptations. The production design and special effects should have garnered Oscars, while the performances of Michael Keaton, Michelle Pfeiffer, Danny DeVito and Christopher Walken mesh perfectly with the expressionist surroundings. One wishes that Burton and Keaton had reunited for a third Dark Knight saga. Instead, Warner Bros. handed over the reins to schlockmeister Joel Schumacher, who drove the series into the ground with "Batman Forever" (1995) and "Batman and Robin" (1997). No wonder Keaton hung up his cowl.

Read Best Reviews of BATMAN RETURNS (2001) Here

Oh, this movie is so sad! It really is! This is a fantastic movie simply because it isn't afraid to be all of the other things that the original "Batman" was, also: Funny, exciting, thrilling, haunting, dark, romantic, and endlessly clever. It also features three terrific performances from the three leads; Michael Keaton as the Dark Knight (Bruce Wayne), Michelle Pfeiffer looking hot as ever as the sleek and smooth Catwoman (Selena Kyle), and Danny Devito as the diabolically demonic Penguin (Oswald Cobblepot). And we can never forget Christopher Walken, playing Max Schreck (yeah, just like the guy who played Nosferatu), who is quite the fiend.

The film opens with a rather heartbreaking scene that sets the tone for the entire movie, which takes the lightheartedness of the Joker character in the original and tosses it right out the window. Instead, we have the emotionally scarred darkness of the Penguin, who was literally sent up the river like Baby Moses in a covered wicker baby basket on Christmas Eve simply because he wasn't a normal child born with five fingers instead of the shiny flippers he has extending from his wrists. Despite his ghastly, unsightly appearence and mangled people skills, we sympathize with the Penguin's plight simply because we would never wish what happened to him on our worst enemy. Sure, being sent up the river worked out fine for Moses, but Penguin is no Moses, and he is not on a mission from God. He's on a mission for a simple reason: Revenge. Revenge of biblical proportions by kidnapping every first born child in Gotham City, in honor of his own castaway status on Christmas Eve, more than 30 years prior. Meanwhile, we have the newly resurrected-from-cat-saliva Selena Kyle, who decides to try on a skintight vinyl suit with a whip draped around her feminine feline torso, desperate to avenge her "death" at the hands of her boss, Schreck. And amongst it all, Bruce Wayne is in love with Selena Kyle and trying to shut down the blatantly illegal operations of Schreck, trying to connect him to the Penguin, who he theorizes runs the Red Triangle Gang that terrorizes the streets. His hands are quite full as Batman, too: He is trying to stop Catwoman, is unaware of Selena's murder at the hands of Schreck, he knows that Penguin is up to something but can't prove it, and he is being framed. It's an amazingly confusing plot to explain, but it all works seamlessly through the carefully constructed pace of the film, for which I credit Tim Burton, whose direction is flawless, as usual. He keeps the characters interesting while making sure the background is just as visually stunning as Pfeiffer in that catsuit.

"Batman Returns" may take a few viewings to totally appreciate it, but you're astounded a little more each time. It's one of the best comic book movies ever made.

Want BATMAN RETURNS (2001) Discount?

(4.5/5 stars) In some ways this movie is more entertaining than the first "Batman" from 1989, though the extent of your admiration might depend on how well Tim Burton's style suits you. For me, this one is the best of the 80's-90's Batman movies. This time, the Caped Crusader is up against evil magnate Max Shreck (the always peculiar Christopher Walken), the Penguin (Danny DeVito) and Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer). Michael Keaton reprises the role of Bruce Wayne / Batman, looking a little less fit than the first time around. Even though I am not a fan of Michelle Pfeiffer, I must admit she turns in a very good performance as Selina Kyle / Catwoman. It helps that time is spent developing her character, though she is believable as the meek, passive secretary turned confident, vengeful vigilante. The Christmas setting adds a nice touch to the film's atmosphere, with the snow providing a false veneer of tranquility and peace. There are many memorable scenes in the film, though my favorite is the scene with Bruce Wayne and Selina Kyle dancing, not aware at first of each other's identity. That scene is very well done and confirmed for me that Pfeiffer was the correct choice for that role. Gone from the first movie are the poorly chosen Prince songs and the annoyingly comical Robert Wuhl, though remaining are the impressive visuals, exciting action, cool gadgets and decent score. The only questionable element for me was the climax at the ending, which features penguins with missiles strapped to their backs. The scene takes too long to develop and doesn't pay off, even though I appreciate the truly bizarre nature of the concept. The final scene with Bruce Wayne in his car is a close second place for best scene in the movie. Great stuff.

Zodiac (Two-Disc Director's Cut) (2007)

ZodiacAfter the technically accomplished but ultimately hollow thriller Panic Room (3-Disc Special Edition), director David Fincher returns to familiar subject matter with Zodiac, a dramatization of the murders perpetuated by the infamous serial killer known as Zodiac that terrorized the San Francisco Bay area in the late 1960s and early 1970s. With Seven (New Line Platinum Series), Fincher seems like an obvious choice to direct this film but those of you expecting a rehash of that film will be disappointed. With Zodiac, he faces the daunting challenge of making an exciting thriller that runs two hours and forty minutes long where the killer was never caught. He does this by focusing on the people who investigated the case and how it affected them.

This is a film that shows people talking and doing research hardly, dynamic, cinematic material but Fincher makes it fascinating with strong performances from his talented cast and a solid screenplay to anchor the film. Like Michael Mann's equally obsessive serial killer movie, Manhunter (Restored Director's Cut Divimax Edition), Fincher spends a lot of his movie showing offices buzzing with activity as the case heats up and we see people hard at work as the police, FBI, the Chronicle and even the CIA all try to decipher the Zodiac's code and solve the case. He also show the minutia of their methods while also reminding us of the limits of technology at the time (no personal computers, no internet, no DNA testing, etc.). These people faced a monumental task of sifting through hundreds of false leads and crank calls from the substantial information that might actually further the case.

Zodiac presents a wealth of information and invites you to sift through it like the three protagonists. In fact, there is so much to absorb that repeated viewings will undoubtedly reveal more details that might not have been caught upon an initial viewing. The film's long running time allows you to gradually immerse yourself in the film and the story it tells. However, it never feels too long because Fincher maintains a brisk, efficient pace cramming as much detail and information as he can into every scene. The killer is a fascinating enigma and his encrypted letters, his blatant taunting of the police, and the discrepancies between murders only it makes it more interesting. It is easy to see why people became obsessed with this case. Ultimately, the Zodiac case doesn't just leave a trail of actual bodies but also collateral damage in the form of failed marriages, ended partnerships and substance abuse. And this is just the people who investigated the case. The toll taken on the victims who survived, their families and those of the people who were killed is inconceivable. A whole other movie could be made about them. Fincher has made a smart, engaging thriller that suggests a new direction for the filmmaker, one that places an emphasis on character and story instead of atmosphere and set design.

Last year, Paramount released an obligatory bare bones DVD and in the meantime, Fincher and DVD producer extraordinaire, David Prior have assembled an in-depth two-disc special edition that covers all aspects of the production. The director has also added five minutes back into the film that improves on an already great motion picture.

The first disc features an audio commentary by director David Fincher. He touches upon the "oddly personal" period details as much of the film takes place during his childhood and around areas he lived. This also informed the period songs he picked for the film. This is the kind of engaging, informative track we've come to expect from Fincher.

Even better is the second commentary by actors Jake Gyllenhaal and Robert Downey Jr., producer Brad Fischer, screenwriter James Vanderbilt, and crime novelist James Ellroy. Fischer and Vanderbilt talk about how closely they stuck to the actual facts of the case and delve into its details. Ellroy, a self-proclaimed fan of the film, does his entertaining Demon Dog of crime fiction persona that fans of his love while also talking about the film's place in crime fiction. Downey and Gyllenhaal provide all kinds of anecdotal information with Downey displaying his trademark dry sense of humour.

The second disc is broken up into two sections: extras dealing with the film and ones dealing with the actual Zodiac murders. "Zodiac Deciphered" is an hour-long documentary on the making of the film. Producer Brad Fischer and screenwriter James Vanderbilt talk about the origins of the project. We see how each of the film's key locations were faithfully recreated, often shooting at the place where one of the murders took place. Period costumes were authentically recreated from police reports and evidence photographs. When actual locations could not be used, the San Francisco Chronicle offices, they were built from scratch on a soundstage. Fincher nailed the newspaper office down to the tiniest details like vintage rotary phones, typewriters, etc. There is plenty of on-the-set footage that shows Footage and co. at work.

"The Visual Effects of Zodiac" takes a look at how CGI was used not only to recreate certain period details of San Francisco but also the blood in the murder scenes. We see before and after comparison shots and it is incredible how seamlessly the effects are integrated into the film.

The "Previsualization" for three scenes compares the computer animated storyboards with the final product in the film.

Also included is a theatrical trailer.

"This is the Zodiac Speaking" is a four-part documentary on the actual Zodiac murders, featuring interviews with original investigators and the surviving victims. These featurettes present the facts of each murder along with crime scene photographs and vintage TV news footage, taking us through each one in detail.

Finally, there is "His Name was Arthur Leigh Allen." Police investigators and people that knew him talk about the prime suspect in the Zodiac murders. Friends recount chilling anecdotes about the man and investigators provide their own accounts to paint a disturbing portrait.

ZODIAC is director David Fincher's finest film to date. All of the preparatory exercises in violence and horror he served so well in such films as FIGHT CLUB and SEVEN now are even more terrifying because of the manner in which he internalizes the events of the infamous Zodiac killer of the 1960s and 1970s and allows us to see how the murders and lack of proof of the perpetrator destroyed the personal lives of those bound to reveal Zodiac's identity. The story of course is true, as documented in Robert Graysmith's book (adapted extremely well for the screen by James Vanderbilt), and the history is so well known that rehashing it in a review is pointless. But on to the production.

Filmed in the Bay area the film has that peculiar light known to artists of the region but rarely captured so well as it is here by cinematographer Harris Savides: the sunlight (when visualized is brilliant and the night portions are dank not only form the seeming constant rain but also form the seediness of the story's message. The acting is of the highest caliber: newspaper cartoonist Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal, in a standout role), police inspector David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo, in one of his finest performances), news writer Paul Avery (Robert Downey, Jr.), Melvin Belli (Brian Cox), Inspector William Armstrong (Anthony Edwards), Graysmith's long-suffering wife Melanie (Chloë Sevigny), down to the more minor roles are all pitch perfect.

What makes this film work so well is the emphasis on the human aspect of how violence, especially random and uncontrolled, alters the psyches of people. The breakdown from the stress of the fruitless and frustrating investigation by each of the primary characters is heart wrenching. How much of this is actor driven by such talented pros and how much is due to Fincher's directorial abilities is probably a moot point. The very long unwinding of this struggle (158 minutes) becomes almost unbearably tense. While the Added Features of this set open windows of information that delve more deeply into this unsolved horror story, the film still stands solidly on its own without the added accoutrements. This is a very fine film that is worthy of the many awards that are dangling in space at the moment. Grady Harp, January 08

Buy Zodiac (Two-Disc Director's Cut) (2007) Now

As the beginning of any new year rolls around, after awards season, there tends to be a significant drop off in quality or what you might call serious drama. Usually we're left with crowd pleasing, if not critically acclaimed comedy, or low budget horror until the kickoff of the summer season. There are a few gems that sneak in once in a while (perhaps the most notorious was "Silence of the Lambs" with its oddly timed Valentine's opening), but as a generalization--this is true more often than not. So David Fincher's "Zodiac," which make no mistake is a drama--not a thriller, is a welcome respite from traditional fare at this time of the year. Fincher, who made an artistic splash with "Se7en," "The Game," and "Fight Club," has been noticeably absent since hitting it big with the more routine "Panic Room" in 2002. Eschewing the sensationalistic approaches a film of this type might employ, Fincher has crafted a sprawling and ambitious investigative drama about the men whose lives were changed in the obsessive hunt for a serial killer known only as Zodiac.

For those unfamiliar with the story, I will borrow an excerpt from my review on "The Zodiac" (a lesser film that covers some of the same ground, but concentrating more on Zodiac's earlier murders in Vallejo). "Over a period of years during the sixties and seventies, the San Francisco area was plagued by a series of seemingly random murders perpetuated by a man known only as the Zodiac killer. Using the press and taunting the police, Zodiac became one of the more prominent "celebrity" serial killers with his need to be in the spotlight." Fincher's film focuses primarily on three major characters, although a huge cast contributes to this complex tale. There is David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) who is the lead police investigator when the Zodiac moved to San Francisco, Paul Avery (Robert Downey, Jr.) who is the star reporter covering the case for the San Francisco Chronicle, and Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal) who is a cartoonist at the Chronicle who becomes obsessed with the case. In fact, Graysmith's obsession turned into the book which serves as source material for this film.

Clearly, the strongpoint of the film is in the performances. Downey is impeccable in self destructive mode--recapturing some of the energy and unpredictability that made him a star in the first place. Ruffalo is great--persistence turning into frustration. But it is Gyllenhaal who makes the greatest transformation from an awkward youth to someone willing to sacrifice everything to pursue an obsession. The immense cast of supporting characters are, also, well written and beautifully performed. It is in the details of the script that characters, even with limited screen time, leave a lasting and believable impression. The film, which spans decades, recreates the time frame accurately--the art direction, in particular, is spectacular when viewing this city of the recent past.

The story, itself, is a procedural--recounting years of work trying to locate Zodiac. Again, the script is so detailed that you really feel as if you are following the action in the same step by step fashion that the real participants must have. "Zodiac," ultimately, is a smart film. It trusts that you will follow its logic, and perhaps even draw some conclusions of your own. It paints a picture of who Toschi and Graysmith believed to be Zodiac (despite evidence to the contrary), but the film is open-ended enough for you to accept this position or discount it entirely. There is plenty of intrigue as the investigation leads to unlikely places, some chilling recreations of Zodiac's killings, but most of all--real drama about real people. A great adult picture. At over 2 1/2 hours, it's a commitment--but one well worth it. KGHarris, 03/07.

Read Best Reviews of Zodiac (Two-Disc Director's Cut) (2007) Here

David Fincher, director of the fascinating, impeccably composed, cerebral "Zodiac" has not heretofore been known for his subtlety though his "Fight Club," "Alien3" and "Seven" are filled with Life and a doomed even ugly sense of reality. But "Zodiac," the story of the Northern California serial killer, who was more aware of his reputation and celebrity than any Hollywood starlet, gives us a subtler, more rational Fincher than his previous films would suggest. There is very little of the trademark Fincher violence and brutality here and more of a psychologically astute and emotionally cognizant one.

"Zodiac" is a story of Men working together for a common goal: that of capturing the Zodiac killer. There is the Police primarily consisting of San Francisco PD Homicide, David Toschi (a remarkably committed and persuasive Mark Ruffalo) and William Armstrong (stalwart and dedicated Anthony Edwards) and the San Francisco Chronicle reporters Paul Avery (intelligent, pathetically alcoholic Robert Downey) and Robert Graysmith, who would go on to write the book about the Zodiac murders portrayed by the excellent and wounded, ultimately crazed-by-the-case, Jake Gyllenhaal.

As a rule, in most movies of late dealing with serial killers, the serial killer is merely a jumping off point for brutal and disgusting slash and dash murders. But here Fincher has stepped back, adjusted his sights and telescoped on the psychological and emotional effects of the killings, the endless procedural details of the investigation (handwriting experts, the "2500" suspects), the letters sent to the SF Chronicle by Zodiac and the detritus of a 20+ year investigation that wears down and whittles away at any kind of normal life for Toshi and Graysmith. As such "Zodiac" is more about the furtive, brutal legacy of the Zodiac murders and its effect on these two men than it is about the Zodiac killer himself.

Gyllenhaal plays Graysmith as a man possessed: alternately repulsed by the Zodiac as a mass murderer but at the same time fascinated by his facility with the obscure language of codes, symbols and puzzles and his seemingly insatiable, preening desire for celebrity. Matching his intensity is Ruffalo's Toschi. Ruffalo has never been more persuasive and effective even bettering his feral performance in "In the Cut." Both men are obsessed with Zodiac and both pay for this obsession with the hard currency of years and loves lost and never regained.

"Zodiac" goes on a bit too long but its ultimate success can be attributed to its brilliant, careful and intricate accumulation and dissemination of case detail that forms the backbone of this tragic, interesting and intelligent film. The larger tragedy that this film inadvertently points out though is that Zodiac's murderous swath across California in the mid 20th. Century now seems oddly remote, old-fashioned and even quaint in this time of 9/11 and international terrorism.

Want Zodiac (Two-Disc Director's Cut) (2007) Discount?

~In December 1968, police were called to the scene of a double homicide; no motive, no suspects, no witnesses. On July 4th, 1969, "he" struck again, but this time, one of the victims lived. The survivor's name was Mike Mageau, and he is now one of the consultants in this top-notch movie. The attack on Mageau, and the girl he wanted to one day marry, named Darlene Ferrin, comprise the first sequence in the film. Thusly, the the December attack isn't depicted. This is because the makers of "Zodiac" wisely chose to only recreate the crimes which had witnesses or survivors, removing as much speculation from the script as possible.

But, to the dismay of today's A.D.D. riddled audience, there are only three scenes of violence in "Zodiac," although they are recreated with such authenticity, anyone already familiar with the story will cringe at how brutal and heartless the crimes are. Bryan Hartnell, who survived the attack at Lake Berryessa in September 1969, says he actually had to look away during the scene involving him. The realism was simply too much to handle. For this sequence, the film crew actually went to Lake Berryessa, and, referring to crime scene photos, reconstructed the crime scene to look exactly as it did the day of this attack, even transplanting trees to replicate scene as closely as possible. It's strange, Lake Berryessa is a breath-takingly beautiful location, the scenery is simply gorgeous. But, it has the permanent stigma of being the location where the suspect donned an executioner's outfit and hog-tied Bryan Hartnell and Cecilia Sheperd at gunpoint, butchering them with a hunting knife. It is one of the most horrifying scenes ever filmed, because it is faithfully reproduced, with almost 100% accuracy. It's difficult to watch.

"Zodiac: The Director's Cut" is a very long film, almost three hours in total, with very little real on-screen action, but it is a fascinating movie. It focuses on San Francisco Chronicle employee Robert Graysmith's obsession with the case, and his personal and professional relationship with fellow newspaper employee Paul Avery, as well as the fear that spread through the San Francisco area once this crime spree made the paper. It is a story of obsession, as already stated, but it vividly tells the audience exactly how frustrating this case was to the police and the media. It has derailed careers and jeopardized health, as well as causing an extended panic all over California. The joke about California being a cereal bowl comes to mind. It has its share of fruits, nuts, and flakes, and it becomes apparent here. Of course, in all fairness, weird people live all over the place, so don't call me out on it. Just a comment.

It is frustrating to the audience as well as the police, because no suspect has ever been caught, and none are arrested, even in the film. The prime suspect, one Arthur Leigh Allen, had his share of scrapes with the law, usually on sex-related charges, and had even done hard prison time for these offenses, and virtually all of the Zodiac evidence points directly to him, but various little things throw just enough of a wrench into the works to keep him from being formally charged. And when a solid enough case is finally built against him, the arresting officer found Allen dead on his floor, the victim of a fatal heart attack. So, if he really was the Zodiac, his letter claiming they will never catch him came true, because he never did one day of prison time for the Zodiac killings.

This release has a treasure trove of material; you have the uncut movie, the director's vision being shown in tact, with almost every little nuance covered. The sets were made to look like they did at the time, as faithfully as possible. In the bonus materials you have interviews with police officers who worked on the case and two surviving victims, archive footage of news reports from the time,as well as interviews with friends and aqcuaintences of Arthur Leigh Allen.

It is exhaustive in its efforts to inure the viewer in the case, and the fact that people still look at the case, is fascinating, as well.

"...goodbye..." (you'll get this quote if you have seen this movie)

The Doors (1991)

The DoorsThis review refers to the Artisan Special Edition(2disc)DVD of "The Doors".....

Become immersed in the wild ride that Oliver Stone takes you on in this legendary film of a legendary rocker.The extrordinary life story of Jim Morrison, played eeriley by Val Kilmer, will keep you mesmerized and stay with you long after the movie has ended.

The film explores "The Doors", from their beginnings in Venice Beach, California, where they exploded onto the rock scene,breaking the mold of music in the 60's, to their rise as superstars. Morrison's life is the main focus as a senstive poet type dropping out of film school, to becoming the Peyote addicted,culture shocking, philosphical rock idol.The LSD trips, the visions of this genius, his personal life and of course the famous controversial concerts are all told through Stone's unique cinematic magic.

You'll get lost not only in the time setting of the story but of course in the music as well. "The Doors" electrifying music is heard throughout the film and follows them chronologically on their journey. It's a film for fans of the cinema and music alike.

As mentioned above Val Kilmer is uncanny in not only his performance as Morrison, but seems to take on the physical appearance as well. The band members played by Kevin Dillon, Kyle Maclachlan and Frank Whaley are extraordinary in their portrayals. Meg Ryan, in a very dramatic roll as Jim's girl Pam is brilliant.

This "Special Edition" DVD is the one to have(and it's not as expensive as the other) It's a 2 disc set, with a fabulous widescreen picture, and a 5.1 Dolby Dig(get to this through the special feature selections) audio track that will blow you away. Lots and lots of special features. On the disc with the movie you can listen to Stone's commentary where he fills you in on how the band met, the genesis of the songs, and where he has taken license with the story. The second disc is filled with featurettes and production notes. Looking at the Technical info for the other edition ("The Collectors") it seems to be longer by 30 minutes and may have some extras not included with this one, but it is not in the 5.1 which for me was the deciding factor in this film featuring this exciting soundtrack.

So get out those mood rings and leather fringe vests and get ready to rock with "The Doors".....

"This Is The End"...........Laurie

also recommended:The Very Best of the Doors

"Pam joined him three years later . . ." is on my copy of the 15 Year Anniversary Edition; the movie is the same as the Special Edition.

The packaging and menus are updated and look great. Substantially better than the special edition.

On to the 2 new features.

The Doors in L.A. 20 minute feature; Robbie Krieger, John Densmore, (yaaay!), Jimmy Greenspoon, and Pamela Des Barres are the prominent interviews on camera here. Nothing earth shattering, but it's nice to see/hear John Densmore's abridged opinions.

The Jim Morrison Phenomena in Paris it's interesting. You've got a handful of people who met JDM in Paris and hung out; they describe his mood and what he was (arguably) saying at the time. There's a French librarian who breaks down a lot of the parallels in the subtleties of the lyrics w/Greek literature. There's a somewhat annoying 20 something saying Jim was done with music and The Doors and blah, blah, blah that isn't substantiated w/anything. There is an interview w/Michelle Rudler, who is listed as "Coroner" who says lots of things were done wrong in the documentation of Morrison's death. It's about 50 minutes.

All of the extras on the Special Edition are here as well.

So in conclusion, if you are looking to purchase The Doors movie on DVD, by Oliver Stone, this is the one to get. The movie is entertaining enough but, you know, it's fictional and not historically accurate enough to garner more than 3 stars from this reviewer.

Buy The Doors (1991) Now

The Doors suffers the same problems that Stone's other films about real people and events (JFK and Nixon) do; Stone uses the docu-drama format as a license to condense times and events, while simultaneously inventing composite characters and situations that never existed. All too often, these films, while containing exciting filmic and visual elements, ring a bit hollow.

The upside of The Doors is the performance of Val Kilmer, who threw himself into the role with ferocity and conviction; that he comes up short in the end isn't due to his acting abilities as much as the choice of episodes and Morrison's characteristics (both real and invented) that Stone chose to film. Simply put, Stone's Morrison comes across as little more than a sporatically gifted poet who sublimates his poetic callings to all the cliched rock star trappings. Perhaps this does describe some of Morrison's personality to a degree, but after seeing Morrison get stoned, drunk and act like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum for 2 hours plus, one wonders if Oliver thought of Morrison as basically an obnoxious drunk (possessed by the soul of a bald, silly-looking, half-naked dead indian that continually wanders around the movie) and, if so, what it was that turned Stone onto making the film in the first place...

The downside, in addition to the lack of scope regarding Morrison, comes in the numerous episodes that never happened (The Doors tripping on acid in the desert, Patricia Kennealy being present at the New Haven show Morrison got arrested at, Particia Kennealy and Pam Courson having a catfight, Buick actually making a commercial using the song Light My Fire and Jim finding out about it by watching tv, Jim setting fire to his and Pam's house while Pam was smacked up in the closet...and on and on). Also, the years of 1967 to early 1969 take up about an hour and a half of the movie, while the remainder of 1969 through to mid 1971 take about twenty minutes.

It's a shame that Stone went to such trouble to set up and film some great concert sequences, and Kilmer really made a terrific attempt at playing Morrison, but in the end both were content to rest the character on both the various myths about the singer and the confirmed instances of Morrison at his drunken worst. A well-shot film that, in the end, has little to do with reality.

Read Best Reviews of The Doors (1991) Here

Hey, I know I'm in the minority in my opinion here on Amazon, yet I will state unequivocally my view that the portrayal of Jim Morrison, his common-law wife Pamela Courson, the group, and even the supporting cast of regulars in The Doors Universe come off like characters in search of a serious screenwriter.

Come on already, Oliver. Who could sympathize with Jim and Company when they spew out lines of dialogue clipped, of all places, from Morrison's song lyrics? Did you actually think an audience would accept Jim uttering such discordant lines in an everyday conversation? Could you not separate the man from the performer? Because of that awful bit of writing, Jim comes off like a buffoon, not an erudite talent who, despite a lifetime of loneliness, alienation, and addictive tendencies (which would ultimately snuff out his life), still managed to push aside material comfort for a pursuit of the truth as he saw it.

Also, how come Jim revels in such horrible psychobabble? Had you not gleamed the interviews (available through Bright Midnight and other retailers) you'd hear an incredibly bright, articulate young man who lamented the day he elected to be part of a rock and roll band. You'd also have the makings of excellent drama, as a man who cannot escape his fame and a man who longed to create films and poetry in his own right.

How could one ever sympathize with a drunken lout (YOUR Jim) who acts like an ass (seems more like Val Kilmer playing himself rather than Jim), shows no compassion whatsoever, and just appears to become famous in one quick turn of events. The only clue we have to the success stems from the Sullivan show, the airport raid, and assorted concerts, but we never get a sense of Jim being nationally lambasted. Some archival footage might have helped there. But of course then the more sedate, intelligent Morrison--whom you portrayed as bumping into cops whereas Jim preferred to sway at a mike stand (see the archival footage)--doesn't figure in a Hollywood biopic.

What a shame. What a rotten, dirty, salacious mess. Maybe your own demons got the better of your good sense, Oliver. God knows, if your Morrison had been the true Morrison, I'd never had been a fan of his in the first place. Thanks for turning Jim into David Lee Roth, the members of KISS, Robert Plant, and all those other Circus Magazine posterboys for rock and roll excess. Too bad. An integrity, a nonmaterial nature, and a sincere attraction to make art distinguishes Jim from all those other Sex, Drug, and Rock and Roller hellions.

Want The Doors (1991) Discount?

(Blu-ray version)

For only those, who just like me, when look for a review, they only hope to find technicals opinions, nothing about the movie, history, critical or something like that, so...

The picture is great and the sound is great too. Buy it!

Save 40% Off

Perfect Understanding (1933)

Perfect UnderstandingAs a classic film enthusiast, I was somewhat surprised that I'd never even heard of the 1933 Ealing Studio release "Perfect Understanding." Not only does it carry the Ealing brand, it boasts a screenplay by the great Michael Powell and lead performances from Laurence Olivier and Gloria Swanson. Heck, that's all I need to know! Sign me up. Billed as a romantic comedy, I'm not sure the movie entirely succeeds under this description. With aspects that veer from slapstick to complete melodrama, the tone of "Perfect Understanding" veers all over the place. An unconventional domestic drama centered around infidelity (both imagined and real), there are some aspects of the movie that play deadly serious. These moments are (for my taste) the strongest in the film. When it plays for a lighter appeal, the manic energy can feel somewhat overdone and chaotic. At times, it seems as if two different movies are competing against one another. But despite these reservations, it's still a easy recommendation for fans of Olivier and Swanson! They make the picture worth a look!

Swanson and Olivier play a young society couple who don't want to fall into the same trap as their other married friends. They want a marriage in which they can retain their independence without all the baggage of traditional domesticity. It's a fine arrangement (a perfect understanding, if you will) in theory, but somewhat harder in practice. After a blissful honeymoon, the couple separate at the end of their vacation. With Olivier enjoying the festivities of Cannes, his old circle of friends and a former flame end up sharing time with the new groom. Can he withstand the temptation of another woman? Coincidentally, Swanson also has another suitor on the home front. When the couple reunite, how much honesty can their relationship bear? Between real offenses and certain misconceptions, this marital experiment seems doomed to failure. Can love prevail? Should it?

I really liked Swanson and Olivier together. Swanson was trying to establish herself in the talkies after being a silent screen star and she even produced this movie (the only film she ever made in Britain). Olivier was a stage star (a trained Shakespearean actor) newly into a film career. They have an easy chemistry and charm to spare. If you know them primarily from their later works, this more lightweight piece is an interesting counterpoint. Olivier, in particular, is downright dashing! I don't think "Perfect Understanding" is an essential classic, by any means, but it is definitely worth a look. The early scenes are especially jumbled with dozens of characters and relationships thrown at you rather haphazardly. Things start to settle, however, once we leave this extended opening. Again, I probably wouldn't classify this as romantic comedy (although some might). To me, it's more of a relationship drama with some lighter moments. KGHarris, 5/13.

I love classic films. Especially old black `n whites. I couldn't say why exactly. I think it's that they're a bit more primal about how they had to approach the filmmaking process. They didn't have all of the tricks and twists of special effects and fancy-pants editing, so they were largely confined to using dialogue that great, great form of communication to convey so very much of the story. Without good, snappy dialogue, those movies of old were destined to one day end up on the trash heap. Consequently, I think they produced better screenwriters folks who had a learned ear for what sounded right, what conveyed the proper sentiment, what captured a precise emotion for their audiences. Still, it's a shame that more of these `classics' don't get the treatment PERFECT UNDERSTANDING has; it's an impressive discovery, and I can only hope there's more to come from the folks behind the Cohen Film Collection.

(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and characters. If you're the kind of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I'd encourage you to skip down to the last two paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you're accepting of a few modest hints at `things to come,' then read on ...)

Judy Rogers (played by the forever lovely Gloria Swanson) and Nicholas Randall (a young and thin Laurence Olivier) are socialites in love. However, they see couples all around them mired in one unhappy marriage after another. Hoping to `buck the trend,' Judy and Nick decide the best they can do to preserve their own relationship magic is to draft a "marriage agreement," one which promises they will never argue, they will always treat one another as lovers, and they will always respect one another's private happiness. What appears to be a perfect understanding only leads to the discover of one imperfection after another as Nick succumbs to the charms of a former lover (Nora Swinburne) and Judy almost falls into the arms of another (John Halliday). Can they find happiness again or are they now destined for divorce?

Wow. Talk about a real eye-opener! PERFECT UNDERSTANDING was way ahead of its time. In fact, the agreement fashioned by the two lovebirds in the opening could almost be likened to an `open marriage' by contemporary standards. In fact, his own personal guilt forces Nick to confess, and Judy appears perfectly willing to forgive him; that is until she divulges her marital woes to her old friend, Ivan. To make matters worse, Judy realizes she's pregnant while it's clear to her that the child belongs to her one and only true love, Nick's suspicions only serve to push the two of them further and further apart. What's amazing is how open and nonchalant the script by Michael Powell treats all of this, almost as if this were the status quo in marital relationships of the time. I daresay it wasn't this was 1933, after all though Hollywood socialites and debutantes were always `ahead of the curve' when it comes to social mores. That much hasn't changed.

The film is smartly directed from staging to cinematography by Cyril Gardner. Gardner made impressive use of some vast interior sets, and he moved the plot along briskly by making extensive use of some rather elaborate video montages to establish the passage of time as well as the build-up of marital tension. Also, it's exciting to see Olivier so fresh and new in his career (promotional materials provided to me with the release point out he was only but a few years along in film); and, even at this ripe age, he was a master at the witty banter establishing the high points of his love with Judy (Swanson). The two of them handle both ends of the scale with great skill the first half is punctuated by their constant repartee while the latter half is richly nuanced with desperate, longing expressions of their mutual torture.

Billed largely as a "comedy of manners," UNDERSTANDING may not be PERFECT, but it's pretty darn close, and it's pretty darn impressive.

PERFECT UNDERSTANDING was produced by Gloria Swanson British Productions (the only film she made in Britain). DVD distribution is being handled through Cohen Media Group. As for the technical specifications, the film looks and sounds very solid be aware this is a (standard) two-track audio, and there's some marked gaps in quality in the first fifteen minutes or so, but it clears up as the film progresses. The Blu-ray release is blessed with two selected shorts from the era (two Mack Sennett shorts "Husband's Reunion" and "Dream Stuff").

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. Given the era, it's certainly an exercise in some curious morality. PERFECT UNDERSTANDING is a wonderful find from Cohen this is its Blu-ray and DVD debut. It's been longingly restored for this release, and who wouldn't want to experience this Gloria Swanson/Laurence Olivier rom-com now that it's available? The script captures the marked trend of the time to propel the narrative through the use of clever dialogue and it's brilliantly delivered by two masters of the craft. I'll admit it dragged a bit for me in the last fifteen minutes that's when the marriage is coming apart but rest assured there will be a happy ending for those who work for it most ... just like in life!

In the interests of fairness, I'm pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Cohen Media Group provided me with an advance DVD copy of PERFECT UNDERSTANDING by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review.

Buy Perfect Understanding (1933) Now

This is a great little travelogue of a film, with great shots of various European locations, back before both WW2 bombing and later, globalization, had tampered with the scenery.There couldn't have been much international tourism in 1933, so these characters are indeed priveleged. Olivier seems very good here, not insufferably intense and hard to believe as he became after he returned to England in the 40's (though this is apparently an English film, with Gloria Swanson as a producer and other American actors it doesn'seem so.)

Read Best Reviews of Perfect Understanding (1933) Here

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975)

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's NestMilos Forman has always had a knack for assembling great ensemble casts. This is particularly true in his most critically acclaimed releases (Taking Off, Amadeus and this film). It would be difficult indeed to come up with actors and actresses who were better suited to fill the roles in OFOTCN. This is true in terms of both the stars, Jack Nicholson and Louise Fletcher, and the secondary characters. Who could have been a better Harding than William Redfield? A better Billy Bibbit than Brad Dourif? A better Cheswick than Sydney Lassick? And most especially, a better Chief Bromden than Will Sampson?

I rank this movie as the best of the best of what I consider to be American Cinema's golden decade, the 70s. It certainly won the widest acclaim, with its sweep of the major Oscars for 1975 (Nicholson also won best actor from the New York Film Critics voters that year).

Not to be overlooked is the fantastic job performed by the film's adaptors, Bo Goldman and Lawrence Hauben, who also won Oscars for their screenplay. True, they did have a fairly decent stage version (by Dale Wasserman) to work with. I remember seeing an excellent production of the play, with a terrific cast, in San Francisco circa 1972. Just as an aside, I read in the Norton Critical edition of the novel, a review of a NY production of the play by Walter Kerr that was an absolute pan. Suffice it to say that the movie is much different than either the novel or the play. Those familiar with Kesey's great novel understand how difficult a transfer from page to screen would be; about a third of the story is Bromden's delusional interior monologue. The final script, quite rightly, focuses almost exclusively on Randal P McMurphy's struggle with Nurse Ratched for the hearts and minds of the inmates.

This is truly a gut and soul-wrenching movie, with many moments of high maniacal comedy interspersed. Though many of his other films are top-notch, this is Forman's masterpiece. If you haven't read the book, read it. It you don't own this movie, buy it. There are few works in the history of American literature and film that are superior.

It has taken me nearly 30 years to get round to watching this film, and I genuinely think I appreciate it more for being that much older. It has had accolades for everything -plot, direction, filming, casting, acting. It deserves them all. It is nothing short of compulsive. The bad guy who has not lost his soul (much less his spirit) is pitted against the embodiment of sanctimonious righteousness who never had a soul to lose.

I wonder whether Nicholson has even yet had full recognition for the truly great actor he is (how many people have even seen The King of Marvin Gardens, for instance?) His screen presence is enormous, magnetic and menacing. He combines outsize testosteronic individuality with the ability to get inside a character, and an electric sense of threat with a real power to tug at the heart-strings. Bad he may be, but unsympathetic never. He is a very big little guy, but he is still the little guy against the system. It must be impossible, surely, to upstage that?

Incredibly, no. The ultimate star in a film that has no shortage of up-and-coming luminaries as well as Nicholson (D de Vito for one) is Louise Fletcher as Nurse Ratched. I am never going to forget that mask-like expressionless face and that ever-rational, implacable, ever-modulated voice mouthing those soulless, uncomprehending, the-system-is-right banalities. Above all, I am never going to forget that hair. Among the many touches of genius in this production, that hairstyle is the ultimate. I simply could not take my eyes off it. The name is effective too, and I shall continue to believe until someone proves me wrong that it was an inspired borrowing from Jane Eyre -the dreadful and sadistic Miss Skatcherd brought up to date and given a 20th-century twist.

This film is never going to become dated as long as these polarities continue to repel each other. I saw it at all only because my son showed it to me. It is relevant to my generation, it is relevant to his, and I can't foresee when it is not going to be relevant.

Buy One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) Now

This movie is as relevant now as it was when it first hit movie theaters in the 70's. Hilarious, somewhat dark and thought provoking. Great performances all around, anyone I recommend this film to loves it. You will remember most of these characters, right down to Christopher Lloyd and Danny DeVito in supporting roles. In my opinion, one of the most uproariously funny moments in movie history occurs when Chezaroo flips out about Nurse Ratched's stingy cigarette policy.

The Blu ray transfer of this movie is excellent. It is not the very best of the best, but for a film that came out in the mid-seventies it has superb PQ on Blu ray.

Read Best Reviews of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) Here

This is one of my favorite Jack Nicholson movies. The collector's edition has some nice goodies: a 52 page hard-bound book, reproduction of the original press book, a 52 card deck, 4 mini-reproduction of the original worldwide theatrical posters and 6 cast/character photos. A great package for a great movie that received 5 Academy Awards.

Want One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) Discount?

5 stars for the film, 1 star for the DVD:

There are a lot of reviews that discuss the movie itself, so I will keep this one short and talk about the DVD.

The DVD is a bit of a disappointment. The film itself is very dirty; it looks like the transfer was done from a copy of the film that's been shown a few hundred times in a theater. It's hard to believe that the master itself has deriorated this much.

There are no interesting extras on this DVD. No deleted scenes, no commentaries, no behind the scenes footage. Just some text screens talking about awards the film received, etc.

The are no audio options. You're just stuck with standard sterio. And the menu is bland and static. Basically, you are getting the movie, as you would have experienced it in a theater nearly three decades ago, and nothing else.

I love this film however, especially the ending, so I still recommend buying it if you are a Jack Nicholson fan. Just don't expect the DVD to actually take advantage of the medium.

Monday, September 29, 2014

A Cinderella Story / Another Cinderella Story (Double Feature) (2010)

A Cinderella Story / Another Cinderella StoryThe two movies are pretty decent. A Cinderella Story is a bit bland, while Another Cinderella Story is a bit more lively and humorous.

FYI to let those interested in purchasing this product is that the disk only contains the two movies and nothing else. They do not contain special features of any kind.

This was a birthday gift for our daughter who turned 9. She already saw these movies on the Family Channel and loved them as I did too. This was what she wanted for her birthday and was very happy to get both movies for a great price.

Buy A Cinderella Story / Another Cinderella Story (Double Feature) (2010) Now

I have no clue why I love these movies; but I do, and to get them both, in a set, for less than $10 was amazing! It arrived quickly, also!

Read Best Reviews of A Cinderella Story / Another Cinderella Story (Double Feature) (2010) Here

Great movie for young girls. Great deal: you get 2 movies for the price of one. You can't beat that.

Want A Cinderella Story / Another Cinderella Story (Double Feature) (2010) Discount?

Saturday night teenage sleepover hit! Works every time, no matter how many times these movies are seen. Even the adults in your family will enjoy these!

Save 33% Off

Clash of the Titans (2010)

Clash of the TitansI love "Clash of the Titans," but I'm terribly disappointed by the quality of this DVD. The "all-new digital transfer" that the manufacturer promises is quite possibly the worst transfer I've ever seen, enhancing the film's visual flaws while disguising its merits. In composite shots, live-action elements are so washed-out as to appear almost black-and-white at times, while stop-motion elements are garishly bright and crisp, looking more like cartoons than dimensional objects. This is particularly pronounced in shots of the flying Pegasus; the digital transfer so exaggerates the matte lines around the figure that it appears to be a paper cut-out plastered against the sky. Even the glorious Medusa segment suffers from these defects: what was, in the original (and on VHS), an atmospheric balance of rich darks and flickering red lights, becomes a clash of nearly impenetrable spots of shadow against grainy, pale-brown relief. I'm no authority on digital transfers, but my guess is that this one was done as quickly and cheaply as possible, the manufacturer's reasoning being (probably) that fans of Harryhausen will be so thrilled to have his films on DVD that they could care less what the films look like. Well, I was thrilled to have "Clash of the Titans" on DVD--but when the abysmal quality of the transfer interferes with the very effects that make the film great, my enthusiasm wanes considerably. I'd advise fans of Harryhausen to buy the video version, and to write angry letters to the manufacturer protesting their callous desecration of one of the master's greatest films.

Okay, I really like this movie and have since 1981 when it was theatrically released. It's not my favorite Harryhausen fantasy but it's in my top 5.

I ordered this blu-ray from Amazon.com a week or so ago and it just arrived today. This is where I kick myself in the head for not reading other's reviews of the blu-ray first. The transfer sucks BIG TIME or, perhaps it was just the elements used to create this blu-ray that were a mixed bag! Most (not all) of the daylight scenes were excellent but the evening and night scenes were truly horrid. From the opening scenes of the soldiers on the sandy beach right up to the end titles all I could see were large chunks of dirt that wasn't removed prior to making the transfer. Way too much film grain (much more than should be for a film of this age) and artifacts throughout.. all this clearly visible in the darker and some of the daylight scenes viewed on a 65 inch HD LED TV.

It seems the studios are really getting lazy (or is it just cheap?) in releasing newer and older films in substandard transfers.

I can name on perhaps 1 hand the films I feel are really superb transfers to blu-ray. Another 25 to 30 that are good and all the rest (approx 985 in my collection) as dismal failures as far as the quality of the transfers. I invested in Blu-ray for the promised superb quality this new format offered and to be honest I feel cheated MOST of the time to the point where I'm not going to be buying blu-rays based on how much I like/love the film but more importantly how good the quality of the transfer is. It's just a slap in the face from the studios to wait for them to make one of my favorites available on blu-ray and to be let down once again by a skanky presentation.

Two other blu-rays of recent note that I have had problems with (Gladiator and Saving Private Ryan) have been recalled by the studios for faulty transfers because we consumers bombarded them with complaints. I don't expect that to happen in this case because compared to the two just mentioned, CLASH is an older film with (I'm guessing) nowhere the amount of fans.

So if you really like this film and have a TV larger than 40 inches I'd stay away from this title. However if your TV is smaller and don't expect to be buying a larger one in the next couple of years, then go ahead and buy it coz you probably won't be able to see the deficits in the transfer.

And for all of you who won't be buying this blu-ray, do check out two other Harryhausen films (The 7th Voyage of Sinbad and Jason and the Argonauts) on blu-ray coz they look really GREAT. Sony 10 / Warner 2

Peace out.

Buy Clash of the Titans (2010) Now

What a shame, this is Ray's last feature film and they give the man a kick in his pants with this transfer. This has some of Ray's best creations and it's ruined with a washed out grainy print. I could not bring myself to give it a lower rating. The film deserves 5 stars for Harryhausen's incredible work, but the DVD transfer keeps me from giving it a full thumbs up.

The print is very watchable and at a bargain price of $5.00 it should not be passed up, but the film and Harryhausen deserve much better! Thankfully they are releasing this film on BluRay and on a new DVD, so I will update my review when it has been released and I have a chance to compare them.....I'll keep my fingers crossed that they do this gifted genius justice!

****DVD/BLU RAY UPDATE****

Save your money as the new release of this film looks to be the same old transfer and the Blu Ray isn't worth the upgrade as it just brings out the wear and tear all the more. There are no new extras either. It's a shame because this film desrves to be completely restored and preserved for future generations and old school Harryhausen fans!

****END OF UPDATE****

Read Best Reviews of Clash of the Titans (2010) Here

Judging from the comments below, it seems one either loves this film or despises it. In the book "Roger Ebert's Movie Home Companion", Mr. Ebert praised the film, so I decided to give this DVD a try. I'm glad I took a chance because it turns out Mr. Ebert's opinion matches my own. If you harbor a child's spirit within you, if you like to entertain fantasies, or enjoy comic books, this film is probably for you.

Ebert says "Clash Of The Titans" is special effects wizard, Ray Harryhausen's masterwork, a tour de force, and having seen many of the master's earlier films, I tend to agree. His effects are achieved by stop-action animation, rear projection, modeling, etc.; traditional methods requiring painstaking effort and which lend themselves well to a film which deals with ancient Greek mythology. But there is much more here than just fantastic effects. Nearly everything about this film works for me. The mostly British cast infuses the film with a high tone. Harry Hamlin plays the role of Persius exactly right, and Judi Bowker is adorable as the lovely princess Andromeda. The production values are high, with wondrous sets and marvelous costuming. The location filming in the Mediterranean is beautiful and sometimes breathtaking.

The DVD video transfer is from a clean 35mm print and looks terrific in the 16:9 widescreen mode. The sumptuous London Symphony scoring sets a tasteful mood and effectively augments the story. I do have one gripe, however. The music track on this DVD has too much treble and the music is too loud, competing with the dialog. Whoever remixes these soundtracks should be instructed that the music is not supposed to upstage the acting.

Apart from the sound mix, I honestly can't find much to fault with the film. This ages-old epic of gods and men, good vs. evil, and fantastic ordeals braved in the name of love, is treated with respect, both in script and acting, while remaining fun. Titans is an enchanting movie. It evokes a certain sense of magic which films like Star Wars seem to have sacrificed in the name of urbane sophistication and high-tech realism. This DVD is a fine choice for those who like a touch of charm with their escapism; a gem to be enjoyed again and again, by young and old, for it truly celebrates the child within.

Want Clash of the Titans (2010) Discount?

Movie 3.5

Similar to a lot of people, I remember seeing this (if not bits and pieces of it) on TV growing up as a kid. If not this, then probably some form of Jason and The Argonauts or The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad. Ray Harryhausen and his people did a great job trying to captivate audiences with their work, with Clash of the Titans likely being their most memorable effort. Almost 30 years later with this Blu-ray release, nostalgia must be rampant for those old enough to recall this wondrous interpretation of Greek mythology and fantastic tale of adventure, drama, and romance. I can honestly say until a few months ago when I heard of the upcoming remake, I really didn't remember much about this film. So in preparation for its arrival I decided to give this a rent to refresh my memory. Needless to say, it had been so long, I only now realized how good of a movie this is. Granted, the special effects weren't too great for its time, but I especially like the screenplay and script. Many of the actors/actresses are also British, resulting in a very thespian quality, which I think coincidentally ties in very well to "things of the past" as Mr. Harryhausen would say. Much like how you didn't see too many Greek-themed movies back then, you really don't see much thespian-type works outside of theater houses anymore either. And even after all these years, Titans '81 still manages to carry itself despite its age. The plot is revealed right from the get-go and progresses fairly well throughout, while providing just enough excitement and intrigue to keep the audience entertained. Although, I regret to say the special effects did end up hindering it a bit. Obviously, it was not big-budget like a Star Wars or Blade Runner back then, but I think it makes up for that in innocence.

Video 3.5

Presented by Warner Bros. in 1080p at an original aspect ratio of 1.85:1, Clash '81 ranges from decent to good at best. Grain is all over the place, even in the cleanest of scenes, and accompanied by an equal amount of noise in the darker ones. Colors are a little more vibrant than the DVD, but just barely. However, detail and texture look much sharper, though can appear somewhat hazy in conjunction with the constant presence of that grain. Black levels and contrast receive a slight boost in depth as well, and shadow delineation seems a little more pronounced compared to what I saw in SD. All in all, considering this wasn't even that high of a budget, this is probably as good as the video will get without massive image manipulation having to be applied.

Audio 4.0

This is probably the most notable of improvements over the DVD. While the original sound master was only limited to 2 channels, this DTS-HD 2.0 track is surprisingly buoyant. Separation of dialogue, sound effects, and music are good, even immersing at some points like there was actual surround speaker usage from the sides. Although, high and low ends aren't too different from one another, leaving a little more to be desired, but it's good for what was available. Again, this is probably as good as it'll get. Just goes to make you wonder how a sound design like Clash '81 can get lossless audio when bigger name movies and TV series still aren't getting stuck with lossy.

Extras 2.0

Clocking in at just a little over 20 minutes, we get a very brief interview with Ray Harryhausen about his overall thoughts and experiences with the making of Titan's '81. The main segment is about 12 minutes and delves a little here and there about production, writing, and his own personal opinions on the project. The rest of the extras are about 1-minute-long vignettes of Harryhausen explaining the creatures and how they were constructed/animated. Suffice it to say, the real highlight is the 5 minute preview of the 2010 remake that talks a little about the CG designs for Medusa and The Kraken. Given how outdated Titans '81's effects are, I'm actually pretty stoked for when I get to see the remake at some point.

Overall 3.5

Clash of the Titans (1981) certainly has its roots set with a unique charm and level of nostalgia for its Greek mythology and competent storytelling. While the special effects obviously didn't stand the test of time as well as its story, the overall movie itself really isn't so bad. However, with only a decent video transfer, limited audio encode, and small amount of extras, the current SRP of $34.99 for this digibook seems a bit steep for a film that didn't even have the highest quality production of its year. If anything, watch this just for the preview of the remake. Otherwise, die-hard fans should wait for the SRP to go a lot lower for this mediocre A/V presentation.