NFL Super Bowl XLIV: New Orleans Saints Champions (2010)

Anyone thinking about buying this product has to understand that the superbowl in its entirety is not on this Blu-ray. It is just highlights of the season that is being narrated (telling the story of the saints from the beginning of the season to the end). I gave this a three star because i am a die heart Saints fan. I purchased this Blu-Ray because I wanted to watch the superbowl in its entirety again; as well as years to come.

This Blu-ray is not a bad highlight reel of the saints 2009/2010 season. So, if you are ok with the fact that this is not the actual game, then this is the Blu-ray for you.

This Blu-ray is worth the price! At first, I debated purchasing it because it didn't show the entire Super Bowl but this is better. It tells a great story going game by game with great commentary from Jim Henderson and WWL radio. I was happy when they showed us winning and still a bit upset when they showed the 3 game losing streak. I choked up a bit (again) when they showed Hartley nail the winning FG in the NFC Championship game.

The story is told from a definitively Saints and Who Dat Nation perspective. It's like no one else matters, not even Peyton Manning, he's an after thought (in the film). They do a good job of capturing the spirit of the Saints, season, each game and the Super Bowl.

If you are a Saints fan this is a must buy and if you're not you'll still enjoy a great film.

Buy NFL Super Bowl XLIV: New Orleans Saints Champions (2010) Now

I find it funny that the set called "Super Bowl XLIV Champions" is a season highlight reel and the other set out there called "Saints Road to XLIV" is the one with the entire Super Bowl game on it. Basically, if you want to see a highlight reel to relive the memories of the Saints 2009 season & 1st Super Bowl victory along with the presentation of the Lombardi trophy after the game (best feature of the disk), buy this set. If you want to see the Super Bowl XLIV game, buy the "Road to XLIV" set. Both should be viewed as must have purchases for diehard Saints fans!

Read Best Reviews of NFL Super Bowl XLIV: New Orleans Saints Champions (2010) Here

I relive the Saints Super Bowl winning season with these highlights. And I get goosebumps every time I watch it. Good stuff.

Want NFL Super Bowl XLIV: New Orleans Saints Champions (2010) Discount?

Saints fans waited 43 years for this to happen the New Orleans Saints in the Super Bowl! The Road to the Super Bowl is on this DVD. Highlights and important plays from each of the games of the season are on it with the Super Bowl win at the end. We love the DVD and have watched it many, many times. No it doesn't show the entire Super Bowl or any game. It also includes conversations and comments by miked players during the games.

We love the DVD and are ordering another, just in case something happpens to the originial one we bought.

Save 37% Off

The Illusionist (2006)

This is an excellent gothic thriller based on the short story by Steven Millhauser, Eisenheim The Illusionist, set in late 19th century Vienna about the son of a young cabinetmaker who falls in love with a young Viennese aristocrat and is banned from seeing her as he is a basic commoner. As the legend goes about the young lad, he meets a travelling magician on the road who shows him the secrets of illusion, where he sets off to exotic lands to learn the mysteries of life. He returns to Vienna after his travels and opens a show in the great city to astonish not only Vienna's common public with his quasi supernatural illusions, but also Crown Prince Rudolf, son of Emperor Franz Josef who then reigned over the Austrian Hungarian Empire.

Originally the short story was written as a political criticism of the Monarchy, based on the scandalous incident, where the bodies of Rudolf and his mistress, Baroness Mary Vetsera were found shot in a Royal hunting lodge, apparently a murder suicide which the Royal family kept from the public for many years.

Edward Norton as Eisenheim is understated and brilliant, as the many sleight of hand tricks in the film were actually done by the gifted actor. Norton must have practiced for months to reveal such confidence and skill needed for these types of trick. However, Norton's character portrayed a perfect man of mystery, begging the question, are these mere illusions or does Eisenheim possess supernatural power, controlling matter, energy, space and time itself.

The special effects in this film are well done. My favourite illusion in the film, (and they're many) is the Excalibur Sword illusion where Eisenheim borrows Rudolf's sword, somehow magnetizes it to the stage standing straight up, asking the various aristocrats' in the audience to release it from its position. Of course none can release the sword, as they, like the Arthur legend, are not meant to be king. When Prince Rudolf attempts to pull the sword from its stationary stance, he finally does so with great effort; by causing the ruthless Prince some embarrassment, Eisenheim is now a targeted enemy of the Crown.

Paul Giamatti as the corrupt Inspector Uhl really shows what a versatile and gifted actor he really is, able to do comedy, tragedy, fantasy...a very impressive performance.

The overall look of the film had the atmosphere as if we are viewing a primary historical source, the director using 80 year old editing techniques etc., this was unusual but effective for such a mixed genre film fantasy, thriller, supernatural thriller and fairy tale romance.

When first seeing this film I was spellbound and the ending, a perfect twist, making The Illusionist a perfect example of skilful storytelling.

This is an excellent film.

Set in Vienna, filmed in Prague,and just about as lovely as anything I've seen on the large screen, "The Illusionist" stars Edward Norton as a charismatic magician, and Jessica Biel as his high-born love interest. In keeping with its magic and later, occult, theme, the film unwinds through shadow and darkness, like a carriage being horsedrawn through fin-de-siecle Europe's narrow streets. Philip Glass's minimalist score, rather than acting as an anachronism as one might expect, enhances the ethereal, other-worldly quality. Edward Norton brings to Eisenheim, the central character (the book is based on the short story "Eisenheim, the Illusionist", by Steven Millhauser)an understated quality that adds to the sense that he always knows more than we do...and more than the characters in the film, including the two that most want to undo his works of magic, Inspector Uhl and Crown Prince Leopold. Unfortunately, the latter is engaged to Dutchess Sophie van Teschen, Biel's character. Leopold's intent is not only to prevent his lower class rival's success, but to control Sophie completely. Uhl, on the other hand, continues to respect Eisenheim, even as he is carrying out the Crown Prince's orders to shut the magician's show down.

As the tale unwinds (and it does ever more quickly as it moves toward the end), we do learn more and more about what lies behind Eisenheim's sad eyes. When Sophie's body turns up in the river after an argument with Leopold, Eisenheim's shows take on a dark change and he becomes kind of a "John Edwards" of the 19th century...but this John Edwards can summon holographic ghosts onto the stage, much to the delight of his audience. Is he becoming more and more obsessed and perhaps insane as Sophie begins to appear in these seances? In a twinkling, we find out as much about Eisenheim as we have during the entire film, and the lines in the Sophie-Leopold-Eisenheim triangle between the innocent and the devious aren't so clear.

A film to be savored.

Buy The Illusionist (2006) Now

The Illusionist is one of my favorite films. A unique magic/mystery/love story that is wonderfully written, perfectly cast and excellently directed and acted. The blu-ray is a solid improvement over the dvd, however, because the film was shot in a bit of a soft-focus way, it may not come across as razor-sharp as the newer blu-rays. Still, its well worth an upgrade from the dvd for such an excellent movie.

My only criticism is with the rest of the blu-ray treatment. While the picture and sound are excellent, everything else is an embarrassment. There is no main menu, no chapter selection or bookmarks, and no special features on the blu-ray disc. Just a garish intro page telling the viewer that they can access the specifications by pressing the top-menu button. That gives you access only to the audio setting. And there are no subtitle options either. Madness! Subtitles actually would help occasionally on this particular film as sometimes the actors are speaking quietly and are difficult to hear, and what they are saying is important to the mystery of the film.

This set includes the original dvd disc which DOES have a main menu with all the expected options, so the buyer gets a bizarre combination of a blu-ray disc with nothing but a hi-def picture, and a vastly inferior standard-def disc that treats the film with at least a little of the respect that it richly deserves.

In the end, I'm glad to finally have a hi-def version of The Illusionist, but I'm baffled and frustrated that Fox treated it with such contempt.

Read Best Reviews of The Illusionist (2006) Here

I was taken by surprise when I saw this film I had read Steven Millhauser's short story, on which it is based, but had missed the film when it came out. The film takes the bare bones of the short story and imposes upon them the intense childhood attachment between Eisenheim and his aristocratic neighbor, and the ensuing romance touching the core of the Hapsburg dynasty shortly before it and its empire go down to ruin. Neither the childhood romance nor the rivalry with the Hapsburg heir appears in the short story. I am usually outraged when original literary works receive such treatment by Hollywood. However, in this case, I was rewarded with a lovely, romantic jewel of a film that works quite well on its own terms. The script begs one or two narrative questions, but this is one of the rare cases in which these don't matter much, overall. Contrary to the opinion expressed by a reviewer below, in my opinion the film is defined by the sense of hidden strength and longing with which Edward Norton imbues Eisenheim. The broken childhood attachment that convinces him to follow his calling as a magician, and the later reunification with his lost love that this choice brings about, make for a very satisfying journey, indeed. It is precisely Eisenheim's ability to hide his thoughts, his canny self-control, and his relationship to his magic (which is to say, his broader view of what is possible and what is not), and their ultimate triumph over blunt authority and the social order, that make the film so appealing.

The rest of the cast is very good, as well, particularly Paul Giammati as the police inspector and Rufus Sewell as the unstable and vicious Crown Prince Leopold. Jessica Biel is the weakest leak in this chain as Eisenham's (adult) love: her "Viennese" accent slips the most often, and she is not as charismatic as Norton, but she does well enough and doesn't spoil the movie. The film is set in Vienna in 1910, and the American actors, as well as the British Sewell, were coached to produce a "Viennese" accent, but it isn't, quite, and the result among the Americans is an inconsistent sound that is neither British nor Viennese, and which Biel, in particular, had trouble maintaining. There are a few narrative weakness. One is the Duchess not recognizing Eisenham, the love of her youth, 15 years later as she stares into his eyes on stage he was already an extraordinary young magician when she first knew him and already possessed of an adult voice. Then there is the little matter of the Duchess's exit, apparently with no questions from the noble family who presumably would have wished to bury her! But these quibbles, somehow, are easily set aside in the somewhat fairy-tale-like atmosphere of the film, which was imaginatively shot in sepia tones that enhanced this. This eerie atmosphere is also greatly enhanced by Philip Glass's delicate, mysterious score. Romantics, rebels, and dreamers everywhere will appreciate the themes of this film as expressed through the relationships among the characters. The magical effects, of course, are enhanced by the wonders of computer technology. One is aware of this while watching, but doesn't care.

A charming and romantic film with a truly unique feel to it, highly recommended.

Want The Illusionist (2006) Discount?

A good story, great acting, beautful sets, great costumes, special effects.. this movie has it all!

It's a clever story. You sort of know how it will end, but it moves so quickly its always two steps ahead of your ideas on how it all ties up.

This movie didn't shake up the box office. The Oscars will pass it by. The neglect is not deserved.

Save 47% Off

The Purge (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2013)

The premise behind writer/director James DeMonaco's film THE PURGE is indeed a fantastic one: set in the year 2022, when unemployment nationwide is down to just one percent, and crimes across the board are at an all-time low. But what if the manner of getting it that was to allow a one-night "purge", in which violent behavior was actually sanctioned by the United States government, and largely to rid America of the poor and the indigent? It is a premise that may seem outrageous; but so too was the idea of a surveillance state as depicted in George Orwell's classic 1948 novel "1984"; and what has America become since 9/11 but a real-life surveillance state? Under the right circumstances, it is completely possible that something like THE PURGE might come to pass.

Ethan Hawke portrays a security systems designer whose entire neighborhood, located in the hills above West Los Angeles, owes its very security and safety to his security designs. It becomes especially important during a twelve-hour time frame from 7 PM to 7 AM on March 21st and 22nd, 2022 known as "The Purge", in which violent behavior, including murder, theft, and even rape, will be allowed--and no police or emergency first responders will be on duty. It is a thing that Hawke and his family, and their neighbors, have gotten used to; and they have also become largely callous when it comes to the potential victims of the Purge, namely the poor who don't have the ability to support themselves with any job or pay approaching anywhere close to what Hawke makes. But on this particular Purge Night, one of Hawke's children (Max Burkholder), out of the goodness and conscience of his heart, lets a wounded black man (Edwin Hodge) enter the premises, which upsets Hawke tremendously. To Hawke, Hodge is exactly the kind of target the Purge people want to kill; and when the leader (Rhys Wakefield) of one such Purge group comes to get Hodge, Hawke, his family, and their home come under siege from that group. Hawke at first advocates handing over Hodge to them (given that the Purge group has already totally crippled what Hawke had once proclaimed a foolproof security system), but his wife (Lena Headey), daughter (Adelaide Kane) and Burkholder, appalled at his descent into cold-blooded "survival of the fittest", force the issue. In the end, they are forced to endure much physical horror and psychological terror until the morning comes. And does the madness really even end there?

DeMonaco wrote and directed THE PURGE on a budget of just slightly more than $3 million; and apart from the sometimes shaky and unsteady camera work (a trait that came from the quasi-documentary style of films like THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT and PARANORMAL ACTIVITY), every penny of that $3 million budget shows up here. There are a number of things that don't quite work the way they should; and some of the acting, especially by Wakefield as the chief Purge instigator, is overly hammy. In terms of what DeMonaco is basically trying to do with what is certainly a fantastic and crazy premise (one that seems to take a number of shots at right-wing elements of America, up to and including the Tea Party), however, THE PURGE is effective enough. There is something extraordinarily ironic at rich, upscale people turning on one another, either for harboring a "filthy swine" such as Hodge, or for having their supposedly "foolproof" security system exposed. In many ways, it derives its power and plot from many films: the original ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13; A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (the masks worn by Wakefield and his posse); THE BIRDS; NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD; STRAW DOGS (the original 1971 Sam Peckinpah classic); and even THE OSTERMAN WEEKEND (Peckinpah's last, released in 1983). But these are films that have a kinetic and psychological power that very few other "horror" or "thriller" films of this kind can have without spiraling into hyper-violent absurdity, and they are films that DeMonaco clearly has learned a lot from.

Hawke does a fairly good job of being a somewhat callous capitalist who grossly underrates the impact that the violent behavior of the night of the Purge will have on his family. Headey also does a credible job as his wife, who questions his motivations and his morality when, at first, he decides to hand Hodge over to Wakefield, instead of doing the right thing and fighting for his humanity. In the final analysis, and in terms of its credibility and plausibility, it has to be said that THE PURGE isn't necessarily the best psychological "horror" or "thriller" film that has ever been. But it is effective enough to deliver what it promises for its eighty-five minute running time.

"The Purge, for its time, is by far one of the most daring and intriguing thrillers and social conscience dramas released in recent memory. While some people might find the concept bewildering to grasp (a 12-hour period known as The Annual Purge involving free, legalised criminal activity), it is nonetheless stronger for consideration than the average "horror" film especially when recent discussions about the Second Amendment, poverty, race/class issues, and mental health all have been in the spotlight.

The film, as the trailers might hint, starts off more as a dark and chilling parable and then switch its gears for more conventional thriller devices with the Straw Dogs-like house invasion toward the middle and end of the film. Nonetheless, much of its messages and intrigue are not lost in the mist as many things can be read and interpreted upon (the affluence of preppy university students showcasing their snobbery through racial violence, fear of the very poor and very rich, taking advantage of innocent women).

While much of its glory comes from the themes, The Purge also complements its too realistic for science-fiction, claustrophobic narrative well with intense cinematography, graphic violence, paranoia, and slow-burner pace of frequent domestic threat. Performances are rather good too with Ethan Hawke plays a believably stuck-up security systems consultant and Lena Headey as the fearful yet resilient matriarch of the Sandin family. The soundtrack, with its clever yet unsettling use of Debussy's Claire de Lune, sets to complement a tone to the film that hints paranoia and horror with "violent peace" (oxymoronic to say the least).

From a person who hardly goes to see these so-called "horror" films (ParaNorman, The Shining, Cabin in the Woods, An American Werewolf in London, and Splice are just a few recent ones I have seen), this one can be construed as more close to horror because of the feeling that you are not safe in your own home but the thriller aspect plays into it moreover due to its realistic albeit futuristic setting. On merit, the film delivers a stronger argument about the trouble vigilantism may bring or provide good or bad and is a good enough film for older audiences to critique and question about much of the film's meaning. On that note, it is also best if you stay in for the credits too so to get the experience of knowing how many of The Annual Purge participants feel glad or feel sorrow."

Buy The Purge (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2013) Now

By the year 2022 the US government, led by our New Founding Fathers, has managed to crawl its way out of a triple dip recession and record crime rates. Unemployment stands at 1%, and crime is at an all time low. With one exception. Once a year, on a date designated as The Purge, for twelve hours all crime is legal. Rape, murder, theft, the entire US has a free pass to do whatever they wish and suffer no repercussions for it. In a single day thousands are murdered and millions of dollars worth of property destroyed in order to give everyday American's an outlet to vent their rage, anger, and frustrations in the hope that they will "cleanse their souls" and not be tempted to commit crimes for the rest of the year.

First of all let's put aside the fact that the premise at face value makes absolutely no sense. I'll let that slide, though I do feel it needs to be said. The premise is what it is, and as implausible as it is, I still thought it interesting enough to warrant a look. But even overlooking this, the movie has some serious flaws that I felt wasted what could have been a very intelligent film. First of all, this film is produced by the same people who brought us great horror movies like the Paranormal Activity movies, Insidious and Sinister, and while I loved those movies this film should have been different. The premise screams suspense thriller, as instead of dealing with supernatural beings like in their previous films, the main baddies in this one are a bunch of teenagers in masks and an old homeless man. To put it simply, there is nothing even remotely scary about this movie, so the fact that they filmed it like a horror movie with the typical horror movie tropes, jump scares, loud music, etc only served as a distraction both for the director and the audience from what should have been the main focus. These sort of things worked for Sinister and Insidious because of their supernatural elements, because the villains were invisible, evil forces that couldn't be talked to or reasoned with. This film doesn't have that. Instead we have some homeless guy wandering around an inexplicably enormous house for an hour while the idiot family that lives there stumbles around in the dark. Am I honestly supposed to be scared by this? The Purge is a thriller in a horror movies clothing, and ultimately in my opinion fails horribly at being either.

But what about The Purge itself? Do we get to see the streets turn into battle grounds? Is there subtle yet engaging social commentary to go along with such an interesting premise? Sadly, no. I don't know what these producers deal is with filming well off families in big houses, but this story should have really been told from the POV of someone who is poor and, thus, unable to afford protection from the roaming bands of psychotic rich kids trying to kill them. This is what should have been the focus of the film, not some boring rich family with first world problems, but the poor and downtrodden who are the real victims of this sick tradition. Imagine a film where a poor, single mother/father flees with their children from bands of killers who are not only allowed to kill at will, but encouraged to do so as well. That would have been a great movie. Instead we get boring suburban dad with boring suburban wife, and boring suburban kids. Nothing gets my heart strings strumming like privileged rich people trying to throw some poor homeless guy to the wolves. Yeah, I feel real sorry for those guys.

The Purge is a film that had a great idea but no idea how to see it through. Its boring, badly directed, and commits the cardinal sin of being a horror movie that isn't even remotely scary. If you really want to see it, wait until its on netflix and stream it. Otherwise, my suggestion is to pass. Its really not worth the effort.

Read Best Reviews of The Purge (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2013) Here

This movie is not supose to be scary. It was really good (in my opinion). It delivered what it promised to deliver. People always complain about things. It is sad how people ca never be satisfied. The idea was really creative and well built.

Want The Purge (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2013) Discount?

For Hollywood, this was a goldmine!! With a budget of only a reported 3 million, this movie exceeded and surpassed expectations! And here is why. The acting was superb, Ethan Hawke and company did an excellent job in portraying the story. The audience felt the families plight, they were right there with them. This ultra violent horror movie actually has heart. The ending will surely suprise any veteran horror movie fan. Excellent film!!! The supporting cast, right down to the most minute part did an excellent job as well. We love love love this movie.....go see it!!!

The only issue I have is that I wish that the story was carried outside of the family, but other than that, it would have been a 5 star!!!

Christopher Berry

Save 31% Off

Saw III (Unrated Edition) (2006)

I'm not even going to bother going over a synopsis of the plot. All you horror fans need to know is that this movie surpasses the first film, but in my opinion, it doesn't stand up to the second film in terms of suspense. Saw 3 is the goriest, most disturbing of the films. It seems like 2006 was the year of gore! First came Hostel, with it's torture and blood, then came The Hills Have Eyes, with it's rape, animal killings, parent killings and brutality, and now comes Saw 3...With it's flesh tearing, bone breaking, head twisting, gore splattered shock-fest. I have NEVER, in all my years of watching horror, had to actually cover my own ears and close my eyes while watching more than one scene in a movie before this one. The opening scene had me squirming in my seat with my lids tightly shut (after 15 seconds into the scene I had to mute the tv because I was so grossed out by the noises) and the scene involving a victim trapped in a device that "TWISTS" every limb on his body until the skin tears and the bones break made me want to literally vomit. But, still, the movie was very suspensful and horrifying. It kept you watching and interested. If you can stomach extreme gore and terror then you might enjoy this film. I have to admit that I REALLY hated the ending though. I can't even explain how upset it made me, but overall, the movie was very scary and disturbing. Better than the first, not as good as the second...give it a try...but do it on an empty stomach!!

Not being an avid fan of the first Saw and disliking a lot the second one, I nevertheless was very surprised in a good way about the third installment. Yes, it's utterly relentless and gory, I saw people covering their eyes with hands in a theater, even I winced a couple of times although I had seen many of the films alike. But what I liked the most here was not the brutal nature of Saw III (and it's quite important for the fans when a movie lives up to its R-rating, so that they can say money was spent wisely) and not even the intricate story-line that keeps you surprised and on the edge of your seat all the time. Not the final twist which was expected of course but surely you didn't know what it would be exactly.

The main merit of the third part is that it doesn't appear to be a usual stupid sequel that lacks ideas, it brings some new sense into the series, glues all the three films together making a perfect trilogy out of it which now can be watched as a one big 5-hour film. There's plenty of flashbacks here that explain a lot from the second and even the first part, and some things become clear that were not in the ends of previous series. It really takes talent to make a movie that not just stands alone, but adds a lot to the other parts and completes them. Guys that were making it are true professionals and real maniacs :)

And apart from being as it seems overly gory and graphic Saw III can boast of being rather thoughtful too. The evil genius of Jigsaw (and of the makers of the film) made the characters (and us along with them) think about rage and its manifestations, about revenge and people's insatiable urge to punish those who took their beloved ones. By quite simple examples inclusive of flesh-ripping, bone-crushing, joint-wresting etc. the killer himself shows us killing is bad. Those will survive who don't succumb to the desire of payback. Only forgiving can grant forgiveness for ourselves. And that's the rule for everyone, even for the evil manipulator's apprentice, and it can't be broken. Otherwise death awaits you as well as your victims. In this movie Jigsaw is seen not as an ordinary killer maniac, but as some kind of a teacher if you will. So this time his puzzles must be solved not only using strength, keen wit and will to live, but also by testing your own virtue and that's something new for this kind of flicks, don't you agree?

I don't know what they will do with Saw IV, because the third part wrapped it all very nice making a perfectly neat structure of a trilogy. I'd leave it like that. You can top previous parts in respect of blood and guts, but it'll be pretty hard to keep the same level of thoughtfulness the third part established.

Buy Saw III (Unrated Edition) (2006) Now

To start, let's review the film itself.

The Jigsaw Killer is back, and he's got new test subjects to toy with. With the help of Amanda, his new apprentice, she sets the stage for their two unwilling participants in his twisted game: Dr. Lynn Denlon and Jeff Reinhart. Before the night is over, one will have the chance at life, another will have a chance at revenge, and another will have the chance for redemption. There's not much else I can say without spoiling the plot, and since this review is geared towards why this 2-disc DVD treatment is superior to the previous versions, let's move on.

Saw III has more plot twists than you can shake a broken arm at, and this film doesn't have too many characters to bog down the action as in the previous film. With a running time of 120 minutes, the Director's Cut of Saw III has more gore and violence than the last two treatments. If you think the directors have run out of trap ideas, believe me when I tell you that there are plenty of moments that caused seasoned horror movie fanatics to cringe and wince at the tortures unfolding before them on the silver screen. If you have already been introduced to the 'Saw' universe, Saw III is required viewing.

As for the DVD treatment of the movie, it's common knowledge these days that the first version of a DVD release is typically not the one with the best features, or the most complete version of the film. The most complete version comes later. The best example I can think of is the Blade Runner (Five-Disc Ultimate Collector's Edition) I had to wait 25 years for that.

Thankfully, Saw III got the best DVD version (so far) within a year.

When you open the DVD, you're treated to a certificate allowing you to see Saw IV in the theaters for free. However, the ticket was only good until November 10th of 2007. Even if you buy this DVD after that time, the certificate makes a nice collectable for Saw fans.

When you put in the first disc, you have to wade through 5 movie advertisements before getting to the main menu.

At the main menu, there is an endless one minute loop of "Killer Inside-Messed Up World" playing in the background. It's my belief that DVD menus shouldn't have music playing, and this is a perfect example: The song is WAY too loud. I'm sure it was put there to direct viewers to the music video on the second disc but it's simply an annoyance.

Some of the features on the first disc include:

-Audio commentary by Leigh Whannell, the co-creator of SAW.

-Audio commentary by Director Darren Lynn Bousman

-Audio commentary by Tobin Bell (Jigsaw) and Shawnee Smith (Amanda)

There's one choice in the special features section for "D-Box, Mastering Motion" this is a shameless promotion for a company that offers a new way of experiencing motion in movies with special chairs/helmets/etc.

On the second disc, there's a mixed bag of special features.

First, we start with "Jigsaw's Plan", a trivia game that tests your knowledge of the three Saw films to date. However, the questions are not randomized and if you get one question wrong, you have to start all over; making the replay value of this feature almost non-existent.

Nest, we have "Choose the Death" which allows us to view the scenes of 10 Saw traps from Saw 2 and Saw 3 with commentary from the director. Not a bad feature.

The next feature is "Looking Tortured" I'm not sure who came up with this idea, but it was a pleasant little surprise. 4 people are chosen to have makeup applied to emulate their 'Saw' counterparts. The viewer is shown from start to finish how to create & apply the makeup to look like the perfect Saw victim. Anyone who wants to spend $25 on a Halloween costume can watch this and make a better one themselves.

Hydrovibe offers us a music video of "Killer Inside-Messed Up World" with Shawnee Smith offering additional vocals. This video wasn't bad, but it felt like it was tacked on at the last minute. You'll probably find yourself saying "Hey, isn't this that annoying song playing in the background on the first disc?"

"Filmmaker Faves": This feature is totally unnecessary. Do you lay awake at night wondering about Leigh Whannell's favorite line/scene/trap of the Saw series? This is good for trivia night, but it's really not needed. Plus, the font of the lettering is hard to read here.

The last feature is a "Sneak Peek at Saw IV". This scene is mainly to wet the appetites of those folks eagerly awaiting the next Saw movie to come out on DVD, and they will not be disappointed.

The first batch of SAW III DVD's were out in January of 2007, The "Unrated Edition" and the standard edition. Both of these DVD's had features that did not make it to this version, such as some deleted scenes, commentaries, and trailers.

If you are looking for the longest running, most complete version of Saw III, this is the version for you.

Gift Card or Credit Card...make your choice.

Read Best Reviews of Saw III (Unrated Edition) (2006) Here

I am not usually attracted to this type of film...slasher/horror flicks, that is. I find most of them a waste of money and time, to be honest. This is why I was genuinely shocked at how I truly loved the first two "Saw" films, realizing they exercised absolutely brilliant examples of film-making, acting, and special effects. Both films had a genuinely awesome screenplay with well-written, realistically portrayed dialogue...and of course, forgetting the almost-too-intense amounts of suspense both films lavished upon its viewers would be criminal. Some of the scenes in those films brought on the nail-biting suspense I hadn't felt since Ridley Scott's "Alien." I remember being sick with jealousy after watching the first film that novice filmmakers James Wan and Leigh Whannell could create such a brilliant, intricate, breathtaking horror film that had just the right amounts of blood & guts mixed with a truckload of otherworldly suspense. I remember after watching the second film that Darren Lynn Bousman seriously has got a future on his hands with an exquisitely directed "Saw II." So, naturally, I felt more than compelled to view the third installation of the "Saw" franchise before the fourth film hit theaters. Described as "staggeringly violent" and "sadistically horrific," along with the true incidents of audience members vomiting and fainting in the theater, I felt less and less excited about the third Saw film, and began thinking it was nothing more than a Halloween horror film face-off between Saw III and Hostel to see which film could possibly be more sickeningly violent. In addition, I began to think "How could a third film possibly live up to the caliber of the first two?" After viewing the third film, I really wasn't sure what to think of the theory of the film being violent just to be violent. But here's what I generally thought of the third installation to the brilliant "Saw" franchise. The interlocking two-part story deals with a fatally ill Jigsaw capturing a doctor who must keep him alive for however long it takes for a man, who is psychologically insane with his lust for revenge for the drunk driver who killed his son, to maneuver through a series of Jigsaw's infamous "traps." Jeff, the man, is not actually in the traps, though--it's the people who he's been vengeful towards regarding the death of his son--for instance, the judge who locked away the killer for only a short period of time, and witnesses who didn't do anything. Jeff has the power to stop these traps--find it within himself to forgive them. Either that, or watch them get slaughtered in ways too shocking to write about in this review.

That said, Saw III is definitely a step up when it comes to the gore meter compared to the first two films. Some of the traps are so sickening you feel compelled to turn away from the screen. People vomiting in theaters, though, is a gross overreaction. I ate pizza while watching and I wasn't really nauseated or anything. Don't let that fool you, though--Saw III is extremely violent and the violence in the first two films is pale compared to it. There are plenty of moments where I cringed and thought to myself, "Holy crap, that's just wrong." While a part of me wants to condemn the film for being so excruciatingly violent, I can't help but think the violence was a necessary aspect to the story. You'd really have to see the film to know what I'm talking about here, but anyway, Saw III might've competed with Hostel for "most violent award" but the gore wasn't extremely over-the-top or too intense to watch.

Which brings me into my next point--the storyline. As I said in the first paragraph, the story lines for the first two film blew me out of the damn water with their brilliance. This is where the third film declines--and steeply, at that. The development of new characters is handled extremely poorly and in the end, you really don't give a flying crap who dies and who is left living (extremely unlike the second film). The acting is both up and down at different times. Shawnee Smith (Amanda) and Tobin Bell (Jigsaw) are absolutely top notch, as always. Smith's performance, especially towards the end of the film, sent chills down my spine and Bell never fails to disappoint. Yet, literally every single other actor/actress in the film didn't deliver, and that for me was major point loss.

I liked the directing, editing, and cinematography. Especially the cinematography, which reminded me immensely of the 2004 Denzel Washington action flick "Man On Fire," also dealing with the human spirit's lust for revenge at the loss of another. Fortunately, Darren Lynn Bousman's above-average skills as a film director manage to balance a close-to-falling Saw III and keep it shakily on its feet. Again, I blame this on the weak story. Yet, it is hardly fair for me to completely condemn the story. The screenwriters did a very good job incorporating flashbacks into the film, and explaining elements from the first two films that may have been considered plot holes in the past. This aspect to Saw 3 was immensely enjoyable and made for a good film.

Though, the ending was also very poor, in my opinion. It is very depressing, unhealthy, and unsatisfying like a Big Mac. You almost feel at a complete loss--the events building up from the beginning of the film (and, for that matter, the other two films as well) end up--like this? Bleh. Been there, done that. There also is no shocker at the end, unlike the first two films which each had shockers that pretty much blew the brains out of your ears and left you speechless and unable to move.

Still, though, Saw 3 is a decent film. But it should be understood that unless you are EXTREME fans of the first two films, as I am, you should stay away from this movie. You'll be revolted and disappointed, to say the least. But for hardcore Saw fans, it should be rather pleasing. I don't think "Saw 3" was a great film, But it certainly is decent and I've seen FAR worse. I have hopes for the fourth film that it may redeem the third film and restore the hopes of me and a million others that a great movie--turned into just a decent one--can be brought back to greatness.

3-Stars

Want Saw III (Unrated Edition) (2006) Discount?

The original "Saw" was everything a horror film should be. It had gore both implied and explicit, twists and turns in the plot, and characters that the audience didn't particularly want to see die. Then came along Saw II, which ramped up the gore factor considerably, and while it had its moments, it was obviously only there to make money off of the success of the original. Now the horror genre has been graced with the third offering in the series, which is firmly in Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street territory. The series is now officially a parody of itself, and its continued existence is only assured as long as it remains a cash cow (which it will).

The main problem with Saw III is that Jigsaw and his apprentice Amanda are no longer believable villains. They exude no sense of terror or aura of fear, as they are creatures that simply could not exist in reality. Jigsaw has essentially become the God of the universe. He knows every minute detail of every person's life. He knows where everyone sleeps, how they take their coffee, how long it takes them to drive to work, when the best time to break into their house to plant cameras would be, how their relationships with their spouses and children are, what color underwear they buy, etc. Both Jigsaw and Amanda are also expert locksmiths, pharmacists, and engineers. With no funds at all, they can craft any torture device of any size in minimal time. These devices are also so expertly crafted that they can be deactivated and removed with one small padlock, even if the device is fully covering a person's entire body. These villains are no longer scary because there is obviously no hope of survival at all. No matter how physically strong or prepared a person is, they cannot avoid being captured by Jigsaw, and they have no chance of escaping his traps alive.

Jigsaw is portrayed as a sort of avenging angel in this movie. Out of all the characters, he is the most rational and detached from emotion. The overall tone of the movie almost implies that he is correct and that everyone should just submit to his will and change their lives according to his system of beliefs. The problem with this logic is that if Jigsaw's beliefs are applied to his own life, he should be the one stuck in a deadly trap. His whole point in capturing and torturing people is to show them that they have been wasting their lives and they need to start living and being happy with their lot. He states that one character was chosen because she spends her life doing nothing but trying to save the dead, while her family life is dying. However, this exact same sentence could be applied to Jigsaw. He spends his life trying to save others from emotional death, and this obsession has obviously killed him inside.

Even with all these problems, Saw III does have some merit. The gore in this entry of the series is simply out of control, and exceedingly well done. The tone of the gore has become even more sadistic than in Saw II. An early scene involving chains that have been run through a man's flesh, including his jaw, is absolutely stunning. Pretty much everyone will cringe or look away when he starts ripping the chains out of himself. The final major trap, dubbed "the rack", is one of the most diabolical devices put on film in recent memory. The script is also better than anticipated, and it neatly brings the series full circle, connecting several events that didn't appear to be connected before.

The parallels between Friday the 13th and Saw are occurring with increasing frequency. Jigsaw and Jason both kill in retribution for people not agreeing with their view of how the world should work. While Jason punishes those who do drugs or have pre-marital sex, Jigsaw punishes those who have squandered their lives. Both are unstoppable, invincible whirlwinds of death who can sneak up on anyone, no matter how implausible the situation. Like every Friday the 13th movie ever made, even though the ending of Saw III completely ruined any option for a sequel, Saw 4 is currently in production. Obviously Jason, I mean Jigsaw, will rise again to continue torturing those who don't agree with his world view.

I'll be skipping that one.

Save 19% Off

A Monster In Paris (Blu-Ray + 3-D Blu-Ray + DVD + Digital Copy) (2011)

When I first saw clips of this movie on YouTube, including the by-now-famous song "La Siene," I was so impressed that I immediately began scouring the Internet for a US release date for the movie. When I learned there were no plans for a US release, I was rather disappointed, but I wouldn't let that deter me from seeing this movie. In the end, I splurged and purchased two copies of the DVD (one for myself, one for our local library) from Amazon's Canadian store.

Now seeing that there's an upcoming US DVD release, I'm kicking myself for not being more patient, but I don't regret having purchased this. It's a beautiful movie, and while maybe not quite Pixar quality it's adorable and charming in its own right.

"A Monster In Paris" takes place in 1910 Paris, during the flooding of the Siene river, and focuses on a short, shy theater worker named Emile and his eccentric, bombastic friend Raoul, a delivery man who fancies himself an inventor. While dropping off a package at a scientist's home, the two break into his laboratory and accidentally create the titular monster -a seven-foot-tall, anthromorphic flea who can only communicate via singing. Said "monster" is taken in by Lucille, a nightclub singer who names him Francoer and disguises him as a musician, and soon it falls on her, Emile, and Raoul to protect him from a ruthless comissioner who will stop at nothing to rid Paris of the creature.

While the animation of "A Monster In Paris" isn't quite Pixar quality, I would put it on par with a Dreamworks movie, and it's certainly a cut above the animation of "Ice Age" and "Despicable Me." The scenery shots of early 20th century Paris are gorgeous, and I never once saw a lapse in animation quality that was significant enough to jar me out of the story. And the characters, with the exception of the appropriately villainous commissioner, are likable and quirky, with Francoer himself stealing the show -who knew a giant flea could be so adorable? The story of a group of people hiding a not-so-threatening monster from the authorities might not be the most original one in the world, but it doesn't seem old and tired here -the new setting and the characters kept it from feeling stale.

By far the best feature in this movie is the music. I LOVE the music. Renowned French singers Vanessa Paradis and M provide the vocals, and do a magnificent job. It was a song that led me to find and fall in love with this movie, and the music that remains the best part for me.

I watched this movie in the original French, with English subtitles (I always prefer to watch a movie in its original language), so I can't comment on the English dub. I'll leave that for another reviewer. UPDATE AS OF 1/28/13: I recently re-watched this movie, this time in English. The English dub is passable, but I highly prefer the French version. The French voices sound more natural, and M makes a better voice for the monster than Sean Lennon.

Wonderful movie, with gorgeous music and little to no adult humor or innuendo. I would recommend it for children 5 and older (due to some scary scenes) and anyone who loves musicals, animated films, or even lighthearted monster movies.

A Monster In Paris (Un Monstre à Paris) is a 2011 French animated film by former DreamWorks animator Bibo Bergeron (director of Road to El Dorado, and more embarrassingly, SharkTale). Yes, that's right, 2011. The film first released theatrically in France in October 2011, and then in the United Kingdom with the English dub in January 2012.

In April of 2013, OVER 16 MONTHS LATER, the United States is just now receiving an official release.

Which is utterly baffling, considering that even before the film's French release, A Monster In Paris went viral and gathered a cult following on the internet, with a large percentage of these fans American (myself included), due to the film's beautiful animation and music.

The music in this film is by Matthieu Chedid, better known by his stage name -M-. I became a fan of -Mand his music through A Monster In Paris. I now own three of -M-'s albums, having imported the CDs from France.

So you can imagine my disappointment when after over a year of waiting, I finally receive my official American release of A Monster In Paris on Blu-Ray/DVD, only to discover the original French language track is not included.

While I have nothing against the English dub, in fact the English versions of the songs are quite well done, the English songs swap out -Mfor Sean Lennon.

Again, nothing against Sean Lennon, he does a fine job with performing the songs in English, but having become a fan of -M-'s music through this film I want to watch the version with -Mperforming.

I ideally hoped to be able to watch this film in its original French with English subtitles, which I expect is how many others will want to view the film as well. Yet even though including the French language track in addition to the English dub and English subtitles seems like a no-brainer, Shout! Factory's failure to include such a simple but incredibly important feature is not only disappointing, but after a 16 month wait, is also unbelievably frustrating. I will without a doubt be sending in a complaint to Shout! Factory regarding the absence of the French language track, and I advise if you were also expecting to be able to watch the film in its original French with English subtitles, you do the same.

I love A Monster In Paris. It is an absolutely wonderful film that I highly recommend to anyone who loves animation, but because of Shout! Factory's negligence, I can only advise purchasing the American release of the film if you are fine with only the English dub (hence the 3-star rating). While the English dub is alright, I personally believe the ideal experience of this film should be in its original French with English subtitles. Unfortunately, the only way of doing this appears to be through importing the French Blu-Ray/DVD and then downloading English subtitles online, as the French Blu-Ray/DVD does not include English subtitles. Keep in mind however that due to region coding, the French Blu-Ray/DVD WILL NOT PLAY on most American Blu-Ray/DVD players. It will only play on a region free Blu-Ray/DVD player or a computer with region decoding software.

UPDATE: I've been informed that the Canadian DVD is multilingual, containing both the French and English tracks with English subtitles. Since Canadian DVDs are also Region 1, they WILL PLAY on most American DVD players. So importing a Canadian DVD would be a more simple, viable option for those who want to watch the film in its original French with English subtitles. Sadly for those of us who like our animation in high definition, there is no Canadian Blu-Ray, only a DVD. Importing the French Blu-Ray, finding a method of bypassing the region coding and then downloading subtitles still seems to be the only way of watching the film on Blu-Ray in French with subtitles.

Buy A Monster In Paris (Blu-Ray + 3-D Blu-Ray + DVD + Digital Copy) (2011) Now

I am a French teacher and I can't wait to use this movie as a culmination of our study of Paris (I teach younger children). Vanessa Paradis has an angelic quality to her singing that fits this role perfectly. I appreciate the innocent storyline, there are no adult references or innuendo as there are in so many Disney movies.

Read Best Reviews of A Monster In Paris (Blu-Ray + 3-D Blu-Ray + DVD + Digital Copy) (2011) Here

Why don't more people know about this movie?!? I didn't know what to expect when I first heard about it. A movie about a singing giant flea in Paris? Not exactly a crowd bringer that's for sure. But if Pixar has thought me anything, it's to not underestimate a seemingly ridiculous concept. Plus I love animation and fell in love with the design of the female lead ♥Lucille♥, so I gave it a shot.

The movie is fun to watch and an absolute joy to listen to. The music is phenomenal, mixing both the english and french languages. The animation is on par with anything from Dreamworks or Pixar and the characters, specifically ♥Lucille♥ and Francoeur (the flea) are cute and at times mesmerizing.

If you're hunting for a new animated movie that's very easy on the eyes (and ears), give this one a go.

Want A Monster In Paris (Blu-Ray + 3-D Blu-Ray + DVD + Digital Copy) (2011) Discount?

The story is good, the animation is good but the Music will melt your heart.

This little movie will make the big studios very jealous. Who knew that the story about a giant singing , guitar playing FLEA would be good. Its not perfect, but by the end of the movie you will be satisfied.

Save 20% Off

Original Sin (2001)

Though "Original Sin" received coldest reviews from critics, I enjoyed watching it, and really love that film. We got gorgeous Angelina Jolie and sexy Antonio Banderas, and what do we expect more? Yes, the story is ridiculous, I admit, but the classic noir "Double Indenmity" has also a very far-fetched story that would easily match that of this film. Some point out that there already has been a French version of the story in "Mississipi Mermaid" directed by Truffaut, claiming "Original Sin" is just another Hollywood-made trash remake, but Truffaut's one is not among his best works in spite of two French icons Catherine Deneuve and Jean-Paul Belmondo.

Simply put, "Original Sin" is about love. Lots of love. The film is set in the 19th century, Cuba. Antonio made success with coffee trade, and receives a mail-ordered bride, Angelina. They soon marry, and love each other, but she suddenly disappears with all his money. Enraged Antonio traces her to Havana, where he finds out Angelina, now with a different beau. Instead of killing her, he loves her again. No, he makes love much, much, again. But she has a secret, for which she suffers.... Nothing should be said about the latter half of the film (which completely differs from Truffaut's rather somber version) except that the ever winding story goes like Mulholland Drive.

The suspense element is too thin and the whole storyline is too incredible to take seriously, but the film somehow succeeds on one level, that is, descriptions of illogically passionate love between two leads, whose emotions flare up with enough chemistry to convince that they (actors) really mean it. Antonio, first trying to take back money, soon decides to give everything; Angelina, first trying to deceive him, soon gives up herself. I don't know how American audiences reacted to this illogical behaviors -some have said it's stupid, yes, I understand -but I, a Japanese, somehow find myself drawn deeply into their emotional relations. After all, love is what makes people ridiculous, isn't it? If so, they are very credible, I believe.

Everyone would agree that the production design is fine, and costume (of Angelina Jolie, especially) is delightful to look at. (It was actually shot in Mexico; imagine wearing a suit there.) Good photography makes up for perhaps unnecessary plot twist at the end. Campy, you might say. But as a "Woman of Fate" Angelina Jolie is perfect, and I am not the only one who would give everything to her -and you too, Billy Bob?

I loved this picture! In Germany it opened a week after "Tomb Raider" (so Angelina Jolie was one of the reasons I went to see it), and because it was praised as a love story, I took my girlfriend and she also loved it! Jolie (more beautiful than ever in those costumes), Banderas and Thomas Jane ("Thursday") did a good job in their roles, but mostly the erotic and morbid atmosphere of Havanna during carneval was what made the movie so pleasent to watch. The story-twists were good, it was exelently shot only the ending was a bit of a disapointment, simply because the director chose to lighten up the dark theme of the movie with a happy ending, which doesn't really fit into the flow. To sum it all up: This is not popcorn-cinema! It's a dark love story with great atmosphere! I fully recomend it, although it isn't a movie for all audiences...

Buy Original Sin (2001) Now

This film should be up there on your need to watch list. It's a brilliantly casted and wonderfully scripted story of blind love. When Luis (Bandaras) meets his mail-order-bride Julia (Jolie) he is stunned at her beauty. She is nothing like he expected, yet he marries her immediatly. Luis is the perfect gentleman, and that makes Julia's next move even harder. Once she has gained Luis' trust she leaves him, taking him for every cent. Luis then, with the help of a P.I., decides he will find her, and kill her. The problem is that he still loves her. But does she love him? This film shows the dark side of love, the side that allows you to love someone you don't even know, but can feel, someone you connect with, someone that makes you whole. Jolie and Bandaras are spot on (especially with their clothes off...HOT HOT HOT) and they work wonders with this script. I have watched this film over and over and still can't get enough of it. The unrated version of this film offers a steamier and much more explicet love scene with movement and lots of nudity (no full frontal Bandaras shots though, you'll have to settle for quite a few butt shots) and it includes a few other sex scenes, less explicet, that were cut from the movie entirly. Either way you'll be pleasently pleased. The unrated version doesn't add anything new to the plot and or the flow of the film so pursue only if you're in dire need for a near-porn-like nude scene...otherwise, the theatrical version is just fine (and you still see quite a bit of nudity)...Great acting, great story, great bodies...what can I say but Great movie!

Read Best Reviews of Original Sin (2001) Here

Please don't buy this film if you are a super film critic and wish to tear apart the weaker aspects of Original Sin. Buy this film if you love love and are fans of Antonio Bandaras and Angelina Jolie. It was quite a strech for these two blockbuster actors to do such intimatly nude scenes together, I have never seen either do nudity. They were beautiful together and sizzled the screen with their bedroom and tub love making. It was definatly an afternoon turn on to see these two great actors make love in such a realistic fashion it made me blush. Thomas Jane added more to the film with his bad boy good looks, these three actors were made to take their clothes off, they all had such awesome bodies, it was art on the screen. The plot was set in Havana, and shot in Mexico and you could really get a feel for the Spanish influence Antonio wore elegant panama suits and the wedding scene all the people wore beautiful panama draped white suits it really made you feel you were in Cuba, the shots of the cuban country side were rich with sensual colors and mexican people and planations were beautiful. The plot had many interesting twists to keep you intrigued. When I saw this movie I was extrmemly surprise that it didn't get a better box office review, but I am the kind of person that doesn't always like what everybody else does and this is one film I really loved.

Want Original Sin (2001) Discount?

...I have seen this movie soooooooo many times. I havent got around to buying it yet but i do have it in Divx on my computer. I love it!

Wow, I can't believe how many bad reviews this film got all over the internet. I thought it was an absolutly beautiful, beautiful love story. Angelina is wonderful...

Angelina looked stunning. The costumes were oh so perfect. The dresses were beautiful. Antonio was looking mighty fine too.

The sex scenes were romantic, set oh so perfectly with the wonderful score that I adore, it's so beautiful (my favorite is the lovely, but short opening.)

I recommend this movie for any Angelina Jolie fan. She plays quite a different role in this movie compared to Tomb Raider (which was semi-okay, Angelina was the only true good part about it...SHOWER SCENE!) This is one of my favorite movies of all time, as are most the movies she was in like GIA, Mojave Moon, ect.

-Aya

Save 60% Off

Little Lord Fauntleroy: Kino Classics Remastered Edition (1936)

If you are like me, and really fond of this old gem, do yourself a favor and get this version. It is vast improvement on any other version I have seen, having been made from an original studio archival print, apparently. It is not perfect, but is close. There is some tiny sparkle in a few scenes, and one or two short damage places that should have been fixed. Far too many public domain versions have been released over the years that are pretty dismal in quality. Lots of talented performers in this film, and the camera work shows the care that was taken on many of the old black & white classics.

In the late 1800′s, there was one book that was so popular, it led to the popularity of velvet. The book was "Little Lord Fauntleroy", written by English playwright and author Frances Hodgson Burnett and was originally published in St. Nicholas Magazine between Nov. 1885 through Oct. 1886 and later followed as a book.

The book was quite elaborate when it came to the details of the young Fauntleroy's clothing that its impact on American fashion, primarily with children as parents would dress their kids in suits and away from skirted garments which were favored at the time.

Considered as the ultimate "rags to riches" story at the time, the book would receive several film adaptations from 1914-1995. The best known versions were the 1921 film starring Mary Pickford, a 1980 version starring Alec Guiness, Rick Schroder and Eric Porter but the best known adaptation is the 1936 film starring Freddie Bartholomew and Dolores Costello.

The film was directed by John Cromwell ("Of Human Bondage", "Since You Went Away", "Made For Each Other", "The Prisoner of Zenda") and a screenplay by Hugh Walpole ("David Copperfield", "Vanessa: Her Love Story", "Kind Lady") and the film would make Freddie Bartholomew as one of the most highly sought after child actors and also the second paid child actor after Shirley Temple. Which unfortunately, also became a double-edged sword for Bartholomew as the success of the film would lead to his long-estranged birth parents trying to gain custody and control of his fortune, a seven-year-battle which took a toll on Barthlomew and his career.

But despite the legal troubles and hardships that Bartholomew would experience after 1936, he will forever be remembered for his performance in the film "Lord Little Fauntleroy". And now, the film will be released on Blu-ray and DVD in 2012 courtesy of Kino Lorber.

VIDEO:

"Little Lord Fauntleroy" is presented in 1080p High Definition and was mastered in HD from an original nitrate 35 mm print, preserved by the George Eastman House Motion Picture Department. With that being said, first thing I need to remind those who are not familiar to Kino Blu-rays is that unlike other companies that spend a lot of money on restoration (which is very expensive), Kino does not do the restoration, they release the original transfer on Blu-ray in the best quality possible.

And when it comes to films that were originally on nitrate, I'm usually expecting worse for wear. Primarily because most films filmed on nitrate are now lost (because they were highly flammable and would spontaneously catch on fire) or was severely damaged. Fortunately there are films that were taken care of, transferred to a better medium but during that time, the priority was saving the film not removing defects, specks, etc. They were direct transfers that were not cleaned up.

With the release of "Little Lord Fauntleroy", one can expect to see scenes with white specks, scenes that have some aging. That is a given! But the positive news is that for a film that was derived from an original 35 mm nitrate print, despite the specks and aging, this film looks very good on Blu-ray. It looks like the original negative was not tampered as much, thus less damage. I didn't notice any acid or nitrate burns or excessive flickering or darkening. If anything, this film looks very good for its age and considering where it was taken from.

While the video quality may not be as good as some of Kino's Buster Keaton titles on Blu-ray, for those who have followed the David O. Selznick collection releases, should be happy with the overall release. Especially since this is the best version of the film out on video to date.

AUDIO & SUBTITLES:

While "Little Lord Fauntleroy" does look good for a film nearly 80-years-old, sound-wise, it's a different story. The film is presented in 2.0 monaural and while the dialogue can be heard quite well, there is also quite a few moments of pops and clicks and during the musical moments of the film, especially for the intro or ending of the film, the sound seems a bit too loud and loses its clarity. But those scenes are short and the good news is that the film does sound good and dialogue is clear for the majority of the film.

There are no subtitles.

SPECIAL FEATURES

"Little Lord Fauntleroy" comes with no special features.

JUDGMENT CALL:

"Little Lord Fauntleroy" is a heartwarming classic that showcases American pride but also love for family. In many ways, this is the kind of film that would be commonplace in America for the next two decades despite the focus on the middle-class family, we have a proper middleclass family with a boy with the heart of gold.

John Cromwell's 1936 version of "Little Lord Fauntleroy" is probably the best film adaptation for the mere fact that Freddie Bartholomew plays the character of Ceddie Errol with complete efficacy. He embodies the style and mannerisms of what one would think of Little Lord Fauntleroy that even Frances Hodgson Burnett would have been happy with his performance.

One has to bare in mind that 1930′s, many child stars depicted on the big screen were kids who managed to get in a bit of trouble but yet they were fun to watch and full of spunk. May it be Hal Roach's Little Rascals (Our Gang) to The East End Kids, even Little Rascals star Sid Kibrick makes an appearance in this film, as did a younger Mickey Rooney.

But one can see why the storyline was so popular when the novel was released in the late 1800′s. This was a rags-to-riches story but also an inspiring story of love between a young boy and his mother, but yet treated everyone with kindness and respect. Many parents can hope their kids could be as happy, kind like Ceddie and even in Cromwell's film, Ceddie is the boy that many parents would love to have (or hope their kids could as well-mannered).

And then you have the pro-American, not-yet apple pie mentality with Ceddie telling his English grandfather that he is American, because he was born in America, despite his grandfather insisting that he is English. And of course to show that even this little angel has his tough side as the local kids gang up on him and call him a "sissy" because of his clothes and he speaks proper English, and we see how this young boy is not afraid to defend himself and fight.

But as you have a film with so much humor, what literally wins you over is the film's heart. It's relationships from Ceddie and his mother, as any one can understand the pain it is for a young boy to be separated from his mother but yet, he is able to keep a brave face for his grandfather. And of course, to see his grandfather change with being around Ceddie and we see the transformation of this "grinch" who eventually becomes more and more compassionate.

With solid costume design and impressive performances by its cast, John Cromwell and Hugh Walpole were able to give incredible life to Frances Hodgson Burnett's beloved novel. But once again, it's Freddie Bartholomew who makes this film work. As Jackie Cooper was able to bring this heartwarming emotion to his character Dink in the 1931 film "The Champ", Freddie Bartholomew was able to knock the ball out of the ballpark with this performance that featured grace but fine attention to subtlety. He embodies the character of Little Lord Fauntleroy and once you see him perform, you can understand why he was one of Hollywood's most popular and famous child actors at that time.

And while Mickey Rooney was child actor who had appeared in many films by 1936 and was already well-known, for silent film fans, "Little Lord Fauntleroy" would also feature silent film actress Dolores Costello (who was married to silent actor John Barrymore) in one of her few talking films and the film would also star C. Aubrey Smith, who was an actor in Hollywood during the '30s and '40s, also best known for creating the Hollywood Cricket Club and also for his height at 6'4″.

As for the Blu-ray release, as mentioned earlier, you're not going to find anything pristine for this film and for how good it looks considering it was mastered in HD from an original nitrate 35 mm print and is nearly 80-years-old. While I wish there were special features such as audio commentary or even an interview with Mickey Rooney, then again, not many film from the 1930′s on Blu-ray or DVD come with any.

Overall, "Little Lord Fauntleroy" is a charming, heartwarming film that showcases an amazing performance from its cast, especially from the young Freddie Bartholomew. If you enjoy positive, upbeat, classic Hollywood films from the 1930′s, "Little Lord Fauntleroy" is recommended!

Buy Little Lord Fauntleroy: Kino Classics Remastered Edition (1936) Now

This story has been filmed several times through the centuries. Each brings with it the strengths and weaknesses of the time period in which it was made. A few examples are:

1914 Gerald Royston Cedric Erroll

1921 Mary Pickford Little Lord Fauntleroy/Dearest

1936 Freddy Bartholomew Cedric `Ceddie' Erroll

1976 Glen Anderson Lord Fauntleroy

1980 Rick Schroder Lord Fauntleroy (Ceddie Errol)

1995 Michael Benz Cedric Errol

2003 Aleksei Vesyolkin Cedric

As with any story, everyone has their favorite interpretation. This is a review of the 1936 version.

Ceddie (Freddy Bartholomew) is a well meaning kid, which is wise beyond his years and very well mannered. He lives alone with his mother Dearest (Dolores Costello Barrymore.) He is the product of his environment (America depression era) where he is mentored by a wise grocer (Guy Kibbee,) and befriended by others such as the shoe shine boy (Mickey Rooney.)

Turns out that he is the long lost grandson of the Earl of DorinCourt (C. Aubrey Smith,) and heir to an estate in England. So he is "Little Lord Fauntleroy." He is removed from the only home he knows and whisked off to England. There he does not realize that his grandfather can not stand his mother (they never met) so she has to stay in another house.

All is going swimmingly until the "Real Little Lord Fauntleroy" the son of the other brother shows up. Now what will happen? Is `Ceddie' destined to be second fiddle? Will his mother go back to America? What do his old friends think when they find out? Looks like curtains for everyone.

Read Best Reviews of Little Lord Fauntleroy: Kino Classics Remastered Edition (1936) Here

This is an excellent film with a great cast. It's something you'll want to watch over and over. Very good print, but no cleanup work has been done.

Want Little Lord Fauntleroy: Kino Classics Remastered Edition (1936) Discount?

This is what media should be used for. Watched it with the wife and all 6 boys. Wonderful, uplifting story about change and how good can change. Just a simple, friendly boy who changes hearts and minds by being himself and brings joy to others. Just get it.

Save 26% Off

The Doctor & Stella - Blu-ray Double Feature

These movies both showed real life and it's ups and downs, I especially like the doctor giving his students a taste of what it is like to be a patient

good upgrade from standard dvd and very good value for money. hopefully we see more from the Touchstone back catalogue released on Bluray by Mill Creek...

Buy The Doctor & Stella - Blu-ray Double Feature Now

Mill Creek does it again, this time with two dramas, BOTH of these are rated PG-13

Both are in thier original widescreen ratios, and have optional english captions.

The PQ and AQ are great with this release.

The Doctor stars William Hurt, Elizabeth Perkins, and Alan Arkin.

Stella stars Bette Midler, and John Goodman.

Mill Creek is really releasing some stellar products lately!

Recommended!

Read Best Reviews of The Doctor & Stella - Blu-ray Double Feature Here

The Trouble with Harry (1955)

In a way, Alfred Hitchcock making a dark comedy makes perfect sense -his movies have dead bodies AND clever dialogue. Why not make a movie about both of them?

To be fair, "The Trouble With Harry" is nowhere near Hitchcock's best work, mainly because the central story is very repetitive. But it's kept aloft with Hitchcock's clever dialogue ("Marriage is a good way to spend the winter") and a cast of likably quirky characters who end up spending a few days trying to hide/excavate a dead body. How did you spend YOUR weekend?

Kindly old Captain Wiles (Edmund Gwenn) is out hunting rabbits when he finds the body of a dead man, whom he assumes he killed by accident. Free-spirited artist Sam Marlowe (John Forsythe) comes across Wiles dragging the corpse through the woods, and offers to help him bury the corpse -at least, once they find out what the connection to the perky widow Jennifer Rogers (Shirley MacLaine) is.

However, the whole scenario gets even more muddled when both Mrs. Rogers and kindly Miss Gravely (Mildred Natwick) claim to have accidentally killed the corpse (aka, Harry). The entire situation becomes even more problematic as they try to figure out what to do with Harry, especially with the suspicious Deputy Sheriff Wiggs (Royal Dano) breathing down their necks.

The trouble with "Trouble" is simple: most of the movie consists of the same few jokes, repeated for different people. People keep claiming they killed Harry accidentally, the body is dug up, the body is reburied, and everybody (except Sam) worries about what to do. That's most of the middle of the movie, summed up in a single sentence.

So it's a testament to Alfred Hitchcock's skill that this relatively lightweight movie is still pretty diverting. Most of that is because the dialogue is just so funny and clever, with lots of snappy lines ("We had a fireman on board who hit his head on a brick wall and died two days later." "Where did he find a brick wall on board a ship?").

He never plays the whole corpse angle for too many/few laughs -there isn't any slapstick or gross-out humor, and only one real visual gag (hello, bathtub!). No, the humor comes from the tart, slightly snarky way it's handled.

This is also the closest thing to a romantic comedy that Hitchcock ever made, because the subplots are all about how finding Harry's corpse has brought romance into the lives of Wiles, Sam, Jennifer and Miss Gravely. It's a rather charming focus, and between the wink-wink-nudge-nudge dialogue and flirting, it's pretty entertaining.

Admittedly none of the roles are very demanding, but the actors all do excellent jobs with them -Gwenn and Natwick play a pair of late-in-life lovers who are brought together by the discovery of a corpse. Forsythe provides a lot of the quirky humor in this movie as an artist who doesn't seem to have any idea of societal conventions, and he has decent chemistry with an elfin Shirley MacLaine (who seems similarly unconventional.

"The Trouble With Harry" is one of Hitchcock's weaker films plotwise, but it's still a fluffy, fun little diversion. Any comedy with an ambiguous wandering corpse is worth checking out.

Most Hitchcock movie plots center around things like murder, espionage, fear, and terror; The Trouble With Harry is a very different sort of Hitchcock film. Yes, there's been a murder, or at least a body, but the body in question is really more of an annoyance than it is a mystery to be solved. There's a bit of a confusion over how Harry died, and who's to balm, but the big question isn't about solving a mystery. It's more "now that Harry is dead, what shall we do with him?"

The cast is first rate, and includes John Forsyth as an artist in a small town, a very young Shirley McLaine in her first movie role as a young widow, an even younger Jerry Mathers (later to gain fame as Beaver Cleaver) as her son. There also a number of faces very familiar to fans of the classic era of movies, like Edmund Gwynn, who played Kris Kringle in Miracle on 34th Street, and Mildred Natwick, who made a specialty of playing spinsters in a great many movies.

Buy The Trouble with Harry (1955) Now

A young kid Arnie Rogers (Jerry Mathers, Theodore 'Beaver' Cleaver in the Leave it to Beaver series) is playing in a field and some shots are fired. Soon Arnie comes upon a body. We are now prepared for suspense and mystery.

Turns out pretty formula; in the sense that everybody and nobody could have done it. At first it seems slow and weird as no one acts normal even for a movie character. They are all slow, nonchalant, and distracted. Harry gets dragged around and buried in controversy.

Soon you can really get wrapped up in the story and anticipate the end. The movie never picks up speed; you just have more loose ends to follow. No one cares who bumped Harry off or if they did as long as it does not affect his or her future.

The draw to this movie now days and maybe then is the list of actors and the introduction of Shirley MacLaine. Edmund Gwenn looks pretty old here and is remembered also for his performance in "Outward Bound" (1930) 25 years earlier. Being directed by Alfred Hitchcock, there is still that Hitchcock feel. So sit back and enjoy it for what it is.

Read Best Reviews of The Trouble with Harry (1955) Here

Hitchcock's "The Trouble With Harry," about a body that won't go away, is far more odd than suspenseful, probably making it among the least watchable of the master's 1950s color classics. The rich landscapes and fall colors, though, make this light look at the subject of death the logical choice for Blu-Ray's sharpening technology. This was among the movies Hitchcock locked away after its initial release until after his death. Did he suspect, I wonder, that advances in technology would one day be able to make this box office failure into a feast for the eyes?

Want The Trouble with Harry (1955) Discount?

Five Minutes of Heaven (2009)

When friend Vika (Anamaria Marinca) asks Joe Griffen (James Nesbitt), the brother of a man killed in 1975 by one Alistair Little (Liam Neeson), if killing Alistair would not be good for him, Joe replies ' Not good for me? My five minutes of heaven!' And so runs the razor sharp dialog and acting and power of this little film from the UK that relates the story of a 1975 event in Northern Ireland when Catholics and Protestants were at war and the young Protestant Alistair Little (Mark David), as a UVF member (Ulster Volunteer Force), gathers his friends and 'kills a Catholic' but the murder happens in front of the victim's 11-year-old brother Joe Griffen. Flash forward to 2008 when Alistair Little (now Liam Neeson) has served his prison term and is set up by the media to relate the story of the incident and supposedly meet and shake hands on camera with the now mature Joe Griffen. It is a film about youthful involvement in terrorism and the sequelae that haunts or obsesses the victim's family and the perpetrator. The confrontation between Alistair and Joe is a devastating one.

Guy Hibbert wrote this excruciatingly visceral screenplay and Oliver Hirschbiegel directs a first rate cast. Though Liam Neeson is billed as the star, the film belongs to the powerful acting by James Nesbitt as the vengeful Joe Griffen. The cinematography is dark and dank like the atmosphere in both the warring fog of 1975 and the attempt at reconciliation in 2008. There are subtle pieces of thoughtful enhancement, such as the use of the Mozart 'Requiem' in the near hidden score. In all, this is a moving film about truth and reconciliation that deserves the attention of us all, especially in this time of random acts of terrorism and their possible imprint on our minds and on society. Grady Harp, January 10

One of the best films I have seen on the struggle to reconcile with one's own self as well as one's enemy. There is no cheap forgiveness portrayed here. The acting by Neeson and Nebitt is unbelievably good and the directing is incredible. I couldn't believe that this was a made-for-tv film. Goes to show that on a shoe-string budget, BBC can produce stuff that is far superior to the drivel that comes out the mouth of Hollywood.

Buy Five Minutes of Heaven (2009) Now

A perfect movie is a rare thing. No committee can produce perfection; the too many cooks are never so present as during the production of a movie. I've seen a few, but not many. When 1 person does everything, there's one vision to be 1% short. But when tens or hundreds do it, then each contributes his individual failure until we're left wondering, as we do when watching some YouTube clip of kids riding their bikes off a roof, "Wow..what the **** were they thinking?" However, "Five Minutes of Heaven" comes darn close to perfection.

Two men collide, and then 33 years later collide again. Some serious sparks ensue. Who was right? Who lost the most? Who owes what to whom?

If you're reading these reviews, I'd advise you to stop now and get this film. This is fine film making with a pungent theme. Watch it for its powerful and beautiful tale of loss and recovery. Watch it for two great actors giving superlative performances. Watch it recreate a terrifying yet frightfully close world where hell was always around the corner and ever on the TV. And watch it for what it has to say about the problems, the not easily fixed challenges, we face in the world today....

Read Best Reviews of Five Minutes of Heaven (2009) Here

Do NOT give up on this movie in the first third. I stayed with it because a very experienced global law enforcement officer with anti-terrorism experience told me the movie was worth seeing through to the end, and he was absolutely right.

This is a fine depiction of how gangs and religious and political conflicts get started, it is a superb depiction of the "collateral damage" that affects "bystanders" to the end of their days, and it ends absolutely brilliantly with a typically strong but never-the-less very moving closure by BOTH of the main actors.

Highly recommended to those who wish to think about cause and effect and the psychological dimensions of intra-community violence.

Want Five Minutes of Heaven (2009) Discount?

"Five Minutes of Heaven" is a gripping tale of the aftermath of a murder. In 1975, Alistair, then 17, murders a Catholic man to make a name for himself in Belfast. The man's younger brother, Joe, still a child, witnessed the murder and lived for 33 years with the guilt that was put on him by his mother. The story begins when a TV program wanted to film their "reconciliation." Alistair has become a world renowned speaker because of the insights he has learned while dealing with his guilt. And Joe is just an average guy with vengeance stewing in his heart. The tumult of emotions both men experience as they prepare for their meeting is riveting. Alistair knew there would be no reconciliation. And Joe just wants his five minutes of heaven the moments he'll spend exacting vengeance. How the two men finally meet and what becomes of them is the perfect culmination for this tale of tragedy and redemption. In the end, it is about finding what is good in your life and moving on. As an aside, I do like the way the movie portrayed the mercenary nature of TV programs in their quest for ratings.

Save 55% Off

Triage (2009)

TRIAGE is a well chosen title for this film about who survives an who dies in war: at times those triage decisions are made by serendipity (read 'bad luck'), at times they are made by physicians or medics tending the wounded on the battlefield, and at times they are submerged in the apparent 'survivors' only to later crush the life from those who make it home. Writer/Director Danis Tanovic has adapted Scott Anderson's novel is a manner that carries the seemingly simple act of 'triage' throughout the film, showing how that action can affect the lives of friends, family, and psychological wholeness of the victim.

Mark Walsh (Colin Farrell, in yet another powerful role) and his buddy David (Jamie Sives) are war photographers for a newspaper edited by Amy (Juliet Stevenson). Their current assignment is Kurdistan and the terrifying realities they not only experience but also commit to film are of such a horrid nature that they both are in shock: they not only witness killings and landmine explosion deaths, but they also watch one Dr. Talani (Branko Djuric) triage the wounded, deciding who can survive care and who is so near death that they are put aside to be later 'executed' by Dr. Talani in a compassionate gesture to end their futile suffering. The tension is so great that David decides to return home, leaving Mark to carry on the assignment. An explosion occurs and Mark is seriously injured but survives and after being tended by Dr. Talani he is encouraged to return home. There is no news as to where David is.

Mark returns home to his adoring Elena (Paz Vega), presents his photographs to Amy, and begins to heal: David's wife Diane (Kelly Reilly) is due to deliver their first child in two weeks and has had no word from David. We watch as Mark, eroded by his experiences in Kurdistan, retreat into a state of decline. Elena grows fearful as Mark, despite hospitalizations and medical care, continues to deteriorate and out of desperation she calls her grandfather Joaquin, a psychiatrist who treated the victims of the Spanish Civil War (Elena is still angry that her own grandfather treated the perpetrators of the destruction that war caused). Joaquin slowly brings Mark into the acceptance of how his mind has triaged the events in Kurdistan and leads Mark to discover the truths about incidents in what war for which he has blamed himself. We finally understand David's disappearance at the moment when his and Diane's child is born.

This is a tough story to watch: subtitles would help the audience understand the many dialects used in the film. But the message is clear and the acting is superb by every member of the cast, even very small but cogent cameos by Reece Ritchie as a boy in Beirut and Dada Ashi as a Ugandan woman two of the early incidents Mark must remember and face in his work with Joaquin. The cinematography is dazzling, especially the use of flashbacks of a raging river so important in Mark's memory recall, and the constant focus on the blue and yellow tags that mark the triage decisions. This is another powerful anti-war film, this time as seen through the eyes of a non-combatant observer. It is important to see. Grady Harp, July 10

"Triage" was a real gem. I enjoyed it much more than "The Hurt Locker", although I was expecting the latter to be great and sadly it wasn't, and I was expecting the former to be mediocre and it was great. Maybe that has clouded my judgement ... but not by much. The story is in two parts. The first is dominated by Colin Farrell and takes place mostly in Kurdistan. Farrell plays a photo journalist (Mark) who goes from war to war filming and documenting the events with his friend (David) who is also a photojournalist. Only Farrell returns home and he is wounded. What has happened to his friend and why does Farrell keep having terrible nightmares? During this part we see why the movie is called "Triage".

The second part mostly in Dublin and is dominated by the legendary veteran actor, Christopher Lee. Lee plays a Spanish psychologist who has a 'shady' past and is (Elena) Farrell's wife's grandfather. They are not on good terms but Elena is desperate to save Farrell who is becoming more and more erratic and losing his mind.

Through Lee's help we see flashbacks as to what happened to David.

I found the story very moving. I am baffled as to why the movie was not given a general release. The acting is superb, especially by the two stars. Strangely, Lee's name is missing from the star credits listed by Amazon????

Highly recommended

C. G Wilson

Buy Triage (2009) Now

this story baised in Kurdistan while Colin and his friend there for doing photographing, i can say its the best of Colin farrel he did excellent job and i was happy about this movie that showed something about my people (kurdish) how they suffered for freedom and fighting Saddam dictator, ofcurse it was nice to see farrel in Kurdish clothing

Read Best Reviews of Triage (2009) Here

I would have given this film 5 stars if there were a bit more buoyancy in the script. Colin Farrell is brilliant as the lead character, Paz Vega is luminous as his wife, and the supporting cast does a great job. But the sparkling chemistry is between Farrell and the oh-so-accomplished Christopher Lee, who appears well into the film but is worth the wait. This is a graphic film and not easy to watch. Even so, although war is hell, it also is not exactly clinical depression. There seems to be a subtle lack of lift in the screenplay and direction. There are too few places where a smile and a sense of beauty break through. Even so, this is a dense drama that is well played, nicely filmed and worth watching more than once.

Want Triage (2009) Discount?

This is an excellent film abour war zone photo-journalism, and is Colin Farrell's best role to date. He is maturing as an actor; going deeper and deeper into character. The appearance of legendary actor, Christopher Lee, is also a plus. Highly recommend this for serious film buffs.

Save 43% Off