Bad Santa (Unrated Version + Director's Cut) (2003)

If you are a fan of Bad Santa, DO NOT BUY THIS DVD. I bought it expecting extended and restored scenes, instead I got a totally different ending and hilarious scenes cut out.

This version ends with the little boy outside trying to clean up the blood on his front steps rather than giving the bully a swift kick in the nards.

One of the scenes cut out is the scene in the gym where Willie and Marcus are trying to teach the little boy how to defend himself. That was one of the funniest scenes in the movie.

The packaging is deceptive. If they had said, "new ending" on the notes, I would have left it alone. It didn't and I wasted my money. I thought I would come on here and post a warning.

For those of us who can't quite get into the Christmas spirit, "Bad Santa" is a massive preemptive strike against all of the insufferable sentimentality we're going to be subjected to a few months from now. This movie is every bit as entertaining and funny as "School Of Rock," but where "School Of Rock" succeeded through the overwhelming weight of its good intentions, "Bad Santa" (its moderately heartwarming ending notwithstanding) is all about bad intentions. This movie, especially in its powerhouse first half, displays such a commitment to mean-spiritedness that you can't help but love it.

Billy Bob Thornton's safe-cracking department-store Santa Willie is the epitome of ugliness, all the more so because he commits much of his mayhem in his work outfit. Early on we see him getting drunk and throwing up in an alley, and from there he remains in the gutter for much of the movie. He chain smokes, he wets himself in his chair, he fornicates in a dressing room, and above all, he swears. I don't find profanity inherently funny, but Thornton's acid tongue manages to turn four-letter words into weapons of unimaginable destructive power. More than anything I've seen since the "South Park" movie, "Bad Santa" manages to elevate nasty language into an art form.

Even in its moments of humanity, the movie doesn't aim too high. Willie does have a love interest, but not quite in the conventional sense: intead, it's a young bar waitress with a Santa fetish who demands that Willie wear his stocking cap during coupling. Willie also finds some meaning in his life by striking up an offbeat friendship with a fat, bullied kid named Thurman, a bond that manifests itself in one unforgettable scene when Willie beats the living hell out of the teen skateboarder who gave Thurman a black eye.

Even though it's Thornton's show, "Bad Santa" also benefits from a top-notch supporting cast. In his last film role, the late John Ritter is the picture of ineffectualism as the mall manager; Bernie Mac is admirably slimy as the self-interested security chief; and the three-foot-tall Tony Cox belies his small size with a scene-stealing performance as Willie's "elf" and partner in crime.

"Bad Santa" doesn't have an enormous level of plot development, but then it doesn't really need much. What's really important is the way the movie's cynicism slices and dices the sugary "cheer" (which is often cynical itself) that typically accompanies the holiday season. Christmas isn't all about irritating songs and people rioting in department stores over cheap presents, and we all owe a debt to "Bad Santa" for dumping a little snow on the parade.

Buy Bad Santa (Unrated Version + Director's Cut) (2003) Now

Not only is this Santa bad, he is vulgar, crass, dirty, foulmouthed, loose-moraled come to think of it, I can't imagine a worse Santa. In spite of this, Bad Santa is a brilliant dark comedy, full of huge laughs from beginning to end, as long as you can put up with all of the bad language, which has got to be close to setting a record.

Billy Bob Thornton plays Willie, an ex-con drunkard who gets a job every year at a different department store playing Santa, along with his own elf, Marcus (Tony Cox). The catch is that every Christmas Eve, Willie and Marcus rob the department store blind. Willie wants to get out of this game, but he's so irresponsible and undisciplined that every year he's in dire need of cash again and needs to pull another job. As Santa, he swears at kids, urinates on himself, and is generally the exact opposite of what you want your Santa to be.

This particular year, a young kid (Brett Kelly) who is oblivious to the fact that Willie is not, in fact, the real Santa, attaches himself to Santa. Lo and behold, the kid lives alone in a posh suburban house with only his catatonic granny, so Willie takes up residence with the kid. As Christmas Eve approaches, Marcus becomes increasingly concerned with Willie's condition, the kid becomes increasingly annoying, and Willie stays exactly the same drunk, angry, and generally foul.

Bad Santa is exactly my kind of movie unrelenting, unapologetic, inappropriate, completely distasteful, and utterly hilarious. It's essentially the anti-Christmas film. Billy Bob Thornton has an unbelievable knack for acting, and an almost poetic way of unleashing cuss after cuss. This movie gets a big thumbs up, but definitely is not suitable for kids or the easily offended.

Read Best Reviews of Bad Santa (Unrated Version + Director's Cut) (2003) Here

If you are a bah-humbug individual, a Billy Bob Thornton fan, and/or have an appreciation for dark comedy....THIS is the Christmas film for you! Oh, yes, it requires an open mind and the ability to appreciate the unique, but finally here is a holiday film for those who like their seasonal entertainment with a little less 'sugar and spice'.

First, do not take your 11 year old to see this film, as did the gentleman sitting behind me in the theater. He elected to remain even though I advised him this was an adult film (seems the R-Rating didn't seem to do the trick). I stressed that was probably not suitable for his son even if my answer to his inquiry: "Well, it's about Santa Claus isn't it?" was "YES". Because the entire answer was: "YES, but a very, very baaad Santa".

After the movie, the viewer told me that I was correct, that he should have left, and that he had in fact started to leave several times during the film, but didn't. He added that he himself did not like the film. This made be all the more curious as to exactly why he elected to watch until the credits were rolling.

All the other movie patrons must have checked the ratings (as they were all adults), read the reviews, watched the promos, and perhaps caught Billy Bob on every talk show on TV the previous week (where he spent an inordinate amount of time telling the public 'This is NOT a family film'). They also must have enjoyed the film, because they all laughed, actually, they all laughed a lot.

Being an avid, devoted fan of Thornton, I understand and would be first to admit that I am more than a little biased when it comes to Billy Bob. I think he is incapable of making a film that is not entertaining. That being said, I would have enjoyed 'Bad Santa' if Santa had been portrayed by some other actor (except perhaps Jim Carey, but I digress). However, I don't know any other actor who bring the pathos, the heart, the lewdness, the earthiness, the seediness, and the overall great performance to this film that Billy Bob did.

Billy Bob Thornton continues to explore the depths of his talent and take fans along for the ride by always finding new and unique characters to portray. Generally he does this via the 'independent' film method, because indie films provide the greater opportunities for his enormous creativity.

This time his choice was not a 'new' character, rather actually a very, very recognizable character recognizable at least by name Santa, and this time in a film by commercial film makers. That is where our acquaintance with the character of Santa ends. Willie Stokes' Santa may resemble a lot of characters that we know really exist, as opposed to old Kris Kringle. We know this because many of us have met just such confused people in our real lives, though usually not wearing red velvet suits. The individuals we knew were known to us in the guise of losers, con men, hard-drinkers, and otherwise less-than-perfect people who are just a little bit mixed up about who they are, where they are going, and exactly how to get there.

The only disagreement I would have with many of the reviewing film critics about this film is their insistence that "Bad Santa' does not have a 'good hearted' ending. I would beg to differ. While I won't give it away, I would tell you it has what might be considered an ending that is totally 'appropriate' for a holiday film such as 'Bad Santa'. It isn't an 'It's A Wonderful Life' ending, but then again the film isn't 'Miracle on 34th Street'. But we already know that because the title reveals it from the git-go. I may be a bit of a softie when it comes to kids, but I must tell you some of the tears in my eyes at various moments in 'Bad Santa' were not tears of laughter.

Speaking of kids, Brett Kelly, the young actor who plays 'the kid' in "Bad Santa" is priceless in this film and perfectly cast. Brett is the Coronji Calhoun (Tyrell Musgrove Monsters Ball) of this film. Thornton is excellent in acting in films with children, this film being no exception.

John Ritter, like Billy Bob, has played a variety of characters in a myriad of films during his career and is always 'absolutely on the mark' for the personality of each character. Rather than being 'sorry' for Ritter that his last film was 'Bad Santa'; I believe that making this film with his old friend (from 'Hearts Afire', the 80's TV series) Billy Bob Thornton, in their first film together since 'Sling Blade', was probably a tremendous source of fun and pleasure for Ritter. I am personally very glad that he and Billy Bob had the opportunity to co-star one last time before John's untimely death. While his on-screen time seemed short on this film, John Ritter, as usual, did an excellent job and was very funny, as was always his way.

Open your mind, prepare for laughter, and give yourself the gift of a different kind of holiday cheer this year go see 'Bad Santa'. If what you want for Christmas is a little break from the often false cheerfulness of the traditional and instead a swig of dark humor for the delight of your soul, 'Bad Santa' can definitely make all your wishes come true whether you have been bad or good.

Want Bad Santa (Unrated Version + Director's Cut) (2003) Discount?

Bad Santa, the new anti-holiday comedy from director Terry Zwigoff is one funny movie. It is just what you'd call hilarious and Billy Bob Thorton does make one very bad santa.

Thorton plays a lascivious, acoholic who works with an elf, (hilarious Tony Cox). They're both bad allright! They're business specializes in stealing, by working at different malls around the area and waiting for the right moments to take what they want. Soon a bartender (Lauren Graham) falls for Thorton. The story works out well, it's not amazing (obviously) but it does this movie just fine. As for humor, this movie receives a high rating on my scale. Note: If you find Christmas too sacrosant to joke about or if you don't like scenes using abusive language towards children, then you should skip this. Also Brett Kelly plays a kid, who think Thorton is a real Santa and won't leave him alone.

This is a dark comedy, no doubt. If you have a dark sense of humor, you should definetly look into it. Though the film is vulgar and some of the humor might be viewed as vile, it is entertaining all the way. Bad Santa is rated R for Pervasive Language, Strong Sexual Content and Some Violence. The language is consistent and seems to never end, the sexuality is fairly explicit, you mainly hear sounds, but some is shown. There are only about 3 sex scenes but none include nudity. The violence is reasonably mild, a shootout near the end, which surprisingly isn't bloody and some fistfights. Billy Bob Thorton has also received a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actor for his performance, he does make a great, bad santa, but I'm not sure if he deserves it. Other contenders include, Bill Murray for "Lost in Translation," and yet another nomination this year for Jack Nicholson for "Something's Gotta Give. All in all, a fine comedy, the one thing I might've changed was the constant profanity but I guess it helps make the movie even more funny. Worth seeing in theatres and not a bad pick for owning on Video or DVD.

Save 63% Off

Exotica (DVD+Blu-ray Combo) (Blu-ray)

While Canadian writer-director Atom Egoyan may be best known for his sweeping, 1997 adaptation of Russel Banks' novel The Sweet Hereafter (for which he was nominated for a best directing Oscar), Exotica vastly surpasses Hereafter in its deeply layered secrets and complexity. "You have to convince yourself that this person has something hidden, that you have to find yourself," states a character at the beginning of the film. Each of these characters--the DJ of Club Exotica (Elias Koteas), the pregnant owner of the club (Egoyan's wife Arsinee Khanjian), the mysterious, school girl dancer (Mia Kirshner), her most frequent customer (Bruce Greenwood), and the lonely owner of an exotic pet store (Don McKellar)--has something hidden, deep within the interactions between each other and the non-linear storytelling of Exotica, which multiple viewings enhance to even greater detail.

After winning many Genie Awards (the Canadian equivelant of the American Oscar) including best director and picture, as well as being hailed as a "Miramax Classic" on the box, one would think that the DVD would be filled with lots of added bonuses, and at the very least: a theatrical trailer. Alas, the Exotica DVD boasts no special features, if you don't count the gorgeous widescreen transfer, much to my own dismay.

Since many critics praised the film when it was released in 1994, especially Roger Ebert, there is hope that a new DVD will be created. The Criterion Collection includes numerous foreign, avant-garde, cultish films on DVD, most all of them boasting quite a few, excellent special features (especially the sadly-out-of-print Sid & Nancy DVD; but not for the feature-less Night Porter disc). One would hope, with the support of a few major critics and strong following, that Mirimax (or Criterion) would release a new version of this DVD, featuring all the added features, commentaries, bios that the film rightfully deserves.

I like movies that reveal their mysteries gradually. Films like Mullholland Drive, Memento, Following, etc. Like a good postmodern novel (no that's not an oxymoron there are a few [Paul Auster comes immediately to mind]) these films are non-linear and one is kept guessing about not only what will happen, but whethere central characters are crazy, evil, benign, etc. The audience is kept intentionally in the dark, and thus on edge, and sometimes (as is the case with Mullholland Drive) there is no clear resolution, no tidying things up at the end. Egoyan seems to be operating in similar territory.

Another characterstic that these directors share is that often their characters are not what one would call likeable. This is the case in Exotica. A Canadian Customs Inspector (David Hemblen) is assigned to audit the books of a nervous Toronto exotic pet shop owner. From the outset, we see that this is not going to be your typical CPA/customer relationship. Things get more intriguing when the inspector finds a pistol in the pet-shop owner's drawer and reacts enigmatically.

As the film progresses, the inspector's psyche gradually disintegrates, until finally there is a denouement of denouements at the end of the film. Finally, Egoyan lets the audience in on the source of the inspector's descent into emotional breakdown. No spoilers here, but suffice it to say that the ending provides resolution, without relying on clichés.

Another satisfying Egoyan film. Thoughful script. Uniformly excellent acting, cinematography, direction. Worth re-viewing.

BEK

Buy Exotica (DVD+Blu-ray Combo) (Blu-ray) Now

CAUTION-SPOILERS AHEAD-EXOTICA has been overwhelmingly praised by the critics. I think the Tomatometer is at 95% favorable. Here is my take on EXOTICA-maybe it will help some viewers to appreciate this fine film.

The film is very much a paradox, sensual but sterile, intense but distant, hollow but haunting. It is a complex story with a relatively simple theme. The characters include Francis (Bruce Greenwood) as a Canadian government revenue auditor who is auditing the financials of an exotic pet store (whose owner Thomas is played by Don McKeller) while trying to exorcise his demons at a strip club called EXOTICA. During his nocturnal visits to the club he pays his niece Tracey (played by Sarah Polley) to baby-sit his seemingly absent daughter. The viewer gets to know the strip club DJ, Eric (Elias Koteas); a stripper, Christina (Mia Kirshner) who dances for Francis and happens to be Eric's ex-girlfriend; and the very pregnant (by Eric) club owner Zoe (Arsinee Khanjian) who is having an affair with Christina.

The plot is an example of elliptical storytelling in that it moves in a purposeful ever-circling way to slowly reveal the connections between the worlds of each character. There is enough misdirection to keep the viewer wary of their perceptions. They must pay complete attention and remember what they see.

There are significant technical reasons to like this film. It is first and foremost a director's film and Adam Egoyan's directing is amazing. A director is responsible for both casting and for directing their cast. For Exotica Egoyan added to his cast of regulars two of the best young actresses (Kirshner and Polley) in Canada. Kirshner's performance provides an extremely unusual combination of sensuality and thinly masked pain. Polley is simply the most subtly expressive actress in film today. They are world class talents who seem to deliberately stay away from mainstream films but have little trouble getting lots of work. Greenwood, McKellar, Koteas, and Khanjian, are likewise excellent. Egoyan kept all six reined-in so that their performances are low-key and restrained. While there were many stylish and beautiful camera shots he mostly keeps the characters at a distance. Exotic décor, busy sets, atmosphere, restrained acting, minimal tight shots, and frequent plot misdirection keeps the viewer from bonding or strongly identifying with the characters. He did not want the viewer getting into the heads of the characters, he wanted us to internalize the theme and to take it into our heads. This way if we pay attention we will learn as much about ourselves as we will about the characters.

The theme is substitution, how the process of living is simply a process of substitution. We grow out of things and find substitutes for them. We lose something precious but we carry on by finding a substitute. We expand our horizons and find substitutes that we did not know about or that we thought unattainable. We need something we can't have so we find something that works as a substitute. Sometimes the substitutes are an improvement on the original, sometimes they are a better match with a new stage of life, sometimes they are an imperfect substitute but the best that we can manage, and sometimes (certainly in this film) they are an addictive trap that keep us from moving on or growing.

Most people's dreams don't come true and they settle for a substitute, often without really noticing. The most compelling scene in `Field of Dreams' is when Burt Lancaster is talking about what it was like to give up his dream of playing major league baseball. He says: `It was like coming this close to your dream and then watching it brush past you like a stranger in a crowd. At the time I didn't think much about it. We just don't recognize the most significant moments in our lives when they happen. Back then I thought: there will be other days, I didn't realize that was the only day'. While his character accepted the end of his dream and substituted a life as the town doctor, in Exotica the substitutes are dysfunctional because there is no acceptance. That is why so many of the substitutions involve payment, a transactional substitution is a temporary event and allows the illusion to stay alive.

Exotica focuses on the substitutes used by its central characters. Francis substitutes Christina for his daughter and Tracey for Christina (when she was his daughter's babysitter). Eric substitutes his club DJ job for the career he wanted in radio, he substitutes his voyeurism in the club for his inability to have a lasting relationship. Zoe substitutes for her dead mother and continues to run the club, instead of a husband she has Eric contractually substitute so that she can have a baby. Thomas substitutes his opera liaisons for a real relationship and substitutes an incubator for the eggs he has taken from a nest. Christina substitutes a protective Francis for her uncaring and probably abusive father. Voyeurism substitutes for interaction.

Eric's voyeurism eventually leads him to the conclusion that the Francis-Christina mutual dependency has gone from a temporary coping mechanism to an addictive trap. He elects to destroy that relationship by convincing Francis to touch Christina. Eric knows that the relationship must end once this occurs, no matter how Christina reacts. Either she will no longer be able to use Francis because he betrayed her trust or Francis will no longer be able to use her because he can no longer maintain his illusion of protecting her purity. Then they will both have to move on and seek new and hopefully more positive substitutes.

Contrary to some who have commented on this film I did not see any real `plot holes'. Almost every detail is eventually explained and if anything Egoyan made the plot a little too predictable. But at least this was balanced by some interesting misdirection-like having Tracey live above a shabby strip mall so you jump to the conclusion that she is a child prostitute and that Francis has a thing for young girls. Certainly on the second viewing it is clear that many clues are provided and that the outcome is being subtly telegraphed throughout the film in a kind of mental striptease.

As already mentioned, the really unique feature of this movie is that the viewer does not really connect with the characters but instead connects with the substitution theme. The audience is given a new perspective from which to think about their own substitutions. Perceptive members of the audience are forced to be more than observers. This is powerful stuff.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

Read Best Reviews of Exotica (DVD+Blu-ray Combo) (Blu-ray) Here

In my opinion, Atom Egoyan's EXOTICA is one of the best movies of the last decade. Those of us who had the opportunity to watch in the eighties Egoyan's first movies such as THE ADJUSTER or FAMILY VIEWING are not surprised by the nowadays international recognition of the armenian-canadian director. With EXOTICA, he has joined the very small guild of the writer/directors whose name will be remembered in the future.

Atom Egoyan is treating such universal themes as Redemption, Guiltiness or Desire, mixing them in a puzzle of images and subplots that leave us petrified by the beauty of the movie and the deepness of the feelings experienced by the characters. EXOTICA, like a book you cherish, must be seen several times in order to appreciate the complexity of the screenplay. Don't hesitate to buy it, you cannot be wrong with this movie.

There are alas no bonus features with this Disney/Buena Vista DVD, a company that prefers present extra long documentaries about the making of some infantile movie rather than contribute to the nobler but less profitable effort to help true artists reveal their work. Shame.

A DVD zone your library.

Want Exotica (DVD+Blu-ray Combo) (Blu-ray) Discount?

This is an undiscovered gem of a film with an incredibly inventive and powerful script that is sure to suprise and please. 'Exotica', a "Gentleman's Club", is the focal point of a world in search of meaning. Men come not just to watch beautiful women sensually dance in various stages of undress. They come to forget, however briefly, the pain and suffering they have experienced in the world outside.

Christina (Mia Kirshner) and Eric (Elias Koteas) work at the club, Christina as a dancer, Eric as the DJ. As the customers watch the enchanting Christina perform on-stage and privately, Eric watches the customers watch her. As you might have guessed, while moods and emotions are generally muted and controlled within the confines of Exotica they are forever on the verge of breaking through the illusory nature created and sustained by alcohol and sexual stimulation. There are untold stories to be brought into the light of day and only when the truth is known will the many tangled relationships and reasons for being there finally make sense.

Director Atom Egoyan has conjoured up a place outside of time and space, a purgatorial oasis where all regrets, memories and hopes converge into the incessant drone of the music and the tantalizing movements of the dancers. Truly a stunning vision that will stay with the viewer for quite sometime. Definitely not a film for everyone, 'Exotica' deals with adult situations and contains numerous scenes of nudity and some mild homosexuality. However this thoughtful, probing tale ultimately transcends most of the dark, depressing elements and offers a ray of hope and forgiveness. If you're the adventureous type who is looking for something different 'Exotica' is definitely the film for you.

Mia Kirshner and Elias Koteas (two of my favorite actresses/actors) are fantastic. Also wonderful performances by Bruce Greenwood, Don McKellar, Arsinee Khanjian and a young Sarah Polley.

Never Let Me Go (2010)

"The breakthrough in medical science came in 1952

Doctors could now cure the previous incurable

By 1967, life expectancy passed 100 years"

And so begins Never Let Me Go, a downbeat adaptation of a book I've never had the pleasure of reading by Kazuo Ishiguro. This film is an exercise in understatement; rarely have I seen a film that's so emotional and yet avoids bravado and manages to depict these emotions in such a gentle way. This is no straight-forward drama and there's an unconventional element to the story that I feel would be best to keep secret from the potential viewer. Unfortunately, it's difficult to discuss/critique the film without disclosing that element. With that said, the secret comes out very early into the movie so don't feel that I'm spoiling anything for you.

Besides a brief opening scene, the film opens in 1978 at a boarding school called Hailsham. While headmistress Miss Emily (Charlotte Rampling) gives her daily announcement to the students, it becomes clear that Hailsham is not the typical boarding school. The health of the students is greatly important and the students' existence is a sheltered one, completely cut off from the world outside the boundaries of the school. Students are at the age where romantic ideals begin to blossom and young Kathy H. takes a liking to a boy named Tommy. Those wondering what the purpose of Hailsham is don't have to wait very long as a disenchanted guardian named Miss Lucy (Sally Hawkins) soon enlightens them that their purpose is to grow up and donate their vital organs before their "short-life" will be completed. As this chapter of the film comes to a close, Kathy watches her friend Ruth and Tommy grow close. These childhood scenes are handled with great sentiment, but also with great austerity.

The next two segments take place in 1985 and then 1994, where Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley, and Andrew Garfield take on the roles of Kathy, Ruth, and Tommy. This second part takes place at The Cottages, where the three Hailsham students have their first contact with the outside world and their sexual awareness comes to full fruition. It's here that we learn a bit more about the students' purpose, as well as watch some characters struggle with their already pre-determined fate. "Completion," the third part of the film is arguably the most tragic where hope and optimism leads to sad acceptance.

Despite being only 103 minutes, Never Let Me Go manages to tell a pretty full story and show characters completely evolve from naïve children to naïve, but optimistic adults. Watching these characters evolve is heartbreaking and the way the film burrows into your emotional center with such quiet nuance is astounding. Rarely do elements fall together so perfectly in a film that they completely immerse you in what you're watching and in it's own a soft, sad way this film absolutely casts a spell. This is not a film that will appeal to a wide audience, but I personally found it to be quite masterful.

The film's score by Rachel Portman is one of the most effective musical scores I've heard in 2010. The music evokes such sadness it becomes a key element to the success of the film as a whole. The picturesque photography by cinematographer Adam Kimmel is poetic and beautiful, static yet graceful and adds an additional level of poignancy that the screenwriter could not have foreseen.

As for acting, we get to watch three very promising young actors do some wonderful work. The most surprising is Keira Knightley who gives such an honest portrayal I forgot I was watching Knightley. Ditching any glamor or sharp-tongued wit, she plays the insecure, jealous, and frightened Ruth marvelously. Garfield continues to establish himself as one of the strongest up-and-coming actors at work today. He gets such pathos out of his mix of sadness and optimism; Watch Garfield's face as he learns the truth about deferrals and the way his expression quietly goes from hopefulness to helplessness. Contrast this with his acclaimed performance in The Social Network and you have an actor building an impressive body of work. Meanwhile, Carey Mulligan continues to prove that she is something special and refreshing in the film industry. What an elegant, immensely talented actress she is and her work here is brilliant. Mulligan is a true actress, something Hollywood is lacking these days and her performance here is so powerful, yet completely low-key.

There is something so brave and unexpected about taking a premise rooted in science-fiction and, in doing so, making a deeply moving human drama and a profound, meditative statement on life, death, and humanity. Again, I've never read the book but I wonder if the book is as much of an emotional journey as the film. I would never call this film "uplifting," but the tragic, beautiful ending is one of the most life-affirming endings of 2010.

Never Let Me Go had much more of an impact the second time I watched it. It seemed more heartbreaking, more poignant, more powerful, and more beautiful than it did the first time. It's a deeply emotional viewing experience that gripped my emotions in a way few films have. While highly praised by some critics, it's been largely overshadowed by other films of 2010. Never Let Me Go is as elegant, thought-provoking, and moving as films can get. It's undoubtedly one of the best films of 2010.

GRADE: A

As a 35 year-old-male with stage-4 cancer, I was easily able to relate to the three main characters in this film. The thing that I got from the movie was that it was not the issue of death itself that affected the characters, it was the feeling that there was no time to make up for past mistakes. A great feeling of guilt and regret along with the knowledge that the friendship would soon be over gave the film an even more emotional element not seen in other films. I cannot think of any other movie that has had the emotional effect on me that this one has. The day I received the movie, I watched it twice and promptly put the DVD back into the mailbox so I would not watch it again. Later that night while I was lying in my bed, I started thinking about the movie. Then I started to cry, something I had not done in a very long time. No movie had ever given me the reaction that this one did. "Never Let Me Go" is a movie I would recommend to everyone.

Buy Never Let Me Go (2010) Now

WARNING: This review, like 80 percent of the other reviews here, does contain spoilers. This is a shame but the nature of this film simply requires the insertion of these spoilers in order to discuss the work. If you want to experience the full impact of this work, DO NOT read any of these reviews, including this one, until you have finished the book.

After all of these reviews it would be difficult for me to add anything new other than my personal opinion (and you know what they say about opinions), and the impact this work had on me while I was watching it, and indeed, the impact which remains with me. This is not a movie which I will soon forget. I realize that tastes in reading differ widely and this is good. Some will love this work as I did; others will despise it. I personally feel it is one of the best works; one of the better movies, I have watched over the past few years. But that being said, the film version of the novel is simply my cuppa and I fully realize that not everyone will share my taste...again, this is good. If we all liked the same thing...boring!

Now here is the first spoiler and it is a big one: The thrust of this entire film concerns the ethics of human cloning. This of course came to the attention of us all when Dolly the Sheep was cloned and there was much speculation as to the ethics and wisdom of human cloning. Now it will not take the viewer very long to figure this "mystery" section of the film out even though the film has skillfully led the reader in a round about way with little hints here and there. The viewer will very quickly realize that something is "just not right" about the situation as described.

This story is told though the voice of Kathy H. who is currently a "Carer," and a graduate of a very exclusive school. Her job is to travel around England and give care to those who are in the final phase of acting their part as "donors." Kathy is finishing her time as a "Carer," and is about to begin the next phase of her life.

The story is told in a series of reminiscences as told by Kathy as she remembers her time at Hailsham, the exclusive school mentioned above. The story centers around three primary characters, Kathy, the teller, and her two best friends, Tommy and Ruth.

Of course the reader will eventually place all the pieces of these intricate and detailed reminiscences together and figure out that all of these children have been cloned for the express purpose of harvesting their organs...one at a time, until they die. This is done when they become older and of age.

Now some have classified this work as Science Fiction. That would be an unfair assessment and could be likened to classifying `1984.' or `Brave New World," as Science Fiction. No, this work falls more or less into the category of social observations...what if scenario...not really a futuristic society, but rather a society that simply is; in this day and time...speculative fiction I suppose you could call it.

It is interesting to note that one once has the film offered the opinion of the rightness or wrongness of the situation. It has merely laid out the story and lets the reader shudder and become rather ill when they realize what is happening and allows the viewer to come to their own conclusions. The filming style is extremely detailed, dealing with emotions, facts and speculation and is filled with instances of digression; a method of telling the story I find extremely appealing and fits my taste in reading perfectly. Some find this cumbersome and a bit boring...I do not. I think the author's prose is beautiful and it is extremely thought provoking.

I found myself becoming extremely emotional while watching this work and admit that it touched me. Much has been written as to the fact that many feel it is unbelievable that the characters in this work can accept their fate, not make any great attempts to "escape" and accept their lot in life (for the most part) as natural. I personally found this aspect of the work to be spot on and feel the author was making some very good points here. All of us, in one way or another, accept social norms and accept our particular lot in life. We like to tell ourselves differently, but for the most part it is true. History pretty well teachers us that the majority of mankind, down through the ages, has been pretty sheep like in their obedience to social norms. Think about it. It has happened in the past and is still happening to us today when we kid ourselves, believing that we are too smart and too sophisticated to fall into such a trap. No, for me, the premise of the story is all too believable...which sort of makes me scared and sad at the same time.

Please do not that there are not explosions, car chases, desperate and exciting scenes of escape efforts, no violence, no special effects. This is a thinking film and to be quite frank, one of the most horrifying films I have seen in years.

I also might suggest that you read the book on which this work was based. Like the movie, it is truly a haunting story.

Like this film or hate this film, I seriously doubt that any viewer will not remember this one long after it has been read.

Don Blankenship

The Ozarks

Read Best Reviews of Never Let Me Go (2010) Here

This movie brings up many philosophical questions about life, death, love, and what it means to be human. It leaves itself open to many interpretations, and will leave you thinking about the larger meanings and messages long after the film is ended.

****ALERT MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS!!!****

First off, I think one main message of the film is about how certain forgotten classes of people are used and tossed aside by the rest of us, to make our lives more luxurious or comfortable. The only way we can manage to live with the knowledge that we are profiting off this exploitation, is to pretend these people don't exist. We know there is child labor, and sweatshops, and that many of our clothes/sneakers/electronics are made in 3rd-world factories in borderline slave conditions, often by children who have no hope for a better life. But we push this inconvenient truth out of our minds in order to enjoy the luxuries these forgotten people make possible. It was interesting that in the film, almost every "regular" person who came in contact with the schoolchildren (deliverymen, maintenance workers, etc.), seemed very uncomfortable around them and wanted to avoid interaction with them. They did not want to be reminded of the cost innocent people are paying for their longevity.

I also found it interesting that you almost never saw the beneficiaries of the Donor's sacrifice. They lived in an alternate universe where the organs they needed just appeared the messiness and horror of the process was hidden from them. One very brief but telling scene is when the children were all in a restaurant laughing loudly, and an older couple at a nearby table looks at them with disgust and annoyance. These are the very same people who will likely live a long life thanks to the ultimate sacrifice of the "annoying" young people.

I also found the issue of the "Deferrals" to be full of philosophical significance. In essence I think Ishiguro is making a comment about death, and how we all bargain for more time with the ones we love. Interestingly, in the film the deferrals turn out to be nothing but a false rumor, a children's fairytale. I think perhaps the author is making a comment on belief in the afterlife... we all want to believe that death is not the end, that we will see our loved ones in the afterlife. After all, if our love is true enough, justice MUST dictate that we get more time with them. Is there any basis in truth to this belief? Or, are we like the kids at Hailsham desperately believing a made-up story?

Of course, the film makes it clear from the very 1st scene that deferrals are false we see Tommy clearly about to reach "completion" even as the opening credits roll, so we know there will be no happy ending for he and Kathy. So the viewer is not surprised by the revelation late in the film that there are no deferrals. What is touching, however, is the childlike hope with which Tommy and Kathy cling to this dream of more time together. One of the most moving parts of the film is when we realize that Kathy, always the more grounded one, has just realized there are no deferrals even as Tommy still clings to his hope. Carey Mulligan does wonders with the smallest of expressions in this scene.

Also on the subject of the afterlife, in the final scene when Kathy looks across the field, she imagines seeing Tommy running across to her. This is clearly a reference to the standard Hollywood version of two lovers reuniting in the afterlife. We've seen this type of "happy ending" so often in movies, that we almost expect to see him come running over the horizon. But tellingly, he never does and Kathy never even allows the fantasy to progress to the point where they actually embrace. The thought of something that she knows will never happen is too painful. There is no more time. There is no deferral. All she will ever have is the brief time they had together.

So in the end I think this is a movie about life specifically, the blink-of-an-eye flash of time we all get on this earth. Anyone who has been truly in love will know that no amount of years will ever be enough. We all want a deferral, and would give almost anything for one. In fact, the people in this fictional society in effect bargain their humanity away in exchange for their own deferrals they allow innocent young people to suffer and die in exchange for their own "deferrals". But in the end, deferral or not, "completion" comes for us all, and too soon. All we can do is appreciate every moment, and respect all of our fellow humans, and never let each other go.

Want Never Let Me Go (2010) Discount?

I'm really gravitating to the less mainstream and not super popular movies and books these days. I had never heard of this as far as it being in theaters. I loved it. It haunted me for days after watching it. The weird thing was that I wondered for an hour or so after watching it if it was maybe a true story, if something like this could have really happened. Of course it couldn't, except way long ago and in secret. I got so caught up in the characters and the tiny details, like the people making deliveries to the schools and halfway houses making such an effort not to get to know or care for the kids, to protect themselves from the horror and saddness of the whole thing. This is a movie that has alot of saddness but I enjoyed watching it so much and it really made me think. I think there might be people out there who have philosophies that this kind of thing would be okay. So I think movies like this are terrific to keep us thinking and watching what we do to each other as human beings. I was so glad to see Carey Mulligan in something more than just a supporting role. I think she's very talented.

Save 25% Off

Halloween II (30th Anniversary Edition) (1981)

In putting together this sequel, the powers-that-be decided to combine several of the strongest elements from the original film(Michael Myers, Dr. Loomis, the strong Halloween atmosphere)with the standard pace of an early 80's slasher film(people getting killed every 5-10 minutes.) For me, this is the ideal combination. There has not been a slasher movie since that I have liked more than this one.

Dr. Loomis is my favorite horror hero, and Michael Myers my favorite horror villain. They both enjoy some of their finest moments in this installment. I find this version of Myers creepier than the later incarnations, where he has suddenly grown into something resembling an nfl lineman. There is something in the deliberate movements, and the angular figure, that is decidedly inhuman. And Dr. Loomis elevates all of this to a far higher level than it could ever have achieved otherwise.His strength,courage, and iron will make him a hero. So does his moral anguish over seeing innocent people butchered. But there is also something in his personality that makes him the ideal adversary for the Bogeyman.Of course, as a psychiatrist, he feels professional responsibility. But it goes well beyond that. There is some part of his imagination that is obsessed with Myers, and some part of his humanity that is appalled by him. These feelings, taken in concert with his naturally heroic nature, make him the perfect combatant for Myers.

This movie has the ideal pace. The story is divided between Myers stalking people at the hospital, and Dr. Loomis working with the local police to track him down. Slowly, methodically, Michael Myers begins to remove the employees of the hospital, as he makes his way towards Laurie Strode.As always, he operates like a hunter, or sportsman. Several of his victims are given opportunities to save themselves, as they were in the first film. This is what sets Myers apart from typical killers-he is rather like an artist of the macabre. If it's too easy, he almost seems to regard it as beneath him. Of all the killings, my favorite is the nurse in the room with the aquarium. That whole scene is beautifully shot and lit, with the aquarium casting all sorts of reflections across the darkened room, and the cadaverous face of Myers gradually coming into view over the doomed girl's shoulder.The murder of the security guard is effective, as well.

The atmosphere is perfect. The long, winding hallways are ideal for a movie of this sort.There are just so many places where Michael Myers could be. The effect is only intensified as the night wears on and the primary lights are extinguished.The music is great, too. It incorporates the basic Halloween theme, but it has been altered enough to set it apart from any of the other films. It's not really a tangible thing: all of the elements just work for me.The doomed people, congregated in the dark hospital. The Bogeyman, always lurking in the shadows.Dr. Loomis, making his way ever closer to the scene of the slaughter.This is a film I never get tired of watching.

I have seen this film in excess of 300 times-perhaps 400-by now. I mention that for one reason..........namely, that you simply cannot watch something that many times unless you really enjoy the process of watching it. For instance, once you've seen something a half dozen times or so, all pretense of suspense is lost. There is no longer any suspense, because you know exactly what is going to happen. You're not waiting to see how it ends, because you know how it ends. Eventually, you know how each and every SCENE ends.

I reached that point, and surpassed it.........and yet I still kept watching it. For one reason........

Just about EVERY SINGLE SCENE in Halloween 2 is either perfect, or at least very, very good. This is the key. When I watch this, I will sometimes skip the scene where the ambulance driver plays the little prank on his lady friend. Not always, but sometimes.And that's it. There is not another moment in Halloween 2 that I find extraneous, even as many times as I have sat through it.No matter how often I've seen it, I never tire of it. And this holds true for virtually each and every moment in the film.

From the crucial scenes, right down to those that appear trivial, and everything in between...........they just got it right.

I have always felt that this was Donald Pleasence's finest performance as Loomis. He simply commands the screen. There is noone like him. This is also one of the most effective incarnations of Michael Myers. His posture, and mannerisms, are so rigid, so unnatural.........he comes across as the very literal embodiment of Death, itself.(notice that bizarre little pivot he does when he turns to spy on that girl through her window.)Decidedly inhuman.

There are just so many great moments in this film. It has an ambience that is all its own. For example, the part where Laurie Strode finds out exactly who it was who had been after her earlier in the evening. This was a brilliant scene, with the music and the way that the room is lit(with the hospital room darkened, and all that light flooding through the opened door when the nurse enters-very distinctive looking). Note the hushed tones, the lowered voices........much the way that people actually speak when they are in a darkened room. Or where the blonde nurse is seeking her, after she abandons her room in her dread of Myers' return. The dark office with the aquarium, as the unfortunate nurse looks in vain for the doctor........but finds someone else. All those macabre reflections, cast in every direction around the room, make it an unforgettable scene. Or the silent silhouette, lurking just behind that screen, as the nurse and paramedic plot their next move.

Want slasher 101? How about the doomed security guard, going to investigate a strange noise? You just know how that's going to end up.

A hospital is such an ideal locale for a slasher film to take place. The long, winding hallways..........all those rooms and dark corners..........It is dark, and quiet, and isolated. And those people who ARE there are going about their business, completely oblivious to the danger.

And, always on the periphery, the Bogeyman is silently lurking and waiting. While his patience is, as Loomis said, 'not human', you know that when he DOES eventually act, it will be with decisive brutality.

But it is Loomis, more than any other single factor, that serves to differentiate the Halloween series from any other slasher or horror phenomenon. He brings strength, heroism, sincerity, humanity, and a will of iron........as well as an extraordinarily distinctive, melodic manner of delivering his lines. Just imagine some of Loomis' lines in the hands of an average, contemporary actor. They'd be diminished, perhaps to the point of being rendered gibberish.

But in the hands of Donald Pleasence, they become lyrical, darkly poetic, profound.

Dr.Sam Loomis-he elevates this series to something that it NEVER could have approached without him. There is simply nobody like him.

For me, Halloween 2 is the ultimate slasher film. I love it more and more over time. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

Buy Halloween II (30th Anniversary Edition) (1981) Now

Halloween II is not as good as the original, that is obvious. Many die hard Halloween fans hate this movie and others love it. I would blame some of the hatred on the fact that John Carpneter opted not to direct. This resulted in the movie's lack of tension and dread that the original seemed to master. Halloween II also ups the violence and bloodshed (and random killing which really bothered me). This movie takes place right after Halloween ends. Halloween II benefits from an excellent, at times a little over the top, preformance from Donald Pleasance. Many complain that Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis) sucks in this movie because she is so zoned out. DUH! She is doped up. This adds to the fact that she is helpless. The script may have some problems, but Halloween II is the best sequel. This movie, while not holding a candle to the original, is scary, exciting, and will keep you at the edge of your seat. After a climatic and explosive ending, it is obvious that the series should have stopped right there. But NOO, a string of retarded sequels had to be made. From the Doyle's house to Haddonfield Hospital, Halloween II finishes "the night he came home" very well.

Read Best Reviews of Halloween II (30th Anniversary Edition) (1981) Here

"Halloween II" picks up directly at the end of the original film, and sends survivor Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) to the hospital to nurse her wounds. Unfortunately for her and most of the cast, Micheal Myers follows. Donald Pleasence and Nancy Stephens also reprise their roles as well.Directed by Rick Rosenthal and scripted by John Carpenter and Debra Hill, "Halloween II" is a very respectable sequel. There is a lot more blood and gore in this one (which came in the post-"Friday the 13th" era), but unlike some of the later sequels, this one still has that "Halloween" feel about it. The finale is also very tense and wraps up the story pretty well -you could view the original and this one without any of the other sequels and have a complete story.The DVD is presented in 2.35:1 ratio and does not contain any extras aside from some brief production notes. But the movie is good, and its a bargain price, so pick it up and make it a "Halloween" night.

Want Halloween II (30th Anniversary Edition) (1981) Discount?

When I originally viewed this sequel, I can remeber being very impress on how the film turned out. I was weary because Carpenter didn't return to direct, but some of my worries were layed to rest after I saw that he both wrote and produced it. Rick does a very credible job directing the feature and surprisingly makes the film FEEL pretty darn close ot a Carpenter film. What I really liked about this sequel is that it takes place right, I mean RIGHT after the first film. It follows the shape (Michael Myers) as he fillows Jame Lee Curtis (who is blatenly wearing a wig) to a hospital, and then the hospital itself becomes a house of horrors. I was more than pleased with only a few complaints. I didn't like how the hospital was always dark (like the lights were never on) and how michael got two bullets straight in the eyes and continued to come (this fact was forgotten in latter poor sequels). That was a little chessy and over-the-top, but forgiveable. The only thing that could have made this film better is if Carpenter himself directed, but even with him at the helm, it might not have turned out much better than this. The next entry HALLOWEEN III: SEASON OF THE WITCH, though has nothing to do with these first two films, is a still a good movie. Fans of Carpenter whould also give it a try but stop their. The sequels after that take their audiences for granted and the continuity errors galore as they try to connect to the first two entires.

Save 25% Off

Darkness (2012)

I would say this movie was excellent but I do not think that is strong enough. The movie was outstanding in every way it kept u waiting for what was next and wanting more. Super movie!!!

Not overly engaging or very memorable. One thing i didn't like is the lack of subtitles. In a film like this where people talk softly or with thick accents, subtitles really help. Nothing i dislike more than having to crank the volume to hear a conversation then have music BLAST out of nowhere a second after for a cheap scare. One other problem is doing the shakey camera garbage. Yeah yeah, he was trying to go for camera effects.... pfffft more like, "I cannot create real tension, through creative lighting or dialog so i'll shake the camera instead" It doesn't happen alot, but i am just getting tired of horror films using shakey cam as a crutch for creating tension i guess it is replacing the blasting music jump scare. So it kinda missed the mark on being a memorable "chilling" horror film and falls into the "It's ok" category.

Buy Darkness (2012) Now

The Comancheros (50th Anniversary Edition) (1961)

John Wayne rules in this big, sprawling western adventure film. The screenplay, co-written by western novelist Clair Huffaker, struggles with the historical accuracy of Texas in the 1840s and the rifles seem a little advanced for 1843, but, nit-picking aside, this is an entertaining film. Texas Ranger Jake Cutter (Wayne) and sometime gambler Paul Regret (Stuart Whitman) go under cover after a vicious army of outlaw raiders known as "Comancheros," led by the diabolical Graile (Nehemiah Persoff). Hard-hitting, large scale action sequences deftly directed by Michael Curtiz, who directd some of Errol Flynn's better adventure films, will please action-adventure fans. The movie includes a comfortable blend of action, suspense, and humor with occasional serious overtones of duty, friendship, and the love of a good woman. Taken within the context of the film that isn't as corny as it might sound. Great outdoor color photography adds to the appeal. A pulse-pounding musical score by Elmer Bernstein matches the excitement. Lee Marvin makes the most of his costarring role as Tully Crow, one of the West's wildest bad men. Watch for the hilarious vignette featuring Edgar Buchanan as a judge of dubious integrity. Ditto the comic relief segment with Guinn "Big Boy" Williams as a seemingly bewildered gunrunner. There is nothing intellectual or artistic to say of this movie, but it's good old fashioned fun. Recommended viewing.

The Comancheros is another great John Wayne western with a great supporting cast. The story follows Captain Jake Cutter, a Texas ranger, and his efforts to capture a prisoner, and then to infiltrate a group of gunrunners and bandits, the Comancheros. This group has been supplying the Comanches with repeating rifles who then wreak havoc on the area. There is plenty of action here with numerous shootouts, and also plenty of great characters. At parts during this movie, I wondered why the Duke never took more comedic roles since he is very funny in several scenes.

John Wayne plays Captain Jake Cutter, the big, brawling Texas Ranger who attempts to bring in a prisoner who keeps escaping his grasp, "Monsoor" Paul Regret, played by Stuart Whitman very well. Another notable performance is Lee Marvin's Crow, the contact between Cutter and the Comancheros. He doesn't have a very big part, but what is there is very good. The film also stars Ina Balin, Nehemiah Persoff, Michael Ansara, Patrick Wayne, Bruce Cabot, and Joan O'Brien. Elmer Bernstein also turns in another excellent score that has elements of the Sons of Katie Elder and The Great Escape. The DVD offers a widescreen presentation which looks very good, two trailers(one in Spanish), and also Movie Tone News about an award presented involving the movie. More John Wayne movies should be put out like this, and I give credit to the companies putting out so many new ones recently. A very exciting, enjoyable Duke western that all his fans will love!

Buy The Comancheros (50th Anniversary Edition) (1961) Now

You can see by the title that I am a John Wayne fan, and this rip-roaring Western is one of the reasons why. With equal portions of rousing action, humor, and drama, this film keeps your interest and, like the Duke's performance, never loses its authenticity. It's said that John Wayne took over direction of some of the action sequences, and they're great. There are well-drawn, clear differences between the good guys and bad guys, but the characters are human and developed enough for the actors to sink their teeth into, which all do with gusto. By this time in his career, the Duke only had to show up on screen to be the authentic Western hero, but as usual he goes 'way beyond that, giving a colorful, humorous, absolutely real and terrific performance as the Texas Ranger who helps a man on the wrong side of the law redeem himself and find the woman he loves--as well as stopping a motley, dangerous bunch of white renegades (Comancheros) who are selling weapons to warring Comanche Indians. It's great movie-making and a great couple of hours with the Duke, so check it out!

Read Best Reviews of The Comancheros (50th Anniversary Edition) (1961) Here

I agree completely with every word the previous reviewer,Wayne,said about The Comancheros Blu-ray,this is a reference disc for the blu-ray format!!!!!! STUNNING/PRISTINE Picture Quality,and Audio too.

I have a fair collection of blu-ray films,and the "modern" films are excellent Picture Quality,as you would expect,however,it,s what blu-ray does to the "older" films,especially westerns,that is so amazing.

The Searchers/How The West Was Won/Zulu/The Outlaw Josey Wales are a joy to behold,Home Cinema of the highest calibre,A+++++,well,The Comancheros Blu-ray joins that List,REFERENCE DISCS FOR BLU-RAY!!!!!

I say this as somebody who watched The Comancheros when it was first released at the Cinema,I must have been 10 years old,but that did not prepare me for the absolute pleasure of watching this Duke western on blu-ray,simply put,FABULOUS!!!!!!

Davy Cairns,Scotland.

Want The Comancheros (50th Anniversary Edition) (1961) Discount?

Finally, "The Comancheros" is released on DVD. This is one of Wayne's best, and most enjoyable westerns(that says a lot, because the Duke's westerns were always classic). The acting is superb, Stuart Whitman turning out one of his best performances, and John Wayne underrated as usual. Lee Marvin also makes a powerful, short performance. That cast alone makes for a classic. Michael Curtiz's("Casablanca"-1942) last film, he creates one of the better 1960's westerns. Several people have mentioned the guns in the film. Historical facts are often changed to create entertaining films. This film is not a history lesson, it is an example of classic hollywood at it's best. A well crafted, fun, classic western. Recommended for both fans of classic westerns, and classic films in general.

Save 25% Off

Veer-Zaara (2004)

Curious, I rushed into a Bollywood DVD rental shop and asked the clerk to recommend a few. She immediately handed me this one. I can see why.

This movie introduces us to Veer, a man imprisoned unjustly in prison for twenty-two years, and Somayya, his young, beautiful lawyer trying to get him out. Veer tells Somayya his story of why he's there. It's long, yet beautiful, touching, poignant, and emotional.

Throughout the film, marvelous song-and-dance numbers are interspersed (My favorite song"Lado"), making the viewer want to "get theeself to Indian dance lessons."

Lastly, the movie leaves a few lessons on the viewer's mind. The first, what is a border, but a line drawn on a map? The second, what is life without love?

Enjoy!!!

This movie is one of my favorite love stories. Great cast and great acting. Not to mention a great story that goes where you least expect it too. I am so glad that Hollywood didn't touch this one, they would have ruined it. Bollywood sure knows how to do it right.

Buy Veer-Zaara (2004) Now

I sat down to watch this film with rather low expectations. I mean, sure, it was backed up by heavy star power, like the unfailing Shahrukh Khan, and the excellent Amitabh Bachan, but I didn't expect the film itself to be good. However, this was a beautiful masterpiece, and I must say Yash Chopra has pulled off another splendid film! My only two complaints were that the film tended to drag at some parts, and there was one song (but only one) that bored me a little. Overall, it is a nice film, and should be watched if you have the patience and time. The plot was good, and the romance was not overdone (like in many Hindi films). The main theme song is also rather catchy, and you'll find yourself humming it after you've watched the movie. There is no violence in this film, and it's good for the whole family (I mean that)!

Read Best Reviews of Veer-Zaara (2004) Here

"When the right woman comes into a man's life, that's when he becomes complete."

Unfolding slowly with the bright and vibrant colors of an Indian quilt, this rich and moving romantic epic is the more hopeful side of "The English Patient." Whereas that film was haunted by love, Veer Zaara revels in and embraces it. The notion that destiny can sometimes overcome circumstance because, in the end, love really is all, has rarely been so wonderfully presented.

It begins in shadow, however, as a young beautiful Pakistani named Saamiya Siddique (Rani Mukherji) comes to aid a man known only as 786 who has been imprisoned for the past 22 years. Saamiya knows his name was once Veer Pratap Singh (Shahrukh Khan) and when she uses it, the floodgates of memory open and ever so slowly the story of love which brought him there is revealed. It is her belief that once she hears it she can prove his innocence and free him, despite the handicap of gender presented in her country.

Veer is an Indian rescue pilot and Zaara (Preity Zinta) is a young Pakistani girl trying to bring her Bebe's ashes back home to India before she must return and marry Raza. It is an arranged marriage benefitting both their powerful and respected families but one that is draining Zaara's sprit. There is both humor and romance against the colorful backdrop of the two countries, which despite religious differences, director Chopra shows are closely tied together.

His Indian Uncle and Aunt, who have raised him, embrace Zaara as their own, and only when she must return does Veer learn she is bethrothed to another. He only knows he loves her and wants to be the one to marry her, but nothing of her feelings. It is a story of two hearts crossing borders, their love a river deep and flowing. When her sister Shabbo comes to Veer and lets him know how much Zaara loves him, he comes to the shrine to see her and sets in motion the tragic events which will lead the viewer back to the beginning of the film.

Khan and Zinta are terrific here but it is Rani's marvelous turn as a Pakistani girl going against tradition, very much like the love story of Veer and Zaara, which is the glue holding the film together. Like most Indian films, it is interspersed with the occasional song which propel the story forward. Some are quite beautiful and once used to their interjection as part of the narrative, are very enjoyable. For 22 years Veer has protected his love from dishonor but, once in court, Saamiya discovers something which will change all their lives forever.

Magnificently romantic and hopeful, the viewer is rewarded with an old-fashioned love story both visually and internally beautiful. Rare and rewarding, its brilliance tied to its simplicity, this is a masterpiece of the old variety. Its story of love tied to modern Pakistan and India is somehow timeless and not soon forgotten. Those wanting romance in their films will want to come to the valley filled with the season of love.

Want Veer-Zaara (2004) Discount?

Before viewing this movie, I had never been privy to a "Bollywood" film. I'm your typical "whiteboy" so this genre of film was quite new to me. The first things to take into account (for "whiteboys" like myself) are the length of the movie, bollywood films tend to run longer than american films (no worries though, there's an "intermission"), the other attribute is that this film as with most bollywood films I've learned, incorporate song into the film. Hence, they have more of a "show" feeling to them. It's kind of corny at times, because the actors don't actually do the singing. When the scene suddenly goes into song and the vocal voice is significantly different than the actor/actress's voice it's quite noticable, but that's how things are done and you just have to get used to it.

Overall, Veer Zaara was actually a quite wonderful film, the story is solid and heartfelt, the cinematography is wonderfully done, the acting is superb, and the songs are quite beautiful and catchy (I now have the soundtrack, and listen to it often). This for me, was a wonderful introduction into the genre, and I will seek out more similar movies to view, due to this particular film.

The hardest thing for me was getting past the cheese of the actors during the musical numbers. This is the american in me speaking when I say that I'd probably prefer the songs in the background during scenes, rather than the actors lip-synching to them, but I can definitely get used to that.

I guess in closing, if you are a die-hard fan of Bollywood, or a novice like me, you will enjoy this film. it's a great story, with wonderful actors, spectacular sets/locations, and the music sets the mood perfectly for each scene. I own it now, and that should at least be motive enough to see it when you have the chance.

My Neighbor Totoro (1988)

I have been a huge Miyazaki fan for nearly twenty years now, but I am ashamed to admit that I have only now seen MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO for the first time. The reason is a good one, as reasons go: it was the last important film by Miyazaki that I had not yet seen, and I was saving it for a special occasion. I love seeing again films that I have loved the first time through, but there is always a special magic to seeing a film for the first time. Unfortunately, I now no longer have any Miyazaki films to see that I haven't already seen (at least until he finishes his work-in-progress, which has been given the tentative English title HOWL'S MOVING CASTLE). Fortunately, MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO was worth the weight.

How does this film compare with Miyazaki's finest films? This is a hard question, because he has a large number clustered at the top, all of them excellent. I would be hard pressed to say this was better or worse than any of a number of others. However, each film is distinguished from the others by the mood and tone of the film. MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO may be the gentlest and most peaceful of all his films. True, the girls have moved to the countryside with their father because their mother is in a nearby hospital recovering from a rather vague illness, and the forest is haunted, but the illness is never perceived as especially worrisome (except near the end, when a slight cold prevents her making a brief visit home, provoking a crisis with her daughters), and the spirits in the forest are remarkably benign and benevolent. There is nothing like the ecological apocalypse in THE PRINCESS MONONOKE and NAUSICAA OF THE VALLEY OF THE WIND, or the parents who have been transformed into swine or threatening spirits of SPIRITED AWAY, or the armed conflict in CASTLE IN THE SKY. The world in this film is a loving world, all the way down to a remarkable creature that is a cross between Lewis Carroll's Cheshire Cat and a school bus (literally).

Miyazaki's animation is truly in a league of its own, and I mean that as strongly as possible. It has been decades since the Disney studios were capable of a fraction of the more challenging sequences that Miyazaki seemingly animates with ease. For instance, the wind and storm the first night the children spend in their new home display effects that Disney hasn't attempted since the more marvelous scenes in BAMBI. The way the wind is portrayed as moving through the tops of the trees, the hint of spraying mist, the manner in which the wind moves like a wave over the grass, the shuttering of the house under the assault of the air, are all things of remarkable artistry. Even more remarkable is that after this brief display of mastery, Miyazaki doesn't feel the need to build a huge storm with rain and lightening, but has the wind subside and give way to brilliant white clouds sailing across a moonlit and starry black sky.

Of all Miyazaki's extraordinary gifts as an animator and a storyteller, his greatest virtue might be his patience, and this is something he holds in common with many of the Japanese animators. American animated films are almost always frenetic affairs, in a great rush to fill the screen with activity, and in a hurry to get to the next part of the story. American animated films seem to be more interested in where they are going than in how they are getting there, while for Miyazaki the journey is the far more important part of the film. Certainly one reason for this is the distrust of the American film industry of the patience of the viewers, as if they are in abject terror of small children squirming in their seats if the story doesn't get a move on. Miyazaki, on the other hand, respects his viewers, and is confident that they won't give up on a film simply because the story moves at a steady pace. In MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO, one of the sisters will begin to enter a room, look from one side to the other, take a step, look around again, and gradually and slowly discover what is inside. In many American films, a child would simply explode into the room and that would be it. As a result, every moment of the film becomes a discovery of marvelous and wonderful things.

I would say that this is a very special film by a very special filmmaker, except for the fact that for Hayao Miyazaki special seems to be the norm.

This is an excellent childhood story unrivaled by any since "Peter Pan". The plot involves Satsuke, a girl on the cusp of womanhood, moving into the country with her father and younger sister Mei, where she discovers a child's realm of wonder and make-believe running in parallel to the adults' mundane everyday existence. The family's rickety cottage is filled with easily frightened dust bunnies, and deep within the tangle of roots and branches, in a safe hiding place only a child can access, Totoro, a benign forest creature, makes its lair.

The story is a real jewel, simply, elegantly told. The art is of extremely high quality, excellently detailed, bright and clean. The characters are especially well-depicted, complete with expressive body language and realistically animated. In part because of the excellent dub, they are all sympathetic and deeply human, instantly recognizable as real people around us.

Especially evocative is the portrayal of the children's make-believe world, full of things and places that are there only if you believe in them, like the giant Totoro and his entourage of two tiny, roly-poly furballs, and the magnificent "cat-bus" with great shining eyes and two mice announcing the next stop the exact place you want to go.

A fantastic, enchanting examination of a child's mentality, that is also a mainstay family film.

Buy My Neighbor Totoro (1988) Now

As parents, we've been buying lot of Disney animated movies for our kids (9 and 2 year old). Then one day we saw this cute litle creature on the cover of this Japanese video cover, I decided to buy it and what an investment that was. From that momemnt on we fell in love with every single charecter of the movie, yes, there is no need for a villain in this movie, no bad guys, and the movie still great, Disney should take note of this. Totoro came into our family life such as a fresh breeze and gave us a total new look on kid's movie, more magical than any Disneyesque stuffs we saw in the past. The story was so original, the rural Japan backgound and the school scene reminded me Viet Nam of my youth ( yes , Viet Nam, when there was no fighting nearby). I wept when the kids cried and laughed throghuout the movie, specially my 2 year old. She must watch it every night before she can sleep.

Read Best Reviews of My Neighbor Totoro (1988) Here

What more can be said about MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO? Get this movie. Immediately. Without a doubt one of the best animated features ever made, Japan or otherwise, TOTORO is an outstanding original creation from Hayao Miyazaki and Studio Ghibli.

It's about two sisters -Satsuki and spunky little Mei -moving with their somewhat scatterbrained but loving father to a new home in the Japanese countryside. But the place isn't just deserted; wonders galore lie within their household. Tiny, fuzzy black balls of soot ("dust bunnies", or "soot gremlins", depending on which dub you watch) scatter every nook and cranny of the walls, frightened away only by laughter. A tall, luscious camphor tree towers above the other trees in the back yard. And, lastly, the Totoros themselves, absolutely adorable little creatures who look like a cross between a raccoon, rabbit, owl, and guinea pig (a personal bias here, since I used to own one who reminds me so much of the Totoros here), live in this very forest, carrying acorns, making huge trees grow at night, and playing ocarinas on the branches of the trees. There is even one really BIG Totoro who sleeps under the tree, so cuddlesome and gentle that you'll swear that he's the equivalent of your pet. Of course, he doesn't just allow Mei to snuggle on his chest. He lets out thunderous roars, shake the ground by jumping with full force, grins as wide as a Cheshire cat (albeit with warmth and generosity), helps others when they're in trouble, and gives acorns wrapped in bamboo leaves in return for gifts.

The story isn't all hearts and flowers, however. An emotionally charged subplot involving the sisters' ailing mother (shades of Miyazaki's personal life here) gives TOTORO a dramatic edge. This is particularly evident in the third act, when the girls receive a distressing telegram about their mother. Both Satsuki and Mei are extremely traumatized by this as any real child would be if such a situation occurred in their lifetime. What follows is a tearjerking sequence that builds to a truly happy ending. This mixture of real-life situations, emotions, and magical discoveries found in your nearest back yard make TOTORO feel authentic (even with its fantasy elements). One cannot help but find this quality in any of Miyazaki's films, this one included.

MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO was not a box office success in either Japan or America, but the film has won over millions of children around the world as well as animation buffs for its gorgeous animation style; the backgrounds are lavishly detailed and imagination is galore in much of the sequences. (It was KIKI'S DELIVERY SERVICE that would catapult Miyazaki's animation company, Studio Ghibli, into box office success status.)

The movie was originally dubbed into English by Carl Macek and his infamous company, Streamline Pictures in 1993. Believe it or not, this was one of the "best" dubs they've ever produced, with everyone involved, particularly Lisa Michelson and Cheryl Chase as Satsuki and Mei, turning in very fine performances. As Disney has acquired the rights for Ghibli's movies, though, it was inevitable that they would produce their own version. Many longtime fans of the former version were furious, declaring that the Disney version is an abomination of something from their childhood. However, I beg to differ. As someone who fell in love with TOTORO with the Mecak version, I have to say that this new Disney production is entertaining in its own right. The script is a fresh new translation from the original Japanese (clarifying the origin of Totoro's name), and remains faithful to the meaning of Miyazaki's screenplay, despite a few line changes here and there (nothing major, though).

At first, I was a little worried about hearing Dakota and Elle Fanning as Satsuki and Mei, but both ended up captivating me from the start; personally, I think it was great for Disney to cast two actual sisters to play the young girls--it helps their chemistry come alive. The other actors, including a warm, understated Tim Daly, and delightful Lea Salonga provide similarly top quality work. My favorite performances? Pat Carroll, displaying maternal charm and whimsy as Granny (not sounding anything like her most-famous role, Ursula from THE LITTLE MERMAID), and Frank Welker, who does outstanding vocal foley for both Totoro and the Cat Bus.

Probably the only (minor) false note of Disney's dub is in the handling of the opening and ending songs. The translated lyrics are the same as in the FOX version, but the singer is different. Unlike the warm tones of the nameless singer who delivered "Hey Let's Go" and the showclosing "Totoro", respectively, these songs are instead handled by one Sonya Isaacs. Her voice is competent enough and she hits high notes appropriately, but her approach to the opening song has more of a "gung-ho" attitude and as such, is a bit less charming. She does fare a little better in the ending song, particularly in the bits that she harmonizes parts of the last couple of verses. One other difference is that the songs sound more crisper and vibrant in the new dub but come across as somewhat scratchy-sounding in the older one. So, basically, there are pros and cons to both versions: one is more soothing but more "old" in terms of clarity, while the other offers technical improvements but not so much on the singing end.

Otherwise, however, there really aren't any major quibbles I can find with Disney's dub of MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO. There is no denying that the FOX dub is a classic of its time, but the newer reinterpretation is by no means a disservice. While the arguments over which version is superior may rage on until the very bitter end, it's obvious that the creators of both dubs are fans of Miyazaki, and it shows in both takes. Each takes their own approach to the story, and are neither better nor worse. They simply are what they are.

FOX's initial release of MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO was a pan & scan DVD which contains only the Streamline dub and zero extras. The first two-disc DVD set from Disney provided a widescreen presentation of the film as well as the original Japanese language track. So in a way, it seems curious that a *third* DVD release is planned. What really makes it worthwhile are the extras on the second disc--this is the most that TOTORO has ever had in any of its DVD incarnations. Of course, if you already own either DVD release, then this newest edition may not be necessary.

Either way, however, MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO is far from just another kid's story. With a little bit of luck, grown-ups (and those who consider themselves too "sophisticated" for cartoons) will enjoy it too.

Want My Neighbor Totoro (1988) Discount?

Japanese animated feature about two young girls who meet a supernatural creature, or spirit, named "Totoro." Director Miyazaki's talents shine in this movie with beautiful animation and simple pleasures. The story is set in the late 1950's when a college professor moves to the country with his two daughters who are approximately five and eight years of age. The family is happy for the most part, but their mother is confined to a hospital for an illness not identified in the story. The girls are enchanted with their new home, an old spacious house situated in the country, surrounded by farms and forests. Unusual events begin to take place with mysterious little creatures running around the house and strange winds and noises outside the house at night. Eventually the girls discover Totoro, a large mythical creature who looks like a cross between a bear and rabbit; he's big! Mei, the youngest of the two girls, meets him first and she's the one who names him "Totoro." Satsuki, the older sister, meets Totoro later in the film while waiting for her father at a lonely bus-stop during an evening rainstorm, which is probably the most enjoyable scene in the movie. With Totoro are his two little brothers, miniature versions of himself, and a giant cat who looks like a bus. Totoro and the giant Catbus come to the rescue when Mei is lost in the country after running off in anguish to look for her mother at the hospital, and Satsuki is in dispair trying to find her sister. The story is simple and it's enchanting.

Save 12% Off

Holy Rollers (2010)

In truth, I had never heard of the picture "Holy Rollers" but the idea of Jesse Eisenberg as a Hasidic Jew who becomes entrenched in a drug mule operation held an undeniable appeal. And this film is one of those undiscovered little gems--it may not rock your world, but it's a solidly constructed character study based on a real world case. Funny, moving, and suspenseful--I quite enjoyed this film. The depiction of Eisenberg's orthodox upbringing is well served, but his decision to color outside the lines is also believably demonstrated. As he is seduced to the dark side, the transition is well wrought. In fact, I think this is one of Eisenberg's most well rounded performances--one that uses his offbeat mannerisms to good affect.

The story, in and of itself, is undeniably fascinating--it documents a ring of Ecstasy smugglers in the late nineties who transported their wares internationally using the least likely suspects. Justin Bartha colorfully portrays the neighborhood bad boy who eschews the conventional expectations of the Hasidic community. Eisenberg is his neighbor and friend who becomes a bit disillusioned as his life does not seem to be going precisely as planned. When Bartha proposes an opportunity for Eisenberg to score some cash for traveling to Amsterdam, he is reluctant. But after an initial foray into this new venture, he begins to embrace it more and more. The corruption of innocence and the seduction of power are primary themes in this tale of lawlessness. But how far is he willing to go? And is there any way out?

A taut and succinct screenplay maintains the film's momentum as Eisenberg rises in importance. The movie does a great job documenting the real danger of the enterprise and undeniable allure it holds for our young protagonist. Wrestling the classic demons of evil versus good, Eisenberg relates the moral and ethical dilemma with precision. But Bartha also steals just about every scene he's in! Clearly on a path to destruction, he nevertheless maintains a charisma and likability that keeps the film grounded. The film doesn't provide an easy out and everyone must face the consequences of their choices. "Holy Rollers" is quite entertaining and an easy recommendation, but beware of the hyperbole of one critic that is printed on the DVD. Comparing this to "Scarface" or "The Godfather" will set unreasonable expectations. It shares some of the same basic themes, but this small and understated film is much more specific in its tone and modest in its goals! KGHarris, 3/11.

Save 25% Off

Quiz Show

This looks vastly better than the USA letterboxed DVD which was overexposed, shaky, and washed out. The picture is very sharp, bright, steady, and clear with deep blacks and rich but subdued colors. English 5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio and closed captions. Several dubs and subtitle options. Not a lot of extras no commentary track, just the teaser, trailer, and short featurette. The picture was restored and remastered very recently, this Blu-ray was released in early February 2013. The movie looks brand new with no dirt or film damage. Very light grain.

You can get this well under $30 with shipping on eBay from Australian sellers (click on Worldwide under Item Location when doing a search). Delivery took less than two weeks to USA.

Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus & 30,000 Leagues Under the Sea (2010)

I got this because I saw Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus on tv a while ago and had a great time with my friend watching it. It's one of those movies that is so bad you can't hate it. We were laughing the whole time and really this is one of our favorite movies now. This was cheaper with the 30,000 Leagues Under the Sea than the movie itself, so I bought this to save a few dollars. I honestly have not watched the other movie yet so I cannot say how great or how bad that one is. But the price was hard to beat.

People who read books should not watch movies. There will never be any similarity between them. Does that make them bad? Verne's book "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is boring compared to any film made about it...except maybe ones with Doug McClure. 30,000 Leagues is clearly deeper than 20,000 Leagues but that doesn't make for a deeper film. This movie made me feel like I was in the first grade playing, "What's wrong with this picture?" It was fun and the only way to watch this film and enjoy it.

The first question I had to raise (having served on a nuclear sub) was when did they start allowing women to serve on subs? The answer I got from Wiki was December 2011...meaning it hasn't happened yet and certainly didn't happen in 2007 when this film was made. Okay, but it made for a more interesting film. Now the enlisted people had dark black background petty officer patches sewn to their left arm on their light blue shirt. The background on the patch is supposed to be the same color as the uniform. The woman appears to have a steel workers insignia, i.e. a construction rating and not an engineering or electrical type rating as one might expect. The male petty officer appears to have a discontinued (as of 2006) photographer's mate insignia. This is a special sub and would be considered a re-enlistment bonus for top first class petty officers in the engineering field, not a second class photographer's mate. Natalie Stone as Lieutenant Commander Lucille Conciel has her oak insignia on the right lapel only. The captain had his birds on both lapels and Lorenzo Lamas as Lieutenant Michael Arronax had his Lt. bars on one lapel and a chief petty officers anchor on the other. You got to ask yourself what did they do? Go to an army-navy store and buy a handful of stuff and tried to make it work? Of course they are going to try to rescue a sub that is stuck on the bottom (in tact?) at 20,000 feet that was taken down by a giant squid. In the following scene Lamas "corrects" his lapel insignias by eliminating the chief's anchor and replacing his double Lt. bars with a single silver Lt. junior grade bars. Did he get busted in those 2 minutes?

As their small sub descends they can look out into the ocean fairly clearly and see all kinds of things growing from the ocean floor. This is wrong on so many levels. 1) They don't have viewing window or screen doors on subs. 2)If they did it would be too dark to see much of anything 3) They are diving near the Marianas Trench. They wouldn't see the ocean flora even if they had a window with visibility.

As the small Aquanaut descends it shakes as if it is falling apart. The reason given is because they are going through thermal layers which rocks the boat. Hmmm. Actually submarines operate in those thermal layers because it makes it harder to be detected. And was that flames underwater?

The movie is fun as Asylum films demonstrate they know nothing about the Navy. Why do they insist on making ocean films? The only fun in watching this film is finding the errors. Captain Nemo was played bad. Natalie Stone look as if she was playing Casey Anthony on trial with the way she had her hair.

No f-bombs, sex, or nudity. Frequent "Asylum actress", Kim Little looks cute in a pony tail and that is about as sexy as it gets.

This review is for: "Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus"

The title should say, "Don't expect much." I expected a bad script, bad acting, bad science, and bad special effects. In that regard I wasn't disappointed. If you decide to turn it off after a giant shark jumps out of the water and takes a jet out of the sky, wait. We later find out they can travel 500 knots, but have trouble catching a nuclear sub doing less than say, 40 knots. No wait. These nuclear subs have something called "emergency turbos" so maybe they can go faster. Sailors on nuclear subs don't carry handguns. Really. Who would they shoot underwater? At one point they flash the locations of the recent attacks. Nearly all were in the Pacific ocean as expected. There were 3 in the Atlantic. As Sarah Palin might tweet, "WTF?" These creatures for some unexplained reason are impervious to conventional weapons so the military led by our secret government kidnaps three scientists to employ them for information on how to kill them. They get right on the task by mixing water tainted with various vegetable dies. We discover red water added to blue water makes purple water and that blonds love Japanese men who try to act like Sulu as much as Orientals love blonds. After a romp in a closet, they figure out they can lure the creatures into certain ports (San Francisco and Tokoyo) which have a natural shelf and then trap them. The idea being they can get in, but somehow they can't get out, unless they catch a ride with a plane flying overhead. They then manufacture a phermone of an extinct animal for which they would normally have no idea where to start. We know they are successful because when they mix two liquids together it turns florescent green and Debbie Gibson smiles.

At one point Japanese and American subs are in the same area. All the American subs are destroyed but one. The Japanese civilian scientist asks, which one is it, as Debbie or now Deborah Gibson is on one of them. The captain says, "No way of telling." After making subs (this film and Moby Dick) do all kinds of things beyond any smidgeon of realism, they claim they "can't tell." Really they can tell. Each sub has its own unique underwater signature.

Movie drops f-bomb once, no nudity, no sex scenes.

The creatures look very artificial. But what did you expect? If you enjoy getting stoned and watching "Lost in Space" episode , give this one 5 stars. Great two-fer Asylum price.

Buy Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus & 30,000 Leagues Under the Sea (2010) Now

Most things I Review I say yep or nope. So I'm short about 19 0r so words for your review.

Read Best Reviews of Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus & 30,000 Leagues Under the Sea (2010) Here

A Very cheap and Perfect way to waste 3 hours. Double Lorenzo Lamas (Snakeater Series), enough said. Check out Raptor Island as well, if your into nonsense.

Want Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus & 30,000 Leagues Under the Sea (2010) Discount?

Okay, the internet hype of MSVGO was palpable and I'm glad the movie lived up to the hype. It was great b-grade fun, and I even felt had the film been made in the 80s, children of the nineties would have gotten an animated version of the show (of course, without the sex) to educate children about the ocean and the lifeforms in it that would be a great spin-off for The Asylum should they ever decide to do something like that.

The film reuses shots so many times it's practically made with a drinking game in the script. It's so much fun because it's so ridiculous.

30,000 leagues reuses ship shots from MSVGO (or is it the other way round?) and is quite boring. It's actually not terrible; the pacing is the only thing that really lets it down. Other than that it's pretty damn fun.

I recommend to b-movie fans for sure!

Save 60% Off