The Red Shoes (The Criterion Collection) (1948)

Many of Powell and Pressburger's films explore the life of the artist and the power of the artistic imagination. In THE RED SHOES and PEEPING TOM, most notably, the writer-directors reveal the sacrifices that art sometimes demands from its acolytes.

Balletophiles often praise THE RED SHOES, but one need not be a fan of ballet to be amazed by the film's emotional power and extraordinary staging. On the Criterion DVD, the saturated reds that represent the artist's blood sacrifice, and the cool aqua-blues that represent the (false) promise of life and romance outside of art, appear with unmatched vividness. Powell is a master of color, and has influenced a generation of filmmakers (through the advocacy of his admirer Martin Scorcese) with his theories about how color and music contribute to the thematic impact of a film.

Anton Walbrook, who plays the impressario Lermontov in THE RED SHOES, is one of Powell and Pressburger's favorite actors, appearing to stunning effect in THE LIFE AND DEATH OF COLONEL BLIMP as well. Moira Shearer, the actress/dancer who plays the lead, made her reputation on THE RED SHOES. She also dances in one segment of the rarely-seen Powell/Pressburger masterpiece THE TALES OF HOFFMAN.

The Criterion DVD has the beautiful sound and picture we've come to expect from the Voyager Company. Interesting disc features include: an audio track of Jeremy Irons reading from the original Hans Christian Anderson fairy tale, the complete text of Powell and Pressburger's novelization of the movie, an extensive collection of Scorcese's memorabilia, and a comparison of the Red Shoes Ballet with the filmed storyboard sketches the directors used as a guide. One wonderful addition for Powell and Pressburger fans is their filmography -brief descriptions with cast lists and dates for all their films, most of which also have film clips included. It's a chance to see scenes from some of the long-lost works in their catalogue.

I've seen the original film of "The Red Shoes" a number of times over the years and just loved it. The story, ballet, music, color, actors, and the whole production are superb!

Later I acquired the RCA SelectaVision CED video disc edition (two parts) in the early 1980s. The CED issue unfortunately was prone to frame skipping, occasionally syncopating the ballet sequences. Still later, I obtained the Paramount VHS hi-fi release (1987). There was no frame skipping with the VHS tape, but the tops of all the frames tended to be somewhat bent and fluttery. Alas, I found no remedies for these problems.

Without question, this DVD release is the best of the lot, technically. And, I liked the additional background material contributed to this DVD edition. The DVD has great color with clear, well focused images. The only deficiency, in my opinion, is the movie sound track which sounds dated (1947), however it's on par or better than the forementioned VHS release.

Overall, I would class this DVD movie as one I would have to take, along with others, to a desert island on which I subsequently became marooned.

Buy The Red Shoes (The Criterion Collection) (1948) Now

This is a magnificent movie, one of the most voluptuous ever filmed (in Technicolor), one of the most influential, and one of the most satisfyingly melodramatic. Every bit of it works. At the most simplistic, it's a fairy tale, Hans Christian Andersen's The Red Shoes, that takes place in a ballet, which is repeated in real life.

At the heart of the movie is Boris Lermontov (Anton Walbrook), the imperious impresario of The Ballet Lermontov. He can be cold, charming, ruthless. At a party he says, "If some fat harriden is going to sing, I must go. I can't stand amateurs." He's enigmatic except for his dedication to ballet. At that same party he meets Victoria Page (Moira Shearer), a young ballet dancer, and is intrigued by her.

"Why do you want to dance?" he asks her.

"Why do you want to live?"

"I don't know exactly why, but I must," he says.

"That's my answer, too."

He brings her into his ballet company and also hires Julian Craster, a young composer. Later, with three weeks to create a ballet, he has Craster compose the music to the story of The Red Shoes. Victoria Page will dance it. It is a triumph, but Page leaves the Ballet Lermontov to marry Craster. Lermontov is outraged and swears he'll never see her again. She needs to dance, though, and Lermontov slowly realizes he wants her back, completely dedicated to dancing, because he can make her a great dancer. He subtly woos her back to dance the ballet again, with tragic results.

The ballet of the red shoes is the story of a young girl, engaged to be married who loves to dance and longs to go the village fair. She spies a pair of red dancing shoes in the window of a shoemaker. Despite the reluctance of her fiance, she dons the shoes and begins to dance. She has a joyous time. As she tires, however, the shoes won't let her stop dancing and she can't take them off. She dances until she dies.

The movie works so well on so many levels. Anton Walbrook is marvelous. He can be cold and demanding and devious as Lermontov, but he conveys exactly Lermontov's utter dedication. At the end of the movie when Lermontov, alone on the stage, announces to the audience Victoria Page's death in a strangled kind of breaking screech...well, you'll sit up straight. Moira Shearer, who was in fact a young ballet dancer at Sadlers' Wells and had to be coaxed to take the role, is a gorgeous creature and a first-rate dancer. She carries off the acting requirements very well. With her flaming red hair, she is just a wonder to look at and appreciate.

And then there is The Red Shoes Ballet itself. This was the first time a movie's story line was interrupted for an extended dance piece. The music by Brian Easdale is so memorable that I doubt anyone who hears it will forget the main theme. Powell directed the ballet as a surreal fantasy. It starts on the stage of the theater, then shifts to a stage that was never built in a real theater, then shifts into pure cinema. After The Red Shoes, other musicals suddenly had to have ballets -An American in Paris, Singin' in the Rain, and on and on -but none has ever been better than this.

The Red Shoes is a magnificent movie. It deservedly remains one of Powell's and Pressburger's great accomplishments.

The Criterion edition is just about flawless with true color and great clarity. The commentary that accompanies the movie is fascinating.

Read Best Reviews of The Red Shoes (The Criterion Collection) (1948) Here

The Red Shoes was one of the best ventures by The Archers, the joint production company by Briton Michael Powell and Hungarian emigre to Britain Emeric Pressburger, considered to be the definitive film marrying ballet and cinema.

The story of the Red Shoes by Hans Christian Andersen forms the basis for the story of aspiring dancer Victoria Page, aspiring composer Julian Crasster, and ballet company impresario Boris Lermontov, who takes on the latter two under his wing. Crasster's involvement begins when portions of his work Hearts Of Fire is appropriated in a ballet, and he's given the job of orchestra coach, when he confronts Lermontov. Page comes to the attention of the maestro when the latter snubs an offer by the girl's aristocratic aunt to see her dance. To the Russian, ballet is more than poetry and motion, but his religion, and hence, not an audition. He tries her out at a separate audition, where she makes the final cut.

Lermonotov decides to stage his next ballet based on Andersen's tale, with Victoria as the principle (Victoria Principle? just kidding) and Crassner as the composer. The ballet is a hit, for Lermontov and the whole film, as it's the highlight of the entire movie, with Victoria's flaming red hair a marked contrast to her pale skin and outfit, the ruby red shoes forming a near-symmetry, as they are on her toes. The choreography as well as the music is masterful. Despite Lermonotov and Crassner's insistence that "the music is all that matters," for us the film viewer, it's also the colours and dancing that do as well. Indeed, though the cinematography missed an Oscar, the score and art-direction/set decoration did not.

However, as demonstrated by the departure of his previous star, Irina Boronskaya due to marriage, the authoritarian Lermontov takes this personally, almost a heresy to his religion of ballet. To him, a dancer relies on the doubtful comfort of human love. Once that doubt is removed, goodbye dancing shoes, tights, exercise bar, hello high heels, stockings, and kitchen. He is determined to make Page a master dancer, and anything that comes in the way, he sees as a detriment to himself.

As for the original story, it's of a girl who puts on a pair of enchanted red shoes that keep on dancing even when the girl doesn't want to. This movie is a reinterpretation of it, where the ballet soon turns to real life.

This was Moira Shearer's debut film, and first of only six movies, and the young Scot creates a vivid but fragile and fairylike Victoria, aspiring dancer, the subject of her Svengali-like mentor, and emotionally tortured between being a dancer and a housewife. As she did ballet from age six, an ideal choice. And Ludmilla Tcherina, who plays Irina and who just recently died, was a former prima ballerina of the Monte Carlo ballet, so another great choice. And admire or hate his petty authoritarian personality, Anton Walbrook's powerful personality drives the movie. But Leonide Massine as the flamboyant, camp dancing coach Grigori Lyubov steals the show. Shearer, Massine, and the two directors would be reunited in The Tales Of Hoffman.

A visual triumph in the dancing scenes, as is the foreign location footage. Oh, and the Archers team wasn't the only one inspired by Andersen's tale, as Kate Bush created a reinterpretation of it in her The Line, Curve, and Cross short film.

Want The Red Shoes (The Criterion Collection) (1948) Discount?

The 1948 classic film starring Moira Shearer (herself a professional ballerina) is no only an enjoyable semi-realistic fantasy film, in much the same lines as say The Wizard Of Oz, but a brilliant film technically to look at. It's drawn from the dark fairy tale by Hans Christian Anderson (responsible for such stories as The Little Mermaid), in which a young girl is forced to wear red shoes with a will of their own. The poor girl dances until she dies. The concept is taken to a late 40's England, where the aspiring ballerina Victoria Page seeks to dance in the prestigious company headed by the eccentric, perfectionist and intensely driven impresario Lentmontov. The story provides the audience with a glimpse of dance rehearsals, theatrical life both pre-performance and during, the charm of the glamourosu life ballerinas are said to enjoy. But in reality, it is a study on obscession, the demand for virtuouso performance and the conflict between love of one's career and romantic love. Victoria Page is herself doomed to dance to her death when she is torn between her duty to Lentmontov and her love for his musical composer and choreographer. This movie is excellent for ballet fans, and for stage magic fansthe Ballet of the Red Shoes is the most striking moment in the film, an original ballet set against surreal, nightmarish backgrounds of carnivals, ballrooms and ghostly netherworlds where neon lights change colors in blinding and dizzying speed and danced to jazzy 40's music. The film is sure to impress adults (I disagree that it is for children due to the drama of the whole thing), and it is marvelously shot in Paris, London and Monte Carlo. A film like this does'nt come often.

Save 7% Off

Rambo (Extended Cut) (2010)

Well I must admit I had to have this, cos let's face it, it's Rambo. I'm a huge fan of the original trilogy and was a huge fan of Stallone's recent revival of the character in 'John Rambo' which i thought was a raw and gritty supercharged action film yet with depth of character and story that easily surpassed any of it's disposable contemporaries. Make no bones about it; "the expendables" sticker on the front the "expendables" trailer; the trailers of films from all of the actors in the "expendables" this is a pure money making and marketing combo to tie in with the release of Sly's latest actioner. BUT, I have to say, what whilst expecting nothing more than the all new "Rambo to hell and back" production diaries special feature, and maybe a couple of extended scenes in the movie, I was actually really surprised at just how different this new cut of the film is.

This is not just the theatrical cut with a couple of extra bits, this is a true director's cut style extended edition with a completely re-edited opening, many extended takes, many alternate takes, and whole new extra scenes that all blend seemlessly to really compliment and add much to the film. A lot of this really helps to elaborate the story, and really flesh out character and themes that whilst hinted at in the original, were never really fully explored. When Rambo says in the original "no, what you're trying to do is change what is", and Sara asks him "and what is?"; he just says "go home". I always used to wonder, "yeah, what is??". Well, a whole knew alternate take here reveals all, and also a few real home truths about his real feelings about war and regret. And that's not all, you find out so much more about the characters, their relationships, motivation, and so many tiny insertions of lines here and there, very subtle shot changes, alternate dialog, black and white flashbacks, that it's almost an entirely new take on the film. It's all great stuff!

A word of warning tho, there do appear to be a few cuts and alterations to some of the more violent and extreme/controversial scences. Some of these bits are alternate takes (when the main bad guy leader takes delivery of the young village boy for example), but others are just plain removed, or cut short. The child being stabbed in the attack on the village is missing, the guy flying though the air with both legs blown off is cut short, the bearded mercenary stabbing the solider under the hut is removed, and a few other bits that seemed slightly shortened. I should add that these alterations are VERY few, I probably counted 5 or 6, and doubt that this was a censorship issue as the majority of the blood soaked limb exploding violence is completely intact. I'd imagine this was purely a directorial/artistic decision, (a lot of the excised scenes were digital effects, some of which don't stand up quite as effectively as others). Something to bear in mind though before you buy!

The stunning MPEG 4 AVC encoded 1080p picture and 7.1 dts hd master audio remain, giving an blu-ray experience of reference quality, just like the original lionsgate release. People may hesitate to buy this, thinking that they're not really getting much for their money, but trust me this is FAR from a lazy release to steal your money, this is a superb director's cut edition that totally delivers. Also, for any foreign buyers, the blu ray is officially ABC encoded, so it will play on any blu ray player. Enjoy an all new Rambo!

I must admit, that as of recent I have enjoyed current mainstream movies regardless if they are released to the theater or directly to video so I can abase them. In other words, I truly find pleasure in ripping movies apart. It has been my perception, my perception, that about 70% of movies made in the past 5 to 6 years are horrid.

One might ask why I feel this way, well it is rather simple. Most movies are a plug in for a new phone, car or maybe to promote a soundtrack. These movies also rely more on special effects and visual stimulation, where acting, directing and story take the backseat. Therefore, movies (for the most part) in modern times are nothing more than a 90 to 100 minute commercial.

Then of course there are the movies that are so over the top they are just down right silly. This is the perception I had when I saw the trailer for "Rambo" (it was titled "John Rambo" when I first viewed it on the internet). I thought, "What the hell is Stallone thinking"? I didn't see the most recent "Rocky", but I heard it wasn't any good. I didn't really care too much about the quality of a new "Rocky" movie, but I felt like there was nothing else to do and all doors were closed when "Rocky 5" was made. Why was Stallone going back to Rocky? Was there a point to it? Now he is going to make another Rambo movie, why? Both these characters whose names start with "R" make a return after not being seen for almost 20 years?

I digress to the trailer for Rambo I saw on the internet. I was laughing so hard I couldn't take it. The way this movie was presented was comical. I had said to my brother and some friends, "I can't wait to see this movie, I need a good laugh". Then the day came, it was a work night (the same as a school night, but you go to work early the next day instead of school) and I went to a 9:40pm showing with my brother and two of our friends. I was so pumped and all four of us were ready to laugh very hard. As a side note, this is the first time I had been in a movie theater to watch a new release in a very long time.

We watched and we absorbed this movie and when the end credits rolled and the lights came back on in the theater we were speechless. I thought this was the first wonderful and moving film I had seen in a long time. (So did everyone else in my view party.) I couldn't believe it. I have seen all the other Rambo films and yes they were entertaining, but I wouldn't say they were deep or compelling pieces of cinema. This new Rambo movie had something to say.

It followed a different format, it seemed more dramatic and the violence (there was plenty of it) was brutal and candid. When I say candid, I mean that many of things that happened in this movie, happens in the real world.

The plot of this film is rather simple, Rambo now lives in Southeastern Asia near Burma and some American humanitarians need a guide and ride by boat to provide health care, food and education to the poor people in the area. They find John Rambo and after some persuasions from a female team member (Julie Benz) Rambo signs on.

Consequently, there is a large militant and fundamental group that has nothing better to do than torture and massacre the less fortunate people in their country. It doesn't take a wizard to figure out what happens next, Rambo, guns, violence, death, and blah, blah, blah. However, the violence doesn't seem to be moot or without justification if that makes sense. The best comparison I can make is to "Saving Private Ryan", the violence in that film was graphic and at times over the top, but made a point to portray the reality that was World War 2. "Rambo" has the exact type of feel to it with respect to violence being graphic, over the top and making a point. Mind you I am not saying that "Rambo is a better film or as good as "Saving Private Ryan", but it was used more as a frame of reference. Oddly enough, "Saving Private Ryan" came out in 1998 and "Rambo" came out ten years later (2008), perhaps in 2018 there will be another violent film with a message.

Stallone did a good job too in this film he gave a rather minimal performance, not much dialogue but did display a level of dichotomy towards his emotions to events in the plot. I felt the story was also simplistic, but it worked, the movie didn't need a multi-leveled storyline. I also felt the direction of the film was very good too; by the way Sly wrote and directed this movie.

"Rambo" was a motion picture that stirred myriad thoughts in my head when it was over. It made me think how revolting and disgusting it is that there are still countries in the world that can't get health care or are being "controlled" and/or restricted to certain living conditions by a dictatorship or totalitarian government that results to violence or casualties of human lives. It also made me think how insane it is that U.S. presidential candidates are able to raise thousands, if not millions, of dollars for their campaigns, but when they get into office, it then becomes difficult to "raise" money for the things they promised before they were the incumbent. Then I thought about how everyone wants to go "green" and save the environment, yet it costs more money and there is less tax breaks to "go green". Not to mention Earth Day is only one day a year, rather than year long recognition. What about relying on fossil fuel when there are other forms of fuel for our cars/machines? Or that many people are more up to date with Reality Television than what is going on in the world.

In conclusion, I am not sure this was Sylvester Stallone's intention to stir the pot of modern social sciences or in my case promote schizophrenia when making this movie. However, I felt this film didn't pull any punches and says a lot about the world we live in, on many levels. I recommend this film to anyone who wants an eye opening experience. This is a lot coming from a person who thought this movie was going to be the number one unintentional comedy of 2008 and now believes it was one of the best movies made in a very long time.

Sly, I commend you.

Buy Rambo (Extended Cut) (2010) Now

Of all the Rambo movies this one is the best. The most violent, brutal stunning movie I have ever seen. Emotionally draining story of some do gooders that want to take medicine and help to a group of poor opressed people in Burma. They are under control of the brutal military that wants no one to hear this story let alone help these people. The do gooders talk Rambo into taking them up river to the settlement. He is reluctant to take them but the woman with the group talks him into taking them. Of course they are taken by the military and most everyone in the village is slaughtered. Someone from back home comes looking for them when they never return home. Rambo takes a band of merceneries to the settlement to bring them back. The do-gooders are held captive and tortured. It's nonstop heartpounding action after Rambo gets there.

Iv'e never seen anything like the violence in this movie. It's incredible.

It's filmed in Burma and the cinemaphotography is outstanding. Beautiful scenery. Good use of light and dark and camera angles. Very well done.

Be prepared for the violence because it is extreme. What's shown in this movie is going on there as I speak. We don't hear the story in the media. Stallone made this movie with Burmese people as actors and they were all at risk making this movie. Stallone still has it at 61 years.

If you don't like Rambo then don't bother. Otherwise it's highly entertaining!

Steve

Read Best Reviews of Rambo (Extended Cut) (2010) Here

Ignore the fact that this is a Rambo movie and some have the audacity to say that Stallone is past his prime. This Rambo movie is not only the best in the Rambo series, but it's also one of the best action movies of all time.

Did you think that Commando had a lot of killing? BAH!

Did you think that Saving Private Ryan had the most gruesome injuries? Hardly.

This movie is saturated with arms being cut off, legs exploding into bloody stumps, heads popping like over-inflated balloons, and enough gun-play to satisfy even the most hardcore, extremist gun-enthusiast. If it isn't an arrow evenly dividing a man's skull, or someone's intestines being spilled on the ground, then it's an extreme amount of people being sawed in half by high calibre machine gun fire. There's even a crazy-intense seen in which Rambo basically pulls off the throat removal move from Roadhouse, only with a little slower satisfaction to it. About the only thing lacking is a Colombian necktie.

The story itself plays second-fiddle to the incredible amount of action. A church-group from Colorado is doing peacework in Burma, bringing medicine and religion to people oppressed by a militaristic regime intent on genocide. To make their way into hostile territory, the church-goers ask for Rambo's services as a river guide. At first he is hesitant, but the kind-hearted but deadly Rambo eventually consents.

Sure enough, after Rambo drops them off for their jungle-trek to the villagers, the church-group gets caught in the middle of chaos, as the evil military members are senselessly slaughtering every villager in sight. Once they are captured, it's up to Rambo to save the day.

The rest of the movie is a whirlwind of action, as Rambo leads in a hardened group of mercenaries for an extraction mission. They plan on sneaking into the compound, killing anything and anyone that gets in their way, and saving the prisoners. What transpires is carnage the likes of which I have never seen before.

This version of Rambo is an incredible movie if you're looking for pure action and entertainment from beginning to end. I haven't been more entertained by a movie in a very long time.

Want Rambo (Extended Cut) (2010) Discount?

The box cover says Rambo, but the title for the extended cut has been restored to the original JOHN RAMBO title.

The four-movie BluRay Box Set DOES NOT include the extended John Rambo.

Basically Stallone added nine minutes back into the movie, and most of it is dialog INCLUDING the Rocky Balboa style monologues.

There's a quick new scene on the boat in the beginning with the snakes.

Rambo has a big monologue along the same lines of Rocky's speech to his son in Rocky Balboa. It's in the rain when he's convinced to take the boat up river.

There's more dialog on the boat while he's taking the missionaries.

The pastor has more lines when he comes to get Rambo.

Going back to watch the theatrical cut makes it seem like an edited for TV version where they had to cut out big story bits. The extended cut feels more like an end for Rambo along the lines of Rocky Balboa, and restoring the John Rambo title makes sense.

Save 47% Off

Modern Times (The Criterion Collection) (1905)

MODERN TIMES opens with its credits being printed out over a close-up image of a clock ticking interminably forward. The film's first real shot is of mindless sheep being herded through gates, which fades into an image of factory employees exiting a subway stop on their way to work. Looking at this from a modern standpoint, one can only think that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

This is a film that I can watch over and over again. It's not just that it's an incredibly funny film. It's not just that its satire of modernization and industrialization still rings true today. It's that each aspect of the filmmaking pulls together to form something greater than each individual part. The story ranges from big topics concerning the Great Depression and dehumanization, while successfully balancing that with the small love story between the tramp and the gamin. In a theme that would be revisited even more powerfully in LIMELIGHT, the two characters need each other, depend on each other and simply have no reason to exist without the other. The comedy tickles while the tragedy touches. No other director in film history managed to find that equilibrium with such skill.

This is rightly hailed as the last great silent movie, albeit one made several years after sound has become the norm. I still get a kick out of the fact that the only intelligible voices come solely from machines. Chaplin is making a silent film using sound technology, meaning he has the option to take the best of the both worlds. His next film, THE GREAT DICTATOR, wouldn't quite get this mixture right, but it's a success here. The film can go for several minutes at a time with no meaningful talking or sound effects, and then suddenly jump into an unexpected gag involving voice. The mixture of sound and silent set pieces was inevitable at this point in film history, but I've never seen it pulled off as well as Chaplin does it here.

While disc one contains the film itself in beautifully restored condition, the second DVD is full of extras. Most important is the "Chaplin Today -Modern Times" documentary. This is more or less structured around two French directors (Luc and Jean-Pierre Dardenne) discussing the film. Absolutely fascinating stuff. They analyze the film's jokes, its metaphors and its themes. They talk about everything from the number of frames per second shot to the number of gags that revolve around food. Also included in the documentary is some footage of Chaplin meeting Gandhi. I have nothing to add; I just had to mention it.

Chaplin's nonsense song, the tune he sings at the end of the film in faux Italian, is the subject of two extras. The first is an extended version, featuring a final verse that never made it to the final edit. The second is a Karaoke version of the song (I'm not making this up). And speaking of Chaplin's music, there's an excerpt from 1950s TV of Liberace himself (of all people) performing "Smile" -the theme from MODERN TIMES. Great rendition of a great song.

There's also a short (ten minute) documentary from 1967 called "Por primera vez" ("For The First Time") in which peasants in a tiny village in Cuba are shown a movie for the first time. It's a fascinating look at what film means to people who have never actually watched one before. The reason for its inclusion on this DVD is that the film in question is, of course, MODERN TIMES. It may be an odd choice for their first film experience given that the story of a factory worker undergoing a nervous breakdown may not be something that relates well to people who rarely even see automobiles. But the villagers laugh at the right places and seem genuinely enthused. The documentary is well worth watching and will fascinate anyone with an interest in the societal ramifications of film.

The picture restoration on the main feature is also fabulous. The image has never looked crisper. While this is nominally a silent movie, the original release did feature a synchronized soundtrack of sound effects and Chaplin's musical score (which means, unlike other "silent" DVD releases, we connoisseurs don't have to argue about whether this particular sound track is wonderful and totally keeping in the spirit of what would have been played at the time, or a complete outrage that should result in everyone responsible being shot). The sound quality is excellent, bringing one of my favorite film soundtracks to life superbly.

If I was going to recommend one Chaplin movie to someone, I think I'd have to choose this one. It has two major things going for it. It's a great film, but it's also extremely representative of his body of work. It has comedy, it has pathos, it features the tramp, it has a message. And it's also one of the most influential movies that Chaplin ever made. Everyone, from film to television (remember Lucille Ball working at the candy factory?), has either made reference to MODERN TIMES, or just plain stolen some of its gags. The image of Charlie being dragged into the heart of the gears and cogs of a giant unfathomable machine is familiar to even those people who haven't seen the movie. If you like this film, then you should already own this release. And if you haven't seen it before, then this is absolutely worth a gander. You'll be surprised at just how modern and fresh this classic movie is.

Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times is one of my favourite films and arguably one of the best films ever made. The movie remains incredibly funny while also managing to be a significant artistic achievement in cinema design and social commentary. For Chaplin fans, it marks the last appearance of his "little tramp" character and, not coincidentally, his last film without full synchronized sound. The film does include music, sound effects, and the occasional voice, including a segment at the end where we get to hear the tramp sing a short nonsense song. However, as a film released 10 years into the sound movie era, the film is also something of an enigma. It presents perhaps the most famous silent film character in a film that purports to be silent, yet it features futuristic factory machinery (reminiscent of Metropolis) and large close-circuit flat screen video displays that would have looked almost like science fiction back in the 1930's.

This new Blu-ray release from Criterion continues their standard of releasing historically important films with significant audio/video remastering and a variety of enticing special features. However, in this case, Criterion is competing with an already excellent release of this film on DVD from Warner/mk2 in 2003. The new Criterion release mentions that the "new" transfer was created in collaboration with Cineteca di Bologna, who were also credited with the previous Warner/mk2 release. I am not sure if this release actually includes a new transfer or just an upgrade of the existing one to 2K-resolution for Blu-ray. I performed a side-by-side comparison of both versions, and the Criterion Blu-ray version contained noticeably better detail and superior contrast. However, it also contained a great deal more digital grain that I found a little distracting at first. This can easily be seen in the opening frames where the clock face that seemed so steady on the old DVD version now has a multitude of dancing pixels that give it a strange shimmering quality. As the film progressed, I became accustomed to the new graininess of the image and began to appreciate the increased detail. For the first time, I could see some of the horizontal wires used to secretly operate the "feeding machine" in the second chapter. Chaplin's face also looked a little older throughout. The old Warner/mk2 DVD version looked softer and textures, including faces, had a much smoother feel to them. I did notice some extra grit and fibres showing near the edges of the frame in the Criterion version that were absent from the Warner/mk2 DVD, so this does suggest that the transfer or at least processing of the transfer is different. Overall, I preferred the more detailed Criterion version but still think that a better compromise between the two could be reached with some more processing and cleanup of artefacts done to the Criterion version.

Sound quality for both versions was similar with a slight nod going to the lossless Criterion mono version. The old DVD also includes a Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack absent from the Criterion version. This is not really worth the effort for a film with 1936 sound technology.

As far as special features go, the Criterion version really shines. It adds a new and informative commentary by Chaplin biographer, David Robinson. The old DVD included only a six-minute introduction by Robinson. Other features from the old DVD are also carried through to the Criterion Blu-ray. These include the 26-minute "Chaplin Today Modern Times" featurette, two deleted scenes of very minor importance, some theatrical trailers, and a 10-minute Cuban documentary about peasants seeing Modern Times as their first movie experience. The old DVD includes some additional materials that are not included on the new Blu-ray such as photo/poster galleries, plus some vintage featurettes from the US government and Ford motor company related to assembly line labour, and a performance of "Smile" by Liberace. None of these is a major loss.

New to the Criterion version are two excellent "visual essays" which are essentially a series of stills (many from the galleries on the old DVD) with substantial and informative commentaries by two Chaplin historians related to the making of the film and the locations used. There is also a very interesting new featurette about the visual and sound effects used in the film. It includes some fascinating explanations of effect shots presented in the film, although their very detailed explanation of a glass matte shot used in the roller skating scene does not seem to take into account that the camera moves during the sequence.

Also included is a very interesting interview with music arranger, David Raskin, taken from an old Laserdisc version of the film. I was glad to be able to see this again. Finally, an old Chaplin short, "The Rink", and a home movie with Alistair Cooke, "All at Sea", are included. These are available elsewhere but are presented here in superior quality (the former) or with an additional interview (the latter) not available elsewhere.

Criterion also includes a nice 36-page black and white printed booklet with chapter stops, cast and credits, plus two informative historical essays.

Overall, I think this is a nice package. The film presentation is more detailed than it has ever been in any previous release, although some additional digital manipulation of the picture and cleanup of artefacts would be welcomed by my eyes. The bonus features are extensive and interesting, although I would like to have seen more of the image galleries (including stills, script elements, publicity and financial material) that have been included, albeit at much lower resolution, on previous DVD and Laserdisc versions. My only gripe with the bonus materials is that both on disk and in print they refer to poor or at least "diminished" box office performance of the film because it did not have full sound. All vintage box office information I have seen related to the film indicate that it was one of the top five grossing films of the year. Then or now, it is a fun ride.

Buy Modern Times (The Criterion Collection) (1905) Now

The more I watch it, the more I feel that Charlie Chaplin's sublime silent MODERN TIMES (1936) is his finest film. THE GOLD RUSH (1925) is too desolate for my tastes, and CITY LIGHTS (1931) does not have the exquisite Paulette Goddard (then Chaplin's wife) as leading lady. MODERN TIMES is more episodic than other Chaplin features--six or seven one reel comedies strung together for 83 minutes. There are two incomparable segments set in a dehumanizing factory (in this silent film, the boss speaks over surveillance photography)--Chaplin gets caught inside the gears of a machine, while much later his boss, Chester Conklin from the Keystone Kops, has the same thing happen during lunch hour. It is hysterical to see Chaplin feed lunch to the upside down head of Conklin inside the machine. It is also pricelessly funny when Charlie is guinea pig for a new mechanized lunch demonstration that fails miserably.

Meanwhile, out along the waterfront (location work was done at San Pedro harbor), an indomitable Paulette Goddard watches as her father is killed by a mob, feeds bananas to children, and is helped by Chaplin out of a robbery of food when she is starving. The scenes with Goddard are heartbreakingly lovely, while Charlie is having a great time in prison--no work to do and free food! "Can't I please stay longer?" he asks the warden on a title card as he is being paroled. He will get his wish when he inadvertently becomes the leader of a labor rally waving a red Communist flag.

Eventually, Chaplin and Goddard set up housekeeping together in a waterfront shack. She tags along when he gets a job as an all night watchman in a department store. Paulette tries on a fur coat and goes to sleep on a bed up on the fourth or fifth floor. Charlie will wake her before the store opens. But first she watches aghast as he roller skates blindfolded, oblivious to a giant hole in the store four or five stories deep! Then while Paulette sleeps, Charlie tries to be a good security guard on the first floor. There is a story robbery, but one of the criminals recognizes an old pal from prison so they leave Charlie alone. He gets drunk on a barrel of booze, then eventually falls asleep in the lingerie department under a pile of clothes. Unemployment again in the morning.

Finally, Charlie tries his hand, with major coaching from Goddard, as a combination waiter and singer in a fancy restaurant. This is the very first time the Little Tramp talks in movies, singing a gibberish song. But Charlie quits the job when Paulette is arrested for vagrancy. Eluding the police, the two of them head off into a sunrise and bright new future in one of the loveliest endings in all of modern movie history for me. Chaplin's swansong to The Little Tramp forever. Movie comedies just don't get much better than this Depression era gem.

I have MODERN TIMES as part of the two-disk Chaplin Collection authorized by the Chaplin Estate. It looks and sounds like a million bucks, but curiously seems to have been trimmed by a few minutes from the 87 minute original. (All of the Chaplins seem slightly trimmed--for heaven's sake, why?) Disk two bonuses that will take you a good two hours to see--thus a full evening for everything--include a 30 minute chat with two Belgium filmmakers analyzing the movie as they watch it, deleted scenes, the nightclub gibberish song done as Karaoke to try and understand what on earth Chaplin is singing, the classic theme song "Smile" sung by Liberace, a Cuban village seeing their very first movie (MODERN TIMES) with great excitement, U.S. Labor shorts (which I could not get sound on), and a huge 250 stills production gallery.

MODERN TIMES is, quite simply, one of the great comedies of all time and, arguably, Chaplin's most sublime masterpiece. It is sold individually, as a double bill with CITY LIGHTS, as part of one of two Chaplin archives boxed sets, and probably rentable from Netflicks. With so many wonderful Harold Lloyd silent comedies now available in restored 35mm archive prints, along with the same for Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin is getting ignored again. Do watch MODERN TIMES to see the great Charlie at his greatest. Or near greatest.

Read Best Reviews of Modern Times (The Criterion Collection) (1905) Here

It helps that Modern Times is one of Chaplin's best films, period, running a close second behind City Lights (I hope that's next on the re-release list). And happily, unlike The Gold Rush, which was ruined by awful sound choices, the Modern Times DVD offers a clean transfer of the film with all the beloved original elements intact as far as I could see and hear, plus a host of extras.

The film itself is the most briskly paced of Chaplin's feature-length films. And his writing is sharp, unhindered by the sermonizing which permeates his last works. The dilemma facing our Little Tramp this time is something all of us can relate to: For the first time, we see him thinking ahead, wanting to have a future, to form a family, and working towards that end. Chaplin's physical-comedy skills are at their peak: Witness the extended takes of the rollerskate scene, and the factory assembly line. Even if the 18fps (sometimes 16fps) film speed made everything look faster than it really was, it's still impressive physical co-ordination requiring flawless execution, since Chaplin rarely edits using coverage.

In Modern Times we see one of the first truly well-rounded Chaplin heroines. The radiant Paulette Goddard was Chaplin's best leading lady, her high spirits and lively presence being a much better foil for Chaplin than the starry-eyed icons of perfection that were Georgia Hale, Edna Purviance, or Virginia Cherrill. She just has more star quality and brings a quirkier, more animated personality to Chaplin's films, balancing them nicely.

And the gags -some of the best in the Chaplin canon. The eating machine always has me rolling on the floor; the nonsense song is terrific (the DVD offers a "karaoke" version which, though a novelty, does tell us finally what the lyrics actually are); and all the machine gags are fast-moving gems.

The bonus materials include a long outtake and several documentaries. "Chaplin Today" features guests Luc and Jean-Pierre Dardenne, the French filmmakers behind the film Rosetta, and though their film-historian banter is not entirely to my taste, they do bring up some insights that I hadn't observed about Modern Times.

In all, a great release, and a great DVD to have for movie nights. It's a wonderful presentation of a comedy classic.

Want Modern Times (The Criterion Collection) (1905) Discount?

Modern Times is among the Best 100 American movies of all time (#81), and it is among the Best 1000 Movies on DVD by Peter Travers. I rate this movie 5 stars or 9 over 10. This movie is timeless, a masterpiece, a pleasure to watch and watch over and over again. It was the last silent movie Chaplin did and the last to feature the Little Tramp (beautiful ending with the two lovers walking arm and arm into a sunset.) The theme of the movie is how technology alienates the human being. Accidentally converted into a working class hero, Chaplin spends some time in jail, where he'd like to stay forever. There we watch one of the funniest scenes of the movie, the lunch with some "white powder". I couldn't stop laughing! In the times of the Great Depression, Chaplin portraits the unemployed and the hunger. Trying to find a steady job, he ends up in a Caffe where he waits on tables and sings. Yes! He does. The nonsense song (with Chaplin original voice in there) stands as one of the best moments in movie history. I can't quit this song off of my mind ... Paulette Goddard, Chaplin's wife at the time, appears here in what's considered her best and liveliest leading lady. This DVD is beautifully repackaged for the Chaplin Collection (a wonderful collection, thanks Warner!) It includes an all-new digital transfer and a soundtrack remastered in Dolby Digital 5.1 as well as original mono. The second DVD comes full loaded with many speacial features, like a documentary about "Chaplin today", deleted scenes, an introduction by Chaplin biographer David Robinson, a Karaoke of the nonsense song, the wonderful song Smile, sung by Liberace, a Behind the Scenes in the Machine Age 42 minutes documentary, and lots of more extras!

I recommend this DVD to everybody, you will not be disapointed, and I would say it's a MUST for movie collectors. A classic, a masterpiece, a timeless movie!

P.S. If you like my review vote YES. You can read all my other reviews if you wish to. I modestly write them to help people form an opinion about movies, music and books, but if nobody reads them (if you don't vote I do not know if you did) there is no point in writing them

Save 31% Off

The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (Criterion Collection) (1943)

How wonderful it is to have this unique movie beautifully restored to its original length and scene order by the British Film Institute.

Until about ten years ago, I had never seen this film. I had never rented the cut, reconfigured tape, because I didn't think I'd like the film (in any form). But the L.A. County Museum of Art had an Archers' retrospective several years ago that included the BFI restoration print. Despite many of there pictures being among my favorites, I still thought I was in for a hoary WW II propaganda film. I could walk if I didn't like it.

Was I ever wrong. I came out considering it among The Archers best works. which in my book, means one of the finest films ever.

"The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp," in the original version, is a brilliant mix of WW II propaganda, an often whimisical loving satire of the system. It is ultimately one of the most winning anti-war films ever. In a different way, as good as "Grand Illusion."

This low-key epic begins with the Boer War, when Blimp is a young (too) gung-ho officer to the time the film was made--mid-war 1943. The cast is superb. Roger Livesey gives one of the best performances imaginable. Deborah Kerr (18) at the time, gives a tour-de-force performance as the three different women Blimp falls for in the 40-year span of the film. Anton Walbrook Is so brilliant in this film. This man I am now convinced was one of the greatest actors of the 20th Century. His controversial character is a German officer Blimp befriends in the Boer War and they become life-time friends, with Blimp vouching for him being permitted to stay in England during WW II. Walbrook's scene explaining why he has left Germany is as great, if not greater than his curtain speech in "Red Shoes." Most other actors would have turned this into maudlin sentimentality. Walbrook instead gave me a giant lump in my throat. I don't lump easily.

If you've never seen the complete, uncut and untampered with film and are Archers devotee, this is the version for you.

The extras are uniformly fine. The commentary track with Martin Scorsesse and director Michael Powell, from a recording he made on first viewing the restored film, is sharp and perceptive. He sounds very old and can be hard to understand because of it, but it is worth the extra effort to hear him comment on one of his personal favorites.

There is also an excellent half-hour or so documentary, that includes Emeric Pressburger's grandson, that helps explain why and how the film was tampered with and almost never seen as a result of Prime Minister Winston Churchill trying to ban it. No luck in England. J. Arthur Rank released it in his English theatres and advertised "See The Banned Film." And it was a huge hit. The "banned" got the initial audiences in, word-of-mouth made it the movie too see. Winnie also failed in his attempts to stop exportation to other countries.

One of the most intelligent, witty,serious, breathtakingingly beautiful Technicolor films ever released.

Get this Criterion treasure now. It also includes several Colonel Blimp "original" editorial cartoons, by Blimp creator David Low. Some are timely today and could run with the names changed to suit today's political and military madness. The editorial cartoons were a revelation to me.

Archer Fans, order now and have a really complete collection of these unique gems.

The chap from England, below, is absolutey, right.

This is the best film by the best chroniclers of english life. I put this review on the American site because I feel the need to evangelise! Emeric Pressburger was an Hungarian refugee, and put much of his experience into the mouth of Theo, the sympathetic German character (in 1943! No wonder Churchill wanted it banned without seeing it). The film has three sections, set in 1902, 1918 and ww2. It shows the friendship between the title character, Clive Wynne Candy, and Theo Kretchsmar-Shuldorf. It's also a love story, with Deborah Kerr as three identical looking women. Most of all it's a requiem for a lost golden age, and a call to arms to defeat Nazism. The best set pieces are given to Theo (Anton Walbrook) a German refugee actor, emphasising that this is not a conflict between two equal and honourable countries, but between good and between evil, and this time, if good loses, there is no return match.This propaganda is 60 years old, but every time I watch it by the end I'm ready to sign up.

Buy The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (Criterion Collection) (1943) Now

This and "A Matter of Life and Death" are Powell & Presberger's masterpieces, before they descended into the schmalz of "The Red Shoes". The tale of the essentially decent British and German gentlemen, played by Roger Livesey and Anton Walbrook respectively, rapidly becoming dinosaurs in the changing Europe between the Boer War and the Blitz, yet clinging to their values despite being kicked in the face by the brutalisation of Germany and by the consequent brutalisation of a Britain attempting to survive against barbarism. Their friendship begins from the mutual respect engendered by a duel fought reluctantly for the honour of their respective traditions at the time of the Boer War. During convalescence they vie for the hand of Deborah Kerr, turning up in the first of 3 roles. Livesey's shyness leaves Walbrook holding the field. Nearly 20 years pass until they meet again, at a POW camp in Britain. Livesey's essential naivete rides roughshod over the wartime enmity, but Walbrook's response is ambivalent, and the reunion is short-lived and bittersweet. Livesey marries Deborah Kerr's reincarnation as a nurse, because of a resemlance to his first love. A further 20 years pass. Livesey, widowed, is asked to act as sponsor for Walbrook, now exiled from Germany, also widowed and estranged from his Nazi children. Together they come to terms with their sidelining in a world of younger men with few of the old values. Deborah Kerr turns up for the third time as Livesey's driver as he moves from army officer to Home Guard organiser,refusing to be pushed out of the fight. In appearance Livesey's character assumes the appearaqnce of David Low's cartoon Colonel Blimp, but underneath he is more rounded; decent,generous to and loyal to friends, slow to denegrate his foes and totally patriotic, but finally nobody's fool. John Laurie appears in a delicious cameo as Livesey's batman/manservant, crusty but loyal. His boss may occasionally infuriate and perlex, but Laurie recognises the basic decency, as, finally, all do who come into contact with him. It may be propaganda, but it is still magnificent.

Read Best Reviews of The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (Criterion Collection) (1943) Here

I found "The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp" to be a haunting story, rich in story and superbly acted. I found the film to be a very private experience one that you will be thinking about for a long time.

I really can't add anything to the comments made before other than to say that this is the type of film that makes Criterion a special mark. I would question many of their choices, films are available in other formats and of questionable importance (e.g. "Armageddon", "The Royal Tennanbaums" and "The Rock"). "The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp" probably would have been lost forever (or show up as a $...DVD on a "Bargains" rack) without the work put in by Criterion and the "legitimacy" conferred on it by being recognized by the brand.

myke

Want The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (Criterion Collection) (1943) Discount?

This amazing saga--even more amazing, considering that it was filmed during World War II in England, is a tantalizing tale of a man's whole life--from youth to old age--and his loves, all of whom turn out to be played by the marvelous Deborah Kerr. The restoration is up to Criterion's high standards and the Technicolor is delicious. For fun and a look into our past, watch this movie.

Being John Malkovich (1999)

Don't get me wrongI loved American Beauty. I was shocked by The Sixth Sense. I was moved by Magnolia. But for me, the movie in 1999 that made me sit back and say "wow" was Being John Malkovich.

I am sure you know the plot, and words wouldn't help to describe how original (and ingenious) it is. The film works on so many levelsit is a screwball comedy, an existential discussion of the nature of existence, a study of sexual identity, and a satire of the modern desire to "escape" from life. On top of all of that, it is darn entertaining to watch!

The characters (played to perfection but Cusack, Diaz, Keener, and Malkovich himself) are all well-drawn, and the actors do a fantastic jobwait until you see Diaz, unrecognizable in frizzy hair and frumpy dress.

The directing is top notch as well. Spike Jonze (of Three Kings fame) has made a wise choicehe recognizes the script is the star and has directed a film without any flashy camera work, which would detract from the real focal point. That is not to say the work is pedestrianhe did everything that had to be done to make the film, and he did it well (note his Oscar nod for best director).

The production design is a big star here as well. The 7 1/2 floor is almost "Gilliam-esque"in fact, when I first saw the preview I assumed it was Terry Gilliam's (Brazil, 12 Monkeys) newest film.

The best word to describe this film is "giddy." I saw that because that is what I brought away from itI felt giddy watching it, and you can teel the cast and crew felt the same making it. The best thing I have read about the film was from a rejection letter from another studio, which neglected to option the screenplay: "I'm sure Being John Malkovich would be regarded as a work of genius on whatever planet it was written." If that doesn't make you want to see the thing, nothing will.

"Well, there's this guy...." That's all that some viewers could really come up with when asked to describe "Being John Malkovich", the latest film starring Cameron Diaz, Catherine Keener and John Cusack. Oh...and John Malkovich is in it, too. This movie is so original, I can't even begin to explain this movie, other than that it was intelligent, fascinating, and hilarious. Because of the originality, it is completely unpredictable: you are so completely in the dark trying to guess what is going to happen next, that you end up not even bothering to guess-which makes a great movie-going experience.

Cusack plays Craig Schwartz, a puppeteer who believes he is not just a puppeteer, but an artist. Diaz, in a wig that makes her nearly unrecognizable, plays Schwartz' animal-loving wife, Lotte. Cusack, upon the realization that he might not make it as a puppeteer, decides to get a day job, at a place on the seventh and half floor of a New York skyscraper. It is here at this odd office floor, that Cusack stumbles upon a portal to John Malkovich's brain-where he is allowed to experience what it is like to be a celebrity for 15 minutes, and then be spit out somewhere outside the New Jersey turnpike. Hilarity ensues, and metaphysical questions are asked.

This movie is like a dream-and not in the sense that it's an incredibly great movie, although it is. It's like a dream because of the way that the logic is formatted. Things that have seemingly little significance, have a large significance by the movie's end. We are whisked away from plotline to plotline, that soon the rhythm of the rapidfire plot becomes catchy. Things that would not make sense in most movies makes complete sense here. Being John Malkovich's intentional irrationality make this a dadaistic masterpiece, a trend that I am unsure if I would want duplicated, because perhaps then motion pictures would become a medium for the insane.

The writer, Charlie Kaufmann, is quoted as saying that he wrote it not thinking that it would ever turn into a film. In response, John Malkovich said that only a writer who did not think that their script could become a film would write such a script. I'd have an inclination to agree with Malkovich, unless it has become hip to produce scripts that are risky, odd, and seemingly drug-induced. This may well be the one movie that you should see this year. Josh Bob says check it out. Five stars.

Buy Being John Malkovich (1999) Now

In case, you don't know, that's a line from an Oingo Boingo song.

Being John Malkovich is a movie about people. John Cusack is an unemployed puppeteer who gets a new job in a very peculiar place: the 7 & 1/2 floor of an office building. He soon discovers a tunnel into the mind of movie star John Malkovich.

That's the plot at it's most basic. Trying to summarize this movie is like trying to explain what color looks like to a blind man. It is a shockingly original, amazing film. It was truly robbed of an Oscar for best original screenplay: while American Beauty was good, it wasn't as good as Malkovich and not nearly as original.

The direction by Spike Jonze is strange and surreal. There aren't a lot of bright colors or beautiful shots, but the movie really draws you in with it's dark, strange atmosphere. As I said before, the screenplay is utterly brilliant. The movie kind of reminds me of Terry Gilliam's Brazil only it's not nearly as maddening to watch.

The performances are quite good, but really do serve the story. No one stands out in this movie. Not even Malkovich. One note: if you don't pay attention, the plot may confuse you a bit.

Being John Malkovich is a very rare kind of movie indeed: one that is stunningly original and incredibly well-done. Truly a must-see.

Read Best Reviews of Being John Malkovich (1999) Here

Being John Malkovich is one of the most thematically ambitious films of the 1990's. It delves figuratively and literally into the weaknesses and complexities of the human psyche through the self-revealing and often comical actions of the main characters. Through bizarre situations, a subtle but emotional soundtrack, and a tiny portal on the 7 1/2 floor of an office building, Malkovich investigates the multi-faceted aspects of human beings, and the troubles they face in trying to find themselves.

Each character in this film is aware, sometimes painfully aware, of his or her identity, and the extremes that they reach in trying to change, control, and manipulate their identities suggest that consciousness is perhaps more trouble than it's worth. Craig Schwartz, played by John Cusack, is a talented puppeteer, and therefore a master at adopting multiple personalities, but until he finds a real person to imitate, he remains in his workshop, alone and unsatisfied with his life. That is, until he meets the magnetic Maxine, who's confidence and boldness enchants Craig for the entirety of the movie.

It seems logical to assume that if Craig is unhappy with his identity, then he could be happier if he wasn't aware of himself at all. As Craig says, "Consciousness is a terrible curse I think; I feel; I suffer." Once Craig discovers the Malkovich portal in his office, people start lining up, literally, to partake in the life-altering experience; everyone, that is, except Maxine. Not once does she reveal the slightest interest in going through the portal. Maxine is comfortable in her own skin a quality which Craig, and pretty much everyone who meets her, greatly admires but it is not a comfort that comes from being ignorant of her own identity. Maxine is very aware of the power of self-assurance, a power which she uses to influence Craig, his wife Lotte, and Malkovich himself. While Craig proves that consciousness coupled with insecurity result in depression and desperation, Maxine exists at the opposite end of the spectrum, mixing consciousness with greed, and resulting in manipulation and callousness.

John Malkovich further reinforces the idea the consciousness kills; that "ignorance is bliss." Before he discovers Maxine's true intentions, he is blissful and carefree, with a strong acting career and a hot new girlfriend. But once he finds out, he becomes paranoid, frantic, and untrusting. When he consults his friend Charlie Sheen for advice, Charlie says, perhaps more revealingly than intended, "The truth is for suckers, Johnny boy." Indeed, it is Malkovich's conscience that steals his happiness.

If you've ever wanted to be someone else, or at least wondered what it would be like, then Being John Malkovich is a must see. A wry comedy that makes you think; an intellectual adventure that makes you laugh -Being John Malkovich is a non-oppressive, insightful, and captivating glance into the deepest of human desires and insecurities.

Want Being John Malkovich (1999) Discount?

One of the best films of the past decade is now available in a packed DVD that contains tons more than merely what the description states. I picked it up a week early and was so happy to see a beautiful animorphic image that presents the film exactly as I remember it on the big screen (for once, unlike "Eyes Wide Shut"), great digital sound, plus documentries on the real puppet master who performed for the movie, the 7th 1/2 floor docu and the Malkovich T.V. special in their entierty, the preview and tv spots, plus, and best of all, the hilarious "An Intimate Portrait of the Art of Backround Driving" and a Spike Jonze interview that defies description. A great special edition that doesn't overdo it, the best since the Criterion edition of "Rushmore."

Save 56% Off

Dave (2012)

This movie is one of those gems that quietly grows on you -each viewing creating anticipation and appreciation for its wit and style. The casting is superb. Kevin Kline doesn't know how to give a bad performance. Frank Langella's brilliant characterization of the ambitious, power-hungry 'man behind the throne' is perfect, and a wonderful contrast to his long-ago role as the cad/seducer in Diary of a Mad Housewife.

This is definitely a movie to buy because it needs to be seen many times. The innumerable funny pearls in this movie alone are worth the price of the DVD. For Minnesotans, one of the slyest gags was Dave's gig early in the moview, imitating the President at the grand opening of Durenberger Motors in his home town. The movie was released around the time that David Durenberger (Minnesota's senior senator) was embroiled in an ethics scandal. A personal favorite moment was the scene where Dave (with the help of his accountant buddy played by Charles Grodin) pares the federal budget to save a homeless shelter for children -the cabinet members bemusedly participating just like a family sitting around the kitchen table wrestling with its own budget. Priceless.

How do you solve a potentially explosive scandal, solve all the world's problems, and get rid of the greed and corruption in the White House? Well, you make an affable liberal actor take the President's place of course!

Kevin Kline plays Dave, an affable temp agency owner who on his off-time likes to do small event impersonations of the President. As for his luck, he strikes an uncanny resemblance, a la the Prince and the Pauper, and is found by the Secret Service to be an ideal candidate for a decoy body while the President is off doing... confidential things.

However, when the real President has a stroke, his advisors don't want to set off a national emergency... especially with a liberal vice-president around to think about. Thus they move Dave in a la The Hudsucker Proxy as the new President... but of course, Dave has a warm heart and an inspiration to try his hardest at everything he does, so... he goes at his job with the energy, charisma, and skill that everyone wants from the most powerful man in the world, even warming the angry scowl off of Susan Sarandon's face!

Of course like most cathartic entertainment like this, it's not so much about the actual presenting of ideas on how to solve all the problems (some hints on where to start are made), but more a vehicle for opening up the minds of the audience to the possibility of TRYING to make the world a better place. You can't get answers from it, but dreams, so dream hard. Don't worry, Ving Rhames will grow to like you.

The true entertainment from this comes from Kline. His acting is wonderfully physical and involved, and bleeds a sincerity to the common man, the salt of the Earth, that keeps the audience cheering for him the entire way.

--PolarisDiB

Buy Dave (2012) Now

Though this film was directed by Ivan Reitman, it's the screenwriter's picture all the way. Gary Ross has made his reputation spinning stories of innocents caught up in the world of the not-so-innocent--or vice versa. With Big, starring Tom Hanks, it was a 12-year old magically transformed into a 30 year old man, contending with the world of grownups. In his latest film, Pleasantville, it's two hip, decidedly uninnocent teenagers zoomed into the innocent world of a typical 50s TV show.

In this, his middle film, it's the owner of a copy shop, Dave, called on to impersonate the president--a high strung cad who's just suffered a heart attack. Dave is a heck of a lot more innocent than most guys his age. Divorced, he busies himself with his work and sports, always hoping to meet the right woman.

What's groovy about this film is that it's a hip, comic American remake of the great Akira Kurosawa's Kagemusha. In that film--a powerful drama with no comedy at all--a grievously ill warlord tells his vassals to find a man who resembles him as closely as possible so the warlord can instruct the other man in the ways of ruling a region; if his subjects see him alive and healthy, they'll be reassured and spies from enemy regions will know he's still a force to be reckoned with.

The vassals find a commoner whose resemblance to the warlord is so striking, there's no one else who could do the job. He's told exactly what to do, how to stand, sit, and do all the other stuff a warlord should. The same happens in Dave--he learns what to do from the evil Frank Langella, the White House press secretary. As Dave, Kevin Kline strikes the perfect balance of innocence and determination to right the wrongs so clearly in evidence. And Sigourney Weaver does a more than credible job as the first lady who's charmed by this knowledgeable innocent.

Also here are Ben Kingsley as the just as innocent Vice President (contrast this with his absolutely astounding performance in the recent Sexy Beast as a nasty rotten gangster!) and Ving Rhames, always reliable, as the secret service man who's on Dave's side all the way.

Ross is one smart cookie. Taking Kagemusha and updating it to 90s America, mixing it with big dollops of comedy and a poignant love story, was a great idea. This film really works. Take a look at Ross' other films; they're just as great.

Read Best Reviews of Dave (2012) Here

"Dave" was a pleasant enough movie the first time I saw it, in 1993, with the good guys winning, and with superb acting performances by Kevin Kline, Sigourney Weaver, Frank Langella, Ben Kingsley, and particularly Ving Rhames and Kevin Dunn in supporting roles. In a very small role, Charles Grodin does his best work that I've seen him do, and has one of the outstanding lines: "Who DOES these books?" Langella is quite believable as the astute, scheming politico who has never been bested; Dunn develops his character's moral conscience as we watch him on screen; and Rhames balances perfectly his character's initial distrust of the faux-president with his growing admiration of--and loyalty to--the kind of integrity so many of us wish we could find in "the leader of the free world."

When I decided to see it a second time, I viewed it as a movie or literary critic would, and found that it held together structurally, it developed organically, and it balanced some pretty heavy duty themes with good humor and almost-perfect timing. We have nearly worn out the original VHS tape that we bought, watching it whenever we want a "feel-good" movie, especially after seeing or reading about too much national and international news. Each time I watch it, I see more complexity to the character development and to the plot intricacies (which at first seem to be pretty straight-forward but, upon reflection, are not quite so simple).

"Dave" grows on its audience, appealing initially because it does represent what so many Americans would really like our government to be like; but it invites repeated viewing because of its texture, its acting, and so many of its memorable lines. How often, for example, can you imagine laughing at, "I once caught a fish THIIIIIISSSS big!" In the context of this movie, however, it is funny repeatedly while contributing seriously to character development. And how touching is the simple statement near the end of the movie, "I woulda taken a bullet for you," spoken quietly though in turbulent surroundings.

Even the ending, sappy though it may seem to be, holds open a subtle promise for the future when it is viewed in the light of the early political career of the movie's Vice President. "Dave" has risen steadily to become one of my five or six favorite movies, with "8 1/2," "Inherit the Wind," "Rear Window," "Tootsie," and "Blazing Saddles." I heartily recommend it: for a good time, call "Dave." Really.

Want Dave (2012) Discount?

Hollywood has long bashed politicians in its films. Usually, these greasy-palmed lechs are seen as no more than variations of Willy Stark from ALL THE KING'S MEN. But there have been a few notable exceptions: MR. DEEDS GOES TO TOWN, MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON, THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT, and now director Ivan Reitman presents Kevin Kline as the sainted president-imposter of DAVE. The plot is nonsense, of course. Kline is a businessman who bears a stunning resemblance to the real president who unexpectedly suffers a stroke. Frank Langella, who also bears an equally stunning resemblance in both looks and attitude to former Nixon henchman Bob Haldeman, recruits Kline to stand in for the president. Kline's imposture is so convincing that everyone, including the president's wife (Sigourney Weaver), is fooled. Langella sees Kline only as a buffoon, easily manipulated until he is ready to annoint himself as the new president.

The joy of DAVE is watching an updated version of the fish out of water routine. Kline is genuinely funny as he struggles to master the protocol needed to run the free world. What gives DAVE a touching resonance is the subtle transformation of Kline as the admitted fish out of water to a good-hearted human being who slowly realizes that the power of the presidency can do far more for America than merely enrich the one who sits in the Oval Office. Even the burgeoning romance between Kline as the fake president and Weaver who thinks him the real thing is touching. Director Reitman diluted the focus of interest with a deluge of cameos of famous politicians and Hollywood stars, all of whom do little more than add one moment of cheap laughs in a movie that tries hard for serious laughs about serious issues that range from who we are to who we might be. It is the totality of questions about the need to establish our moral center in our rightful identity that makes DAVE such a refreshing breath of air after the thundering blasphemies of that self-appointed crude politico Willy Stark.

Save 30% Off

The Whistleblower (2010)

"The Whistleblower," based on a true story, is a gritty movie about sexual trafficking in Bosnia. Kathryn Bolkovac (Rachel Weisz), a Nebraska cop, is a divorced mom who takes a job with a security contractor for big pay and a short tour in the Balkans. She discovers that ethnic tensions have caused local cops to refuse to investigate domestic violence cases, particularly those involving Muslims. She is promoted and put in charge of gender affairs by a U.N. official (Vanessa Redgrave), but is increasingly frustrated. After building cases against sexual traffickers, she's told they enjoy diplomatic immunity.

Bolkovac is a lone crusader, persuading fearful women to testify against their abusers, bucking diplomatic hypocrisy, and dealing with rampant paranoia. Ms. Weisz heads this topical political thriller, turning in a powerful performance, one of her best. The movie underscores the collateral damage caused by politics and maintaining the delicate balance of world peace, though it's far more compelling as one strong woman's efforts to advocate for those without a voice.

The sole special feature on this release, available in Blu-ray and DVD editions, is a featurette about real-life whistleblower Kathy Bolkovac.

The Whistleblower is not a comfortable film to watch, nor is it supposed to be Rachel Weisz takes on an extremely difficult role here that could have come across as monotone in the hands of someone less capable. I used to think she was a fairly average actress but she's clearly become somebody extremely skilled around challenging material. Some of her final scenes in the film are Oscar-worthy and underscore a number of sickening truths that have been developed throughout the script.

From the first few minutes, it's pretty clear that the story isn't going to have a happy ending and once you see what military contractors and UN officials were conspiring to achieve, it's enough to make you want to write letters to your elected representatives. I haven't read anything to indicate that the situation shown in this film is untrue and it paints an extremely shameful picture of what Westerns organizations were doing while supposedly protecting civilians.

Overall, it's an intelligent and believable political drama with sharp dialog and fast pacing. Be warned that there are a couple of very unpleasant scenes that are necessary to convey the atrocities involved but may be too much for some viewers.

Buy The Whistleblower (2010) Now

THE WHISTLEBLOWER is a film that kicks you in the stomach and then continues to play out the worst possible truths that we'd rather not admit exist. The theme of the film is Human Trafficking, and apparently there are about 2.5 million victims around the world today young people who are sold into sexual slavery for the financial gain of people from all areas of life, including our own government, the International Practices Task Force, and contracted companies supported by the US Government to rebuild who are assigned to third world countries and countries besieged by or recovering from war, and in our own cities in this country. This film is based on a true story, a story written (and discussed in the bonus track on the DVD) by Kathryn Bolkovac who was transferred from her police job in Lincoln, Nebraska to Bosnia (with the promise of $100,000. and a six month term) to monitor the local Sarajevo police and advise them on proper police procedures. Bolkovac's story was written for the screen by Eilis Kirwan and director Larysa Kondracki who also directed the story with stinging reality.

Kathryn Bolkovac (Rachel Weisz) is a recently divorced mother of a young girl who has lost custody of her daughter because of her constant commitment to her job. When she is offered a lot of money and an advancement if she will go to Bosnia on a special assignment she accepts, feeling that if she ha money she can return home to live close to her young daughter. When she arrives in Sarajevo she is treated with distance from the colleagues with whom she will be working. Her first accomplishment is bringing to justice the abuse of a Muslim woman who has been constantly a victim of spousal abuse something not considered a crime until Kathryn proves it in court. She soon discovers that there is a human trafficking problem in Bosnia where young girls are brought into the country, sold as sex slaves to tend to the needs and whims and cruel and often sadistic whims of the IPTF (International Practices Task Force) as well as the US and international soldiers assigned by the UN to cover the recovery of Bosnia. She visits the bars where the girls are kept, finds evidence of physical violence and abuse in the filth of the atrocious living conditions the girls are subjected to, and begins her attempts to save the girls particularly Raya (Roxana Condurache) and Luba (Paula Schramm) whom she promises to protect if they will testify about their conditions. Kathryn seeks solace from a Dutch compatriot boyfriend Jan (Nikolaj Lie Kaas) and takes her case to the UN person in charge (Monica Bellucci) who is a by-the-rules leader and cannot offer help to Kathryn. Kathryn is contacted by Madeleine Rees (Vanessa Redgrave), the High Commissioner for Human Rights who aids her in her plight and puts her in contact with Peter Ward (David Strathairn), in Internal Affairs chief of the UN complex. Kathryn finally discovers that the perpetrators of the human trafficking are the very people with whom she works and she is ultimately fired from her position. But before she leaves she releases the documents she has created that prove the victims of human trafficking are under the direction and service of the employees of the UN in many ways her dangerous mission has been accomplished and the Democra, a security contractor, is exposed.

Rachel Weisz brings a very human quality to her role, making her transformation into a heroine for the abused victims all the more credible. Her performance is outstanding and in the conversation with the real life Kathryn Bolkovac in the bonus feature with the film the manner in which Weisz succeeded in her role is all the more impressive. This is a tough movie to watch, but it is a necessary statement to make the heinous crime of human trafficking more widely known and punished throughout the world. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp, January 12

Read Best Reviews of The Whistleblower (2010) Here

Personally working in Darfur, Southern Sudan, Nuba Mountains, DR Congo, Romania, Moldova, and Peru, I can tell you that I was skeptical of this movie, before I saw it. Kathryn does an amazing job of conveying her and the girls story as well as the larger problem. And, once again, Rachel delivers an unflinching rendition of a heart-breaking, no-win situation. Many would call Kathryn a fool because she was not "successful" in saving the few, however, I know that the price she paid--and continues to pay--renders her life a broken prayer (as in K.D. Langs song, Hallelujah). God bless you both Kathryn and Rachel.

Want The Whistleblower (2010) Discount?

"Humanity, I love you because when you're hard up you pawn your intelligence to buy a drink." E.E. Cummings

'The Whistleblower' did a fine job of focusing attention on the atrocity of sex-trading young women in postwar Bosnia. Even further troubling, for some of us, is the fact that U.N.'Peace Keeping Contractors', another phrase to add to my list of paradoxymorons in this case, were involved. This was an intelligent thriller and Weis was, as usual, extraordinary.

This movie, about the abuse and trivialization of women, provoked an interesting response in me, for sure. But that would be a rant and I will not perpetrate it upon you...

Save 39% Off

Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut (2006)

Having just watched the Richard Donner version of "Superman II" twice (once with his commentary with 'Creative Consultant' Tom Mankiewicz), I can say that I prefer the Donner version, over Richard Lester's...but with reservations.

Other reviewers point out redundancies, over-long scenes, and character development problems in the Donner version, but these aren't really fair arguments; what you see are the basic scenes, originally shot; Donner, himself, admitted that had he continued on the film, he would have had to do reshoots of several key scenes, and, of course, would have been involved in the editing process (which couldn't be accomplished to the same degree, in the 'restored' edition). The 'turning the world back' resolution was intended for "Superman II"; when the Salkinds chose not to end the first film with a cliffhanger ending, Donner shot the Lois 'death' scene, and Supes turns back time to save her...so repeating the same resolution in "Superman II" was simply a case of using the original film conclusion, which Donner would have changed, had he continued with the film.

There are plotholes, and leaps of logic; as the film stands, Luthor is apparently in the Fortress of Solitude when Superman destroys it(!); Clark's 'revenge' against the diner bully makes no sense, since, after winding back time, the original confrontation never took place; indeed, the Jor-El 'farewell' scene would have been unnecessary, as well, insomuch as Supes rewound time back to before he lost and regained his powers. And what ever became of Miss Teschmacher?

All this having been said, there are moments where I think Richard Lester's lack of understanding of Superman and his Universe makes me stand in Donner's corner; he introduced abilities Supes never had (Saran-wrap symbols...what exactly were they supposed to do?...the 'Kiss of Forgetfulness'...turning Metropolis citizens into comic buffoons, during the climactic brawl...the whole British-accented town sequence, when Zod 'introduces' himself to the world). Other critics have panned Brando's 'Jor-El' in the Donner sequel, praising the Salkinds for dropping him, and increasing Susannah York's involvement, but she seems totally out-of-place as the 'final authority' figure in the Lester version. Maybe he was overpriced, but I think Brando was essential, and the film certainly would have been big enough to offset his paycheck.

I think the Donner version has more 'heart', and reverence to Superman, than Lester's broader, more comic 'take'. Even with the abrupt transitions, logic lapses, rough edges, and redundant resolution, a vision of what "might have been" emerges, and it was a pretty terrific film!

I'm really begging with Amazon to not confuse The new Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut, with the original Superman II: Richard Lester version because both of these are completely different films & should be treated as such.

1st thing people who truely think that Richard Lester is a great director & did a great job on SII need a reality check. All he did was take an already great script done by SUPERMAN I creative consultant Tom Mankiewicz, and 70-80% shot by Richard Donner shift around some stuff & make the film (all the actors were there for him, a donkey could have done it).

Lester would also add some unneeded slap stick humor (e.g. Metropolis fight scene where the three super villains use their super breath to blow out the Metropolis civilians where after an unneeded and very cheesey moment of slap stick bad homage to Charlie Chaplin stances take place & the earlier scene of when the supervillains are introduced by duking it out in the American wild west???).

Lester would be found out as a director in the poor Superman III where his slap stick humour would basically ruin the film but not to say his version of Superman II is bad but it just doesn't compare to the brilliance of number 1, especially after repeated watchings II just seems like a poor boys substiute!!

Donner on the other hand had completely different thinking for II it was meant to be on the same epic scale & feeling a I & in quality terms match it if not even better it. Also around 30% of the Lester film uses Donner's footage whilst in the SII:DC it uses around 80% footage & will feel like a completely different film.

Having already seen some of the new scenes, e.g. Lois jumping out of the window of The Daily Planet to proove that Clark is Superman, The fight with The Super Villains over Metropolis, some of the new Brando scenes, & Lois's tearful farewell, it's obvious that this film will be entirely different from the original theatrical realise of SII & should be treated as an entirely different film not put as if it's just a normal directors cut of an already realised film!!!

Please Amazon originally the link was seperate so why change it???

Buy Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut (2006) Now

Don't believe the naysayers. 95% of people like myself who saw the first Superman II, loved it, but had problems with some of the stupid humor, will love this version. Obviously, you can't go back and fix everything. For those who complain about the screen test footage, it's been over 25 years people!!! I for one am absolutely stunned by what was saved and the quality of it. And where there is an opportunity to have an alternate take of the same scene, it's in here. I had heard over 50% of the film would be new. Well, with the alternative takes, it seems like more like 80% of the film is new! And I have gone back and looked at Lester's Superman II again, and there is no comparison. Practically every single dumb humor moment that was in Lester's Superman II has been cut and has been replaced with Brando footage as the film was originally intended. It's like cutting out the Jerry Lewis humor and replacing it with Lawrence Olivier. If you liked the opening ten minute credit sequence of Lester's Superman III, then I guess you might like Lester's version better. But I think for 95% of Superman fans it's not even a debatable subject.

POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT:

I will not mention what new Richard Donner footage there is, (you should enjoy that for the first time yourself) but for those of you who want to know exactly what "dumb humor" or illogical stuff that has been cut from Lester's version that IS NOT in Richard Donner's version, read on below...

Lois' chain-smoking orange juice squeezing scene. Gone!

Zod raising farmer with silver beam from his finger. Gone!

Ursa beating farmer at arm wrestling. Gone!

Almost all jokes relating to Non's dumbness including his inability to use heat vision like the others. Gone!

Lame wise-cracking bell hop at Niagara Falls "have a happy.... whatever" Gone!

Superman steps into molecule chamber with Superman suit on, and exits wearing street clothes? Gone! (Now he enters and exits with street clothes. Some scenes appear to have been reshot with a body double for Reeve.)

During super fight, long extended scene with earthquake going on while Superman and Non fight underground and humans on surface bounce around like bowling pins had been drastically reduced.

During super fight, all jokes relating to villains blowing at humans are gone, (ice cream cone in face, toupee falling off, laughing man falling over in phone booth and continues to talk all gone. The rollerskating backward guy is seen only briefly if you look for him, but he's not at all obvious like before.

Ursa hits Non accidentally with flag pole and kid on street says, "Wow, home run....." Gone!

Three villains each using their silver beams against Superman at the Fortress of Solitude. Gone!

Superman throwing a red "S" at Non at the Fortress of Solitude.. Gone!

Superman playing stupid Krypton "hide and seek" superpower game at Fortress of Solitude with villains. Gone!

There are a few jokes that were cut that could have remained, but after looking at Lester's Superman's II again back-to-back with this new version, like I said, there's no comparison. Buy it now.

Read Best Reviews of Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut (2006) Here

Widely regarded as one of the best superhero sequels ever, director Richard Lester's 'Superman II' had the daunting task of living up to the legacy of the original film, despite having major restrictions placed on it. For instance, Marlon Brando and Gene Hackman were not available for additional scenes, thus much of the film had to be re-cut and Brando had to be removed entirely for legal reasons. Lester had to incorporate footage shot by original director Richard Donner with newly shot scenes, while keeping the tone of the sequel consistent. The end result is a sequel that's almost every bit as good as the film that spawned it. Christopher Reeve even said that this was his favorite of the Superman movies.

In recent years, the revelation of all the behind-the-scenes drama of Donner's dismissal from the franchise has unfairly placed Lester's version in a negative light. Some fans even went as far as to state that the new Superman II-The Richard Donner Cut was the definitive sequel before even having seen it! While which 'Superman II' is superior remains subjective, the simple fact is that the Donner Cut is a close approximation of his original vision rather than a fully realized film, since he had only shot around 70% of the footage. The rest was spliced together from screen tests, new shots using body and voice doubles, and footage from Lester's version. This is not unlike what Richard Lester had to do to finish his sequel. Thus, both films can and must co-exist since there are shared footage and scenes unique to each version that simply work better. For instance, terrorists hijacking the Eiffel Tower is simply more of a job for Superman than Lois jumping out a window. Consequently, Donner's Brando footage better illustrates the father/son motif established in the first film than Lester's re-shoots with Superman's mother.

As for the extras in this re-release, WB has compiled an impressive array of rarely seen material. There is a commentary by the producers, a 1981 'making of' special hosted by Chris Reeve, 8 Fleischer Studios Superman cartoons plus a retrospective, deleted scenes, and perhaps the most eclectic...the 'Superman 50th Anniversary' TV Special. Produced in 1988 by the 'Saturday Night Live' crew, this special was widely panned originally but had since become a hot commodity on the bootlegging scene. With appearances by classic Superman and SNL alumni, this special can be better appreciated now in hindsight for its quirky blend of comedy and nostalgia.

In closing, despite its shortcomings, 'Superman II' set forth a benchmark in the superhero film genre by showing how a sequel can take off the "kid gloves" and come out swinging once the exposition is firmly established in the original. Knowledge of the off-set controversy should only enhance our appreciation of the final film the cast and crew put together because it really is a classic sequel.

Want Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut (2006) Discount?

attended last week's world premiere screening of the much anticipated Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut. Like many Supe fans, I'd been looking forward to this for a LONG time. However, I'm here to tell you to lower your expectations on this one. It's simply not as good as the released version finished by Richard Lester.

After seeing the Donner version, I watched the Lester version again to make sure I could coherently compare the two versions. I concluded there are several very serious problems with the Donner version, and I'll lay these out, alerting you to spoilers.

First, a few comments about the original Superman 1, so you understand where I'm coming from. IMO, the first film had several major tone shifts. The Krypton section was very serious, bordering on pretentious. Brando played Jor-El not like a man, but as a demi-god, cold, aloof and superior. The Smallville section (my favorite portion) evoked Frank Capra-John Ford Americana, human and emotional. And the Metropolis section started as an enjoyable comic book, but then degenerated into goofy camp as Lex Luthor's ridiculous plan unfolded, and Gene Hackman mugged and played Superman's arch-enemy for laughs. For me, the Luthor characterization and earthquake plot ruined what I thought what could have been a fine film. And I totally didn't buy Superman turning back time, which I thought was a complete cop-out. All real Superman fans know that Supes can't do that (and even if he could, he wouldn't)! So that's the "baggage" I bring to this review.

On to Superman II. As most fans of the series know, Brando filmed scenes for the Fortress of Solitude sequences, but they were dropped when he demanded more money, and redone with Susannah York as Lara. Donner's version restores the Brando scenes. I found these restored scenes too long and not very good. The truth is, Brando did these films for the money, and basically walked through his role. I doubt that there is any survey of Brando's work that mentions Jor-El as one of his memorable performances. It seemed that Donner wanted to include every frame of Brando, so there's a lot of repetition. For example, Superman II now opens as Part 1 did, with Jor-El sentencing the 3 villains to the Phantom Zone, reciting the litany of their crimes. When Luthor plays back the recording crystals in the Fortress of Solitude, he gets the exact same explanation by Jor-El, about the villains. Hearing this information twice is boring and unnecessary. Later, Jor-El interacts with his son. But the tonal shifts of the first film come back to undermine the second one. Brando's pompous interpretation of Jor-El simply doesn't mesh well with Reeve's everyman version of Supes. These actors are in two different movies. Lester got around this by using Lara instead, in a performance that we can now see had more humanity than Brando's, but was light enough to maintain the comic book tone. Lara is sympathetic and basically supportive regarding her son's conflict about love vs duty, and this serves the story well, providing the emotion the story needs at this point.

SPOILER. In Donner's version, Jor-El is judgmental and dismissive to his son which, although is true to his characterization, does not make Superman's ultimate decision to give up his powers believable. But Donner's worst choice is in the placement of this scene. In Lester's version, Superman talks to his mom about his conflict, then gives up his powers BEFORE he sleeps with Lois. The implication is that Superman can't have sex with a human unless he surrenders his super powers (no doubt, his super orgasm, going faster than a speeding bullet, would be fatal!). But Donner has the sex scene first, and then has Superman talk to Jor-El and give up his powers.

This begs the question, if Superman can have sex with a human, why give up his powers? It makes no sense! Changing the order of these scenes completely undermines the human story and conflict at the core of the film. Later, when Clark returns to the Arctic in hopes of restoring his powers, there's yet another scene with Jor-El, who says "I knew this was going to happen," followed by some ridiculous mumbo jumbo in which Jor-El somehow transfers his spirit into his son to restore his powers. It's supposed to be moving and emotional, but it's not because there's no human relationship between Jor-El and Kal-El to begin with. Richard Lester simply showed us Clark finding the green power crystal and left the rest to our imagination, keeping the tone of the entire film light, like a comic book. Donner, however, adds in elements of pretension, and even said in the panel discussion afterward that he was trying to make a movie about the father-son relationship. But it doesn't work, and it doesn't belong because Superman II isn't a movie about father and son, it's about a man who has to decide between what he wants for himself and his responsibility to the world.

Almost every scene in Donner's version goes on too long. There's usually an extra unnecessary beat at the end of scenes. There's more Luthor and Otis, more Luthor and Miss Teschmacher, more Luthor with the villains, all which slow down the pace for the sake of marginal gags. If you like Hackman's Luthor, you may enjoy this. But I didn't.

There is a nice alternate version of the scene in which Lois throws herself into the river in an attempt to prove Clark is Superman. Donner's version takes place at the Daily Planet, where Lois jumps out the window same gimmick, different execution. And the screen tests on the Superman 1 DVD are turned into the revelation scene at Niagara Falls, which works pretty well.

SPOILER. Finally, we have a major cop-out with the ending. After the villains have been vanquished and we're back at the Daily Planet, Lois tells Clark that his secret is safe with her. But rather than giving Lois the "magic kiss of forgetfulness" to erase her memory, Superman once again turns back time, using the same footage from Part 1. He turns back time so far that the villains end up back in the Phantom Zone, meaning that the entire movie never happened! This is followed by the final denouement from the released version, in which Clark Kent returns to the diner and takes down the bully who beat him up. However, because time has been turned back, Clark had never been here before, so this makes no sense either! There's also another serious lapse of logic regarding the time reversal which requires too much explanation, but it will be obvious to most viewers.

Most of the music is recycled from the first film. This didn't bother me, but someone else who was there said that the cues kept reminding him of the scenes from Part 1 in which they originally occurred.

All in all, the Donner Version is an interesting curiosity, with some good moments among a lot of misfires. But personally, I'm glad we have the Richard Lester version, which is more coherent tonally, makes more sense, and is more entertaining. Superman completists will no doubt want this DVD for the collection. For everyone else, I suggest you rent it before you buy it.

Save 20% Off