Soloist (2013)

I think it's quite extraordinary that none of the reviews of the Soloist discuss the use of Beethoven's work in the film, which in my view reveals a shocking ignorance on the part of the critics. For example, the use of the cello part from the rondo of the second movement (the funeral march) of the 3rd symphony is brilliant, and reveals far more than just the playing skill of Ayres. Ditto the use of the Triple Concerto, various string quartets, less well-known parts of the 9th Symphony, all of which brilliantly move from the cello parts to the lager ensemble and back. It's a moving, innovative, and gorgeous use of Beethoven's work, and it makes a much larger point that the critics seem to miss entirely: Beethoven's work, most of all is about transcendence, the brotherhood of mankind, and the profound spiritual value of music. That's how the Soloist uses the composers's work to tell the story. Beethoven and music are Ayres' path to transcendence, and the way Beethoven's work is handled in the film makes this point clearly. The Soloist is worth seeing (and hearing) for the music alone.

People who see this film as a political statement miss the whole point.

This movie is primarily about the relationship between the weary journalist and the homeless artist, and Downey and Foxx give great performances. It sensitively deals with issues of charity and friendship in ways that challenge conventional ideals, and I liked the fact that in the end, Downey's character seems content to stop playing the role of "rescuer" and instead lets events play out to their natural conclusion. In fact, Foxx's character, for all the mental distress he faces, seems more grounded at times than Downey's character, and you might wonder whether the soloist refers to the cello virtuoso or the journalist who seems to learn what it means to be a friend rather than going solo through life. In that respect, it's a show that operates effectively on more than a superficial level.

Now if they could just have spent a little more time coaching Foxx on his fake cello-playing skills...alas.

Buy Soloist (2013) Now

Having casually checked this out recently, knowing absolutely nothing about the film beforehand except from its brief description on cable, which sounded interesting to me, I was and will forever continue to be, stunned by how great this movie is, for me at least. I have since watched extended parts of it as well as the whole thing, several times, have permanently recorded it onto DVD for future enjoyment, and my initial reactions remain the same with each viewing. This is one of the best movies I've seen in a long time. The fact that this didn't really make any box office buzz or profit is not surprising, given the subject matter. But the generally favorable but highly mixed, both positive and negative feelings and opinions about it from other reviewers and critics, and especially the lack of industry awards for this (i.e., Golden Globes, Oscars, etc.), are puzzling to me.

IMHO, this film is simply wonderful throughout, beginning to end, and has moved me to very moist eyes upon each and every viewing, tears of both profound sadness and sublime joy alike. I suspect that most people who have seen this, and have given it thumbs down, are missing the boat here. Although I always try to give, at times grudgingly, respect for the opinions, beliefs, and feelings of intelligent, enlightened folks, no matter what the film, I find it hard to fathom how and why anyone could watch this, stick with it to the end, and not see this as something really special.

The first time I watched this "cold," knowing almost nothing about it and only later discovering that it was all based upon a true story and the characters based upon real people, I nonetheless strongly suspected such was the case early on in the film and to the finish. It just had to be, I reasoned, because so many Los Angeles locales and environments, and particularly specific "Angeleno" details and ideas explored within it, rang so true and familiar to me. This is because of my own personal experiences with LA-centric, relevant places, people, concepts, issues, and events of substance and reality, for nearly a third of my lifetime.

Perhaps the main reason why a lot of folks who didn't or don't think that highly of this as I do, is because of this lack of personal connectedness to it, which I have and they may not. And that goes to all the filthy rich big shots of Hollyweird who chose to basically ignore this, come awards time. I accept these factors as givens, but honestly, this film has universal themes and observations, which really should appeal to most common people with sentimental hearts and rational minds. That this didn't seem to resonate powerfully with more upon release or since, I can accept. But it's a shame, because this really is extraordinary filmmaking, and distinctively honors what it apparently sets out to pay homage to, throughout.

The film, screenplay adaptation by Susannah Grant, is based on a series of columns written by Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez, who chronicled the plight of Mister Nathaniel Ayers, Jr., a middle-aged, homeless, drifting LA "crazy," but a former Julliard-trained musician with schizophrenia, originally from Cleveland, Ohio. The beginnings of this project were eventually inspired by and detailed in Lopez's book "The Soloist: A Lost Dream, an Unlikely Friendship, and the Redemptive Power of Music" which was published in the spring of 2008.

Nicely but not heavy-handedly or intrusively directed by Joe Wright, starring Jamie Foxx as Nathaniel and Robert Downey Jr. as Steve, the movie features original soundtrack music from Golden Globe and Academy Award-winning composer Dario Marianelli, as well as subtle and intense excerpts from works by Beethoven and the enchanting Cello Suite No. 1 by Bach. Needless to say, throughout, great music and the possible redemptive love, "grace," and healing power of it (with even a bit of Neil Diamond thrown in), plays a big part here. But within that basic structure and notion, a superlative visual and cinematic rendering of same, exemplifies the life-changing supremacy of simple friendship which can develop between often-disparate human beings, and which can bring to each, symbiotic rewards. For "the soloist" here doesn't just apply or refer to homeless, at times obviously schizophrenic but talented Nathaniel, but to Steve the talented and humanistic yet cynical reporter as well. By film's end, both forge a life-affirming relationship, despite their immensely different personal blessings and circumstances in life. A real life, rewarding relationship and friendship which apparently continues to present day.

Detailed musical and visual bits in this movie take quite moving and unexpected twists and turns throughout, more than once from far above and apart from the noisy madness of Los Angeles. And about an hour into the film, it unashamedly ventures (when Nathaniel closes his eyes and listens to a full symphony orchestra playing Ludwig Van) into a very delightful and totally spiritual, "closed-eye vision" colorful representation of music as might've been imagined by the late, legendary experimental filmmaker Stan Brakhage. This "closed-eye" section, while brief, came as a complete surprise to me, but should resonate with anyone who has ever really experienced firsthand, the exquisite "beauty" of great music as a transcendental art form. Truth be told however, these moments are only a few in a series of ever meaningful and majestic ones, in what I consider a virtually perfect film.

This movie is not without its lighter sides, and brief but effective moments of humor, but is at its best when relating various true, and serious elements of the modern USA, social/civilized failings as a whole. These range from the obvious, yet-unlearned tragedies/lessons of Hurricane Katrina's impoverished masses, to its equating of those with the continuing utter shame of LA's skid row and homelessness problems and our whole depraved "health-care" system. Also dealt effectively with is the complex and at times troubling, but deeply romantic (in the classic sense) relationship between Lopez the reporter and his ex-wife and co-worker/boss. As well as the search for connectedness to their fellow human beings in a world seemingly gone mad, among which all the characters in this movie, share equally.

As I've said, this film deals with subjects, people, places, and situations which are uniquely familiar to me, having spent so much time in Southern California in circumstances similar to both that of Mister Steve Lopez and Mister Nathaniel Ayers. Jr. At times there, I was near the top, and other times near the bottom. And I can speak with factual understanding of being both a part of the highs of the fancy award ceremony world of mayors and celebrities which Lopez experiences, to nearly being homeless out there myself in the unbelievably bleak environment of skid row and surroundings, which makes up Nathaniel's world.

I could write so much more in praise of this amazing filmic endeavor, but I will just say this in closing. This is truly a work of art, its power and realism enhanced by true events and people and locales, and while it may not be fully appreciated as I write this, I'm sure in the future, it will be seen as a classic, great film with a message which almost everyone, in time, should eventually identify with, in a very special, if wholly individual way. And by the way, again, the very title refers both to Mr. Ayers AND Mr. Lopez, if some haven't caught on or never will, to that.

This is a work, minute by precious minute, to be revered and cherished forever, which I at least, most certainly will.

Read Best Reviews of Soloist (2013) Here

If there were ever any doubt that Robert Downey Jr. is one of our best current actors out there, then this film should put them to rest. Still having doubts? Check out his more current resume: Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang, Good Night and Good Luck, Iron Man, and his amazing Tropic Thunder. And these are just a select few that I've cherry picked. This isn't to say that Jamie Foxx (Dreamgirls) didn't do a great job. It's just that Downey Jr. is showing up in some awfully great roles and performing them to perfection, as witnessed here in THE SOLOIST.

This is a story close to my heart. Similar in theme to Lars and the Real Girl, this story doesn't circle around a town coming together to help one man's pysche. This story is about two men who orbit in entirely different galaxies and how a passing swipe ends up creating a lifetime friendship. Yes, there's the mental illness aspect to it and Foxx plays the role of Nathaniel Ayers exceptionally well. His schizophrenia is obvious, and living on the streets hasn't helped. And when newspaper reporter Steve Lopez (Downey Jr.) tries finding a story to write about, he stumbles upon Nathaniel's past as a Juilliard Music School drop-out. Nathaniel plays a violin with only two strings, and as Steve Lopez writes about his newfound friend in the paper, a donation comes floating in: a beautiful cello.

This cello has multiple draws for Nathaniel, and some of them aren't good. The positives are that Nathaniel can play a beautiful instrument beautifully. And that he finally starts forming a friendly tie with someone (anyone!) It just happens to be Steve Lopez. Steve starts showing him around the current musical scene. But with Nathaniel's reawakening comes the remembrance of his past and how he got to where he is. His mental breakdown comes crashing back into current memory, even as Steve, his new friend, tries to help him out more and more.

The side-story of Steve and his wife's reconciliation (Catherine Keener, An American Crime) is pretty much fluff for the movie/story and doesn't add much. It is the touching and powerful story of a friendship forming amidst a respect for one another, a love of music, and facing the challenges of an oft-times debilitating mental illness that drives this wonderful film.

And the music ain't too shabby either.

Want Soloist (2013) Discount?

The sum of the parts of this DVD are way better than the whole. I certainly enjoyed The Soloist, it is a good movie. But once I began exploring the bonus features on this DVD, the whole became so much more. This is the first time since watching Criterion LaserDiscs with real live director or film historian commentary, have bonus features been this movie enhancing.

The Soloist is a solid movie about a Los Angeles Times journalist that meets a homeless man playing a two stringed violin. The film follows Steve Lopez (Robert Downey Jr.), the journalist, through his emotions trying to help Nathaniel Anthony Ayers (Jamie Foxx). The two men end up developing a deep friendship. Gratefully the screenwriter chose not to make this a happily ever after film. The nearly 2 hour film explores insanity, homelessness, and how well meaning people may or may not help these people.

Where things just go crazy wonderful is in the deep bonus features. The film opens with a very strange plea by a very odd looking person almost priest-like, 'if you see a homeless person, they probably don't want money, they really want to just have you say hello. To get more involved with helping see this website.' Its a strange message, delivered by a strange person, and very confusing for the first time viewer. Jumping into the bonus features, it turns out this is the real live Steve Lopez.

The Bonus Features:

Beth's Story a powerful 1.5 minute animated film about a girl who's parents die, she moves from foster home to foster home, finally lives on her own, gets sick, can't pay her bills, and becomes homeless I cried.

A Making of Featurette like none I've ever seen. Not only did this film portray a side of life I hope I never see, nor you see; but they put their money where their mouth is they hired the homeless to actually perform in this film.

A video about the real live Nathaniel Anthony Ayers, Steve Lopez, and his sister. Done with heart and tenderness. It is a beautiful interview piece.

A series of deleted scenes that frankly are hard to tell why they were left out. Several fill plot holes that I found a little disconcerting during the film.

All total there is roughly 45 minutes of bonus features. They give context to how this film was made and why.

I had a few problems with the film itself (they were quickly tossed away after seeing the bonus features). On first view, the Lamp and Mission areas just seemed all too Hollywood. They were packed with homeless people, too much seemed to be going on, they almost looked polished or unreal. As with most true stories, truth is way stranger than fiction. Apparently this is reality on this street, it was not over done. There were some minor pacing problems, early on the story kind of stalled here and there. And I went from thinking that Steve Lopez was this awesome fantastic person, to what his ex-wife says at one point he is just capitalizing on somebody else's misfortune. The worst moment of this was when Nathaniel calls Mr. Lopez asking for help; but he is too busy receiving an award for his LA Times articles about Nathaniel Ayers.

The acting is superb in this film. Jamie Foxx is just outstanding, he proved his acting ability in Ray (that he isn't just a clown like in Booty Call), and just builds in this film. After seeing the real Nathaniel Ayers Mr. Foxx nailed the performance. Robert Downey Jr. is such a talented actor, to say Iron Man, Tropic Thunder, and this film in one breath is some amazing credit to his abilities. He actually improved on the real Mr. Lopez. By far my favorite actor in this film is Nelsan Ellis who played David the director or advocate at Lamp/The Mission.

The film alone is more like a 4 star film. John Wright basically has three films to his credit, The Soloist, Atonement, and Pride and Prejudice. The latter two are not great but good films. The downside to this lack of experience is a number of scenes that run too long and others that run too short or leave plot holes. Frankly I would have traded some scenes off to include three of the deleted scenes when viewed they fill plot holes and the film makes much more sense. Camera work is overall very good. Steady shots are good and solid, handheld is kept to a minimum. I noticed a few jarring cuts from solid shots to handhelds that didn't make good sense. The use of boom shots and huge sweeping pans was a bit over the top most of the time. Near the end there are one shots between Mr. Lopez and Ayers framing is used to great advantage, placing Mr. Lopez on the weak side and Mr. Ayers on the strong side of the frame. A powerful subtle technique.

The film is rated PG-13. There is a bit of strong language, but mostly it is held to a minimum. The subject matter is tough, insanity, and homelessness its probably not fare for those younger than 13. There was a scene or two where my 13 year old son felt a little bit nervous the voices that Mr. Ayers hears in his head are rendered a bit too real at times. The whole production company was very wise to achieve a PG-13 rating. First and foremost this film could reach the widest audience. I don't feel like they compromised anything by keeping the language in reign.

I've always had a fear of homelessness. This film struck a very strong chord for me. It helped me see that there are small things that everyone can do, that can make a difference. This is a beautiful film.

Save 30% Off

The Man Who Would Be King (2011)

He began with 'The Maltese Falcon' which one must admit is not too bad for a first film, don't you think?

Then for years he wanted to bring this adventure story by Kipling to the screen. How many years? Well, originally he had Bogie and Gable in mind for the leads, you do the math.

Fortunately for us, he eventually got the green light for his project.

He then found Peachy and Danny in Michael Caine and Sean Connery, movie stars who are also great actors-of which there ain't many, folks---and who are perfectly cast in the roles.

Moreover, Caine and Connery had been friends for a long time and this undoubtedly helped bring to life the camaraderie between the misfit heroes.

It is the late 19th century and Danny and Peachy, formerly sergeants in Her Majesty's Army, find themselves stranded and penniless in India. Their ungrateful country has no further use for them, although their officers once called them heroes "We fought our way up the pass yard by bloody yard."

Now, bureocrats are running the show "with long skinny noses for looking down on you" and Danny and Peachy are considered 'undesirables'.

So they are faced with three choices: Go back to England and take jobs as a porters or something equally lower class and menial, stay in India and continue to live more or less as petty criminals, or. . .

Well, let's not give the plot away. Suffice it to say that when a reasonable Kipling (wonderfully played by Christopher Plummer) tries to dissuade them from their insane scheme, on the grounds that the odds against them are truly suicidal, Peachy dismisses his concerns with "Well, if a Greek can do it, two Englishman certainly can !"

--The Greek in question being Alexander the Great--

And yes, women as well as men will enjoy this great film. It's a not a "buddy movie", it's a classic.

Thank you, John Huston.

This was one of my favorites, and a "must have" in my DVD library. The story is still great,and the dialog between "Peachy" and "Daniel" is still among my favorites still.

But the DVD was dissappointing. The movie is split on two sides, and has to be flipped to view the remainder of the film.The DVD only has Dolby 1.0 Sound (Digital but MONO)and apparently very weak in the mix. Overall a better picture than my old worn VHS, but very weak audio overall.

The menu's and commentary are hard to read, and there were points in the movie where the transfer to DVD looked "jumpy".

More than disappointing presentation overall.

This deserves a "director's cut", or an audio remix to serve those of us who will cherish whatever copy we have, forever.

Buy The Man Who Would Be King (2011) Now

This film has met all the prerequistes necessary for producing a profound and rewarding entertainment experience. One of the greatest directors of all-time (John Huston), an all-star cast: Sean Connery, Michael Caine, Christopher Plummer and Saeed jaffrey, and an incredibly original storyline incorporating ancient Masonic mysteries, exotic locations and crisp, witty dialogue. This is a story I wish I had written! Even more delightful, it meets all expectations!

Rudyard Kipling (Plummer) finds an unexpected guest awaiting his presence in his darkened study one night. Without proper introductions the hooded intruder begins to share with Kipling a fantastic tale of adventure and discovery from a faraway land that many thought only existed in myth and legend. The study of the famous writer soon disappears as we are taken along with the mysterious narrator on a fantastic journey to a foreign land.

We are now introduced to Daniel Dravot (Connery) and Peachy Carnehan (Caine), two ex-British soldiers and Masonic brothers turn fortune hunters. Seeking fame and fortune they are about to undertake the adventure of a lifetime. Their destination, the Far East in search of the legendary lost treasure of Alexander the Great.

And what an adventure it is! As Daniel and Peachy work their way across the vast Indian landscape towards the remote region of Kafiristan they encounter the usual severe natural hardships and hostile inhabitants as you might expect. However it's the discovery of an archaic religious cult that happens to share many of the same symbols and beliefs found in their own Masonic brotherhood that really makes them begin to wonder. As they unravel the secret origin of this esoteric connection they are faced with the truth behind a two thousand year old secret concerning Alexander the Great and his mythical lost treasure.

Great film from '75. It may seem a little dated to young viewers, but give it a chance and you won't regret it! Great supporting performance from Saeed Jaffrey ( one of the greatest character actors of all time) the who plays their native guide Billy Fish, along with a brief and rare appearance by the lovely Shakira Caine as Roxanne.

Read Best Reviews of The Man Who Would Be King (2011) Here

This movie is an unsurpassed, old-fashioned adventure tale about friendship, and tragic, over-reaching ambition. As an adventure, it far exceeds the wildly more popular but childish Indiana Jones series.

This movie follows the adventure of Daniel Dravot and Peachy Carnahan, two rakish ne'er-do-wells in the British Army in India. They leave the service, and, alone, they pack guns and supplies and head north to Kafiristan, a distant and mysterious land they've only heard tales about, to become Kings, and plunder the kingdom.

When they arrive, they pit warring communities against each other. During battle, Connery's character is mistaken for a god when he is shot (in his leather bandolier), and doesn't bleed. As a result, he is made King. He is brought to the Holy City, where the holy men mistake him for "Son of Sekander," that is, the Son of Alexander The Great. They prostrate themselves before him, and give him access to Alexander's treasure, which they have guarded for centuries.

Instead of taking the money and running, however, Connery gets big-headed, gets to liking the role of King, and wants to stay and administer his kingdom, which he does, and does well, it seems.

As you would expect, that's not the end of the story...but I don't want to give any more away.

This movie is also humorous. It certainly isn't a comedy, but the heroes joke with one another, and the humor arises from their relationship, their fondness for one another, not from improbably comic situations.

This is a grand movie that treats grand themes, and it is worth seeing over and over again. I can't recommend it enough.

Want The Man Who Would Be King (2011) Discount?

This is an exceptional treat with two great actors in Connery and Caine and a great director in Huston, who seems to have been born to make just such a film. Based on a short story by Rudyard Kipling (who is played exceptionally by Christopher Plummer in the film), The Man Who Would Be King tells the story of two former British soldiers in India who devise a scheme to go to neighboring Kafiristan, set themselves up as royalty and then loot the country for all they can carry back home. After running into bandits on the way, enduring freezing temperatures and with a little unintended help from an avalanche, the two meet Billy Fish who gets them set up where they would like to be in Kafiristan. Eventually, and you can see how and why for yourself, Connery comes to be regarded by the locals as a god. This will have its advantages for Connery and Caine, but in the end will be their downfall (no pun intended for those who have already seen the film).

... I saw nothing of poor quality myself. The picture seemed crisp and sound quality was acceptable as well. Here's the negative: unless anything has changed with the manufacturing of the disc itself, one has to flip the disc over about halfway through the film. That's right. A *and* B sides. While I would prefer that the film be continuous all the way through, the fact that it isn't is not enough to give the DVD a negative review.

Also, there are some good extras here. There's a lot of "on location" and extra info about things that went on during the making of the film as well as a "making of" featurette (only about ten or fifteen minutes long). The featurette is nothing exceptional but it does show you what Connery landed on and how the entire cast and crew agonized over the bridge scene at the end of the film. It's also fun to see Connery sitting around in a camouflage hat on the set with the blood on his face that was so important to the story at the end of the film. You also get theatrical trailers for eight of Huston's films. Overall, if you want to see a sweeping film that has Connery and Caine playing roles they were born to play, pick this one up.

Save 49% Off

Missa Solemnis (2013)

I am not a big fan of films of concerts, opera being a different kettle of fish. I certainly don't buy dvds of symphonic concerts but when a large chorus is involved in a major mass with a great orchestra, soloists and conductor I will usually buy it, but I am very selective. How many films of Beethoven's Missa Solemnis do I need? Well, as it turns out two.

From having zero dvds of this piece I ordered the Thielemann concert in a beautiful concert hall from 2010 and the Fabio Luisi one from 2005 filmed at the official opening in the Frauenkirche in Dresden.

Oddly the one from the Frauenkirche is the most authentic concert of the two because it includes applause, and the one from the concert hall is very solemn, slightly pretentious in this regard, and ends with the audience standing silently in homage to the fire bombing of Dresden during WW2. The Frauenkirche might have been the more appropriate place for such reverence.

But there is nothing to complain about in the camera work in either 2005 or 2010. The Unitel from 2010 with Thielemann is fascinating to watch. It is mind-boggling to imagine the coordination of the film team to manage so many cuts and angles and close-ups in a live event without a single camera ever being visible on screen. The work for Luisi's version is equally flawless and beautiful. Thielemann's concert hall is very classical and elegant, Luisi's Frauenkirche setting is joyously baroque and heavenly to behold.. So these two films are quite different and compliment one another very nicely.

Thielemann and Luisi are two of the greatest conductors out there right now. Thielemann eschews baton and score and stands there uninhibited by any incumbrance. His masterful knowledge of the score is evident before the music begins. Luisi uses a score and baton and jumps about a little. This is apt in his performance which seems more in tune with the fundamental joy of this piece.

Their interpretations are contrasted, one may go a little quicker than the other here and there but both interpretations are beautiful, solemn when called for and full of energy and panache at times. The orchestra and choral personnel seem quite different between '06 and '10. The two teams of vocal soloists are both very fine. I prefer, slightly, Luisi's with a fuller soprano and more audible (as recorded) bass. Luisi has two beautiful female soloists, and I don't mean just their voices. Camilla Nylund and Birgit Remmert are splendid and are superbly partnered by Christian Elsner, tenor and René Pape who needs no introduction. Thielemann's team is made up of Krassimira Stoyanova, Elina Garança, Michael Schade and Franz-Josef Selig. All eight of these singers have beautiful, well-trained and controlled voices. If there is an award for the greatest singing of the eight it would go to Elina Garança's extraordinary singing.

She is a young Christa Ludwig and I would expect her to start showing up in Wagner soon, Brangäne, Fricka and Waltraute.

I am happy to have purchased both these films. If you want a Missa Solemnis that is indeed solemn then go for the glorious Thielemann, which is also full of spirit and is life enhancing, if perhaps taking itself too seriously. If you want a more joyous approach, which is also solemn when called for, and has a more natural atmosphere in the extraordinarily beautiful Dresden Frauenkirche, then don't hesitate to buy the Luisi.

Frankly I think I will be turning to the Luisi more than the Thielemann in the future.

Christian Thielemann has just given us his remarkable set of Beethoven symphonies on DVD. With his new orchestra, the Dresden Staatskapelle, a quartet of very good soloists and the outstanding Sächsischer Staatsopernchor he now presents what I see as the logical and transcendental summation of all of Beethoven's works: the Missa Solemnis. The DVD competition is stiff. There is Bernstein's inimitable 1978 rendition in still acceptable sound and film, a very special interpretation by Michael Gielen (1986, nla), my long-time favorite, Sir Gilbert Levine's deeply felt and impressive reading and, finally, Fabio Luisi's recording (both 2005) with the same orchestral and choral forces as Thielemann's. The latter two certainly invite comparison: a comparison from which I'll refrain, because I can not quite warm up to Luisi's reading for purely subjective reasons. Thieleman and his excellent ensemble shine in every respect. Tempi are deliberate, as could be expected, but never drag. Despite the very large number of musicians in attendance, Thielemann keeps the sound stage as transparent and detailed as possible: this is one of his trademarks as a conductor. Without baton, he shapes every phrase, every motif to perfection, never losing his grip on the incredibly long thematic lines and on the whole beauty of this monumental edifice. I found myself spellbound by his moving interpretation, by the cohesion of everything and by his rapt attention to the score which totally involves all concerned as well as the listener. The uncompressed sound and the video are perfect. Get this and you will be elated. Now I wish, as a counterpoint, for a Missa from Paavo Järvi and his Bremer Deutsche Kammerphilharmonie: if wishes were fishes...

Buy Missa Solemnis (2013) Now

Prequel:

My thanks to a reader who has found this review wrongly listed by Amazon under the disc by Harnoncourt as well as being correctly listed under Thielemann's performance in Dresden. Unfortunately this is a common problem with listings and cannot be corrected by reviewers. Please be patient and understanding and either scroll down past this review or read it for unintentional additional interest if appropriate! Thanks Ian Giles

.....................................

Beethoven wrote this work in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars which affected Beethoven deeply. In 1823 he invited various European royal houses to subscribe to a printed edition of his Mass which is how a copy of the work with Beethoven's own autograph annotations has become a part of the holdings of the Saxon State and University library.

Every year on February 13th there is a commemorative concert held in Dresden to commemorate the destruction of Dresden towards the end of World War 2. In this case the concert also commemorated the 25th anniversary of the rebuilding of the opera house. These concerts always feature a requiem and end with a minute's silence without any applause. This end to the performance is included in this 2010 recording and is, in itself, a deeply moving conclusion.

The performance is very fine indeed and rises impressively to all climatic moments with a finely matched quartet of four star singers, committed singing from the choir and immaculate playing from the orchestra under the direction of Thielemann. The long solo violin obligato part throughout the Benedictus is particularly beautifully played by the leader, Matthias Wollong, and the Agnus Dei concludes the work with Beethoven's strong ' plea for inner and outer peace' making the strongest impact imaginable.

This is not a joyful occasion but it is a moving one. The camera work is suitably sensitive whilst being finely detailed and the sound is provided in both DTS-HD and stereo and is of the high quality that one knows now to expect from C Major.

This is a very fine recording and performance of this work and deserves to be considered seriously by purchasers interested in a high quality visual presentation of this work.

Read Best Reviews of Missa Solemnis (2013) Here

What a great disappointment!!!! A monumental choral work is made anemic by a faulty sound track. The chorus and male soloists sound distant from the dominating sound of the orchestra. When the soloists sing in quartet, the male voices, especially the bass, are almost overpowered by the soprano and alto; not that the men don't have powerful voices. It is due to poor sound engineering. On blu-ray, the visual is sharp in detail. If only the sound were!!!!

Want Missa Solemnis (2013) Discount?

"I love it", BUT…... The 5 stars are strictly for the outstanding performances by singers, playing of orchestras, and sound quality of the CD. Disc is, however, wholly lacking adequate notes, there is No Synopsis And No Libretto Whatsoever.

Is this (and others noted below…) some sort of "cheapie" presentation to account for the highly appreciated low prices offered? A regrettable oversight somewhere along the production line?

I Fully expect To Receive From Amazon These Missing Essential Components shortly."I love it", BUT…... The 5 stars are strictly for the outstanding performances by singers, playing of orchestras, and sound quality of the CD. Disc is, however, wholly lacking adequate notes, there is No Synopsis And No Libretto Whatsoever, all the more outrageous since this work is not that often heard.

Is this (and others noted below…) some sort of "cheapie" presentation to account for the highly appreciated low prices offered? A regrettable oversight somewhere along the production line? I Fully Expect To Receive From Amazon These Missing Essential Components shortly..

Save 17% Off

Courage Under Fire (1996)

The basic plot line of "Courage Under Fire" is that Lt. Col Nathaniel Sterling (Denzel Washington) is investigating an incident during the Gulf War to determine whether or not the Medal of Honor should be awarded to Captain Karen Walden (Meg Ryan). It does not take us long to find out that the title of this film refers to both Sterling and Walden. The initial story on Walden, the pilot of a rescue helicopter, is that she made a spectacular rescue of a downed helicopter crew, then fought off attacking Iraquis after her own copter crashed, dying right before they were rescued themselves. But as Sterling questions the surviving members of Walden's crew, he discovers their various versions do not jive, and he begins to question what is the truth. Moreover, Sterling is haunted by his own actions during the Gulf War, where he was responsible for a "friendly fire" incident that resulted in the death of American soldiers. To complicate matters, Sterling is drinking too much, has grown distant from his family, and is being hounded by a commanding officer who wants the P.R. value of Walden receiving the medal and a reporter who knows something of what happened to the Colonel in Iraq.

"Courage Under Fire" makes excellent use of the "Rashomon" technique, wherein we get to see each person's version of what really happened in Iraq. Sterlings own feelings of guilt and responsibility for what happened in Iraq provide an additional level of depth to the narrative (more so than in Kurosawa's original classic film in fact). Some may find the parallel attempts to find redemption to be somewhat heavy handed, but ultimately the film succeeds because of the solid acting performances. In addition to Washington and Ryan, who knew have a scene together, there are solid performances from Lou Diamond Phillips and a very underweight Matt Damon as surviving members of Walden's crew, Michael Moriarity as the General, Scott Glenn as the reporter, and Regina Taylor as Sterling's wife. Certainly this film is closer to the reality of Desert Storm than "Three Kings," but the main enjoyment here is watching Ryan and her crew do the same lines with totally different meanings because of radical changes in context while Washington tries to find meaning in his own life.

One of my favorites. A movie that will keep you guessing till the very end. Nat Serling is sent home from the Persian Gulf with traumas and few prospects after being in a friendly fire incident. He is given what should have been an open-and-shut case: investigate a female chopper pilot for the Medal of Honor. Things become tricky quickly as Serling's support is withdrawn when he discovers discrepancies in the witness' stories and he will have to risk everything to find out the truth about what happened on a dark night in Iraq. Magnetizing throughout, this picture is well-conceived and very compelling, and it has messages about society. Excellent directing and writing, as well as amazing acting, this movie shines.

Buy Courage Under Fire (1996) Now

The basic plot line of "Courage Under Fire" is that Lt. Col Nathaniel Serling (Denzel Washington) is investigating an incident during the Gulf War to determine whether or not the Medal of Honor should be awarded posthumously to Captain Karen Walden (Meg Ryan). It does not take us long to find out that the title of this film refers to both Serling and Walden. The initial story on Walden, the pilot of a rescue helicopter, is that she made a spectacular rescue of a downed helicopter crew, then fought off attacking Iraquis after her own copter crashed, dying right before the besieged group was rescued. But as Serling questions the surviving members of Walden's crew, he discovers their various versions do not jive, and he begins to question what is the truth of what really happened. Moreover, Serling is haunted by his own actions during the Gulf War, where he was responsible for a "friendly fire" incident that resulted in the death of American soldiers. To complicate matters even more, Serling is drinking way too much, has grown distant from his family, and is being hounded by both a commanding officer (Michael Moriarity) who wants the P.R. value of Walden being the first woman to receive the Medal of Honor and a reporter (Scott Glenn) who knows something of what happened to the Colonel in Iraq and wants to know the rest.

"Courage Under Fire" makes excellent use of the "Rashomon" technique, wherein we get to see each person's version of what really happened in Iraq. Serling's own feelings of guilt and responsibility for what happened in Iraq provide an additional level of depth to the narrative (more so than in Kurosawa's original classic film in fact). Some may find the parallel attempts to find redemption to be somewhat heavy handed, but ultimately the film succeeds because of the solid acting performances. In addition to Washington and Ryan, who never have a scene together, there are solid performances from Lou Diamond Phillips and a very underweight Matt Damon as surviving members of Walden's crew, Michael Moriarity as the General, Scott Glenn as the reporter, and Regina Taylor as Serling's wife. Certainly this film is closer to the reality of Desert Storm than "Three Kings," but the main enjoyment here is watching Ryan and her crew do the same lines with totally different meanings because of radical changes in context while Washington tries to find meaning in his own life.

Read Best Reviews of Courage Under Fire (1996) Here

War movies rarely acknowledge fatal blunders alongside the typical nimble strategies all in the same vein, much less in the same individual. Courage Under Fire manages that with an effortless tapestry of morality, valour and honour.

Apart from such sheer emotional freight, it even manages to counch a discreet message about the quirks of real wars and their very human aftermath. There are points in the film where both the Iraqi and the American soldiers look almost indistinguishable. Fighting nations with crunch budgets is a complex enterprise with a variety of perspectives.

There is much to say about the plot's setup, it's spectacular. Denzel is heads and shoulders above everyone else but the performances are excellent all-round. Matt Damon seemed to have lost half his weight to fit into the role. Meg Ryan is very convincing for her irregular turn as a leathery war woman. But above all, I was particularly astonished by the confident pizzazz of Lou Diamond Phillips, his explosive cameo is one of the most unforgettable sequences.

With its highly realistic battle scenes, fast-paced screenplay and a solid heart , Courage Under Fire is a top class production, regardless of the qualms regarding nationalistic or gender messages that other critics bloviate about. My theory that you cannot go terribly wrong with anything that involves Denzel still remains intact.

Want Courage Under Fire (1996) Discount?

Matt Damon can be seen here in one of his first roles, and this role was largely overlooked, overshadowed perhaps by the star power of Meg Ryan (in the least annoying role I have ever seen her play) playing a tough commanding officer during Desert Storm, or overshadowed by Denzel Washington, investigating the circumstances surrounding her death. Damon may even have been overshadowed by the presence of an insane, glory seeking Lou Diamond Phillips. Damon's heroin-addicted character, though, is one of the reasons this film stands out in my mind. Also the story-telling technique of flashing back through different character's eyes is borrowed from such classic films as Kurosawa's Rashomon. It expertly illustrates the importance and use of point-of-view, which is totally different and distorted depending upon whom you consult.

Save 44% Off

Touching the Void

My son and I came out of the theater exhausted just by watching this quasi-documentary reenactment of the 1985 ascent up an unclimbed route on the Siula Grande glacier in Peru. The film's impact is heightened by the excellent cutting between the actor/climbers and Simon Yates and Joe Simpson, who recall their actions, reactions, and feelings nearly 20 years later. Disaster strikes on the descent, where -as one of them notes -"80 percent of accidents happen." After Simpson breaks his leg in a fall, Yates -against impossible odds -continues to try and get him down. Finally, Simpson falls again, off the edge of the mountain. After hours of hanging on to what feels like dead weight, Yates cuts the rope to prevent himself from being gradually pulled into the void. Simpson's survival and return to base camp is nothing short of miraculous, suggesting that man is never more tenacious about life than when he is closest to losing it. Though far different in its circumstances, his story rivals that of Shackleton and the Endurance in Antartica three quarters of a century before. An underlying issue, addressed briefly in the film, is whether Yates should have cut the rope. Apparently some other climbers criticized him for doing so, but Simpson always defended his action. I have no idea how well the technical aspects of Touching the Void are done, but to this mostly earthboard amateur, they looked brilliantly and truly shot. Danger and beauty are scarcely separable in Touching the Void. When you are not immersed in the terror of Yates' and, especially, Simpson's plight, the frigid beauty of the glacier, the colors within its crevasses are glorious. A story of recklessness and great determination, superbly told, filled with many "how did they ever shoot that?" moments, Touching the Void must be seen.

I've seen countless movies over the years but I don't think I've ever been moved in quite the same way that I was watching Touching the Void. I first saw Touching the Void in a small art-house theater in Chicago, the experience was closer to going to church than going to the movies. The entire theater was dead quiet throughout the film but you could feel the tension throughout the room. After it was over I felt like I had been holding my breath for an hour and a half incredible when you consider that, this being a documentary, I more or less knew how it was going to end and others I talked to in the theater expressed the same feelings. I wasn't sure if anything would be lost in the transfer to DVD, it wasn't. Not only was the story just as gripping on the small screen but the extra features made a perfect movie-going experience even better. People marching off to see I, Robot or whatever other dreck Hollywood throws at us have no idea what they're missing in this masterpiece.

Buy Touching the Void Now

This film, based upon the international best seller of the same name, recounts an amazing tale of courage, fortitude, and the will to live, despite dire circumstances. About twenty or so years ago, British mountaineers Joe Simpson and his then climbing partner, Simon Yates, attempted to ascend a perilous section of the Peruvian Andes, Suila Grande, a majestic 21,000 foot peak that was nearly inaccessible. These two intrepid climbers tackled the mountain alpine style and, surprisingly, reached the summit, the first mountaineers to do so.

After reaching the summit, however, tragedy struck on their descent, when Joe, up over 19,000 feet, fell and hit a slope at the base of a cliff, breaking his right leg and rupturing his right knee. Beneath him was a seemingly endless fall to the bottom. When Simon reached him, they both knew that the chances for getting Joe off the mountain were virtually non-existent. Yet, Simon Yates fashioned a daring plan to do just that. For the next few hours, they worked in tandem through a snowstorm, and managed a risky, yet effective, way of trying to lower Joe down the mountain.

Several thousand feet down, Joe, who was roped to Simon, dropped off an edge and found himself now free hanging in space, about six feet away from an ice wall, unable to reach it with his axe. The edge was over hung above him and the dark outline of a yawning crevasse lay directly below him. Joe could not get up, and Simon could not get down. In fact, Joe's weight began to pull Simon off the mountain. So, Simon was finally forced to do the only thing he could do under the circumstances. He cut the rope, believing that he was consigning his friend to certain death. Therein lies the tale. It is at this point in the film that the real story begins.

What happens next is sure to make one believe in miracles. This is an absorbing, beautifully shot film. The story is told in a sort of unique docu-drama style, with actors re-enacting moments in this fantastic, true life tale of survival, while Joe Simpson and Simon Yates narrate what happened on that mountain. It is an absorbing piece of cinema, as it presents a somewhat novel and fresh way of telling this amazing survival story. The cinematography is magnificent, as the film is shot in the Peruvian Andes, where the incident occurred. Moreover, Joe Simpson and Simon Yates do the actual climbing scenes in the film. All armchair climbers will thrill to the sound of their crampons and axes digging into the ice. My only suggestion is that one read the book before viewing the film.

Read Best Reviews of Touching the Void Here

Climbers have always felt there was no need for the embarassing antics displayed in absurd films like Vertical Limit, MI-2, and Cliffhanger to get across the at-once dangerous and beautiful aspects of their sport. In fact, it was believed that a truly talented director could convey those things quite well through a little creativity rather than resorting to nitro-glycerine and cheesey free-soloing scenes to add suspense. So it was with great anticipation and a bit of skepticism that the release of this movie retelling the classic story of Joe Simpson's epic in the Andes was anticipated. No one was let down. This is a brilliantly done film, at the original scene, with the real climbers doing much of the legwork. The climbing scenes are shot with authenticity, and even the actors portraying the climbers did a good job. The horrible situation Simpson finds himself in and his deteriorating physical and mental condition are palpable and nerve-wracking. The feeling of desperation and hopelessness reaches the same heights achieved in the book, as does the anxiety and anguish of Simon (his partner). This is a classic film rendering of a classic book. This is one movie you must see; who knows if another climbing story will ever be done as well. And whether you're a climber or not, you will be just as close to the edge of your seat, all without the insulting Hollywood silliness.

Want Touching the Void Discount?

"Touching the Void" was also the name of the book that Joe Simpson wrote about the events shown in this astonishing movie. In 1985 Simon Yates and Joe went on one of those "we're going to do something that has never been done" kind of Mountain Climbs up a previously unconquered approach up Siula Grande in the Andes.

My wife told me that the film wasn't at all what she was expecting, so it is perhaps worth describing the format of the film. A small film crew, a couple of actors and Joe and Simon themselves returned to Siula Grande in 2002. Richard Hawking, who maintained the base camp at the foot of Siula Grande while Joe and Simon went off on their death-defying climb, comes along as well and seems to have one of the most balanced viewpoints among the original three members. The movie intercuts interviews with Joe and Simon and Richard with footage shot for this movie with actors portraying them. The shots of the Andes and glaciers and icy crevaces are spectacular outdoor photography. The present day Joe, Simon and Richard tell an absolutely spell-binding story of heroism and perseverence and bravery.

Well before the end of the movie I found myself wondering how in the world Simon ever made it off that mountain, and he had by far the easier time of it. Joe's survival is one of the most incredible stories of human endurance you'll ever hear. Seeing that both Joe and Simon made it to the making of this movie removes some of the tension of "oh my goodness! will they make it!" but knowing the ultimate outcome doesn't relieve the edge-of-your-seat-white-knuckle tension of hearing this incredible story.

As a bonus there is additional footage of "what happens next" plus a mini-documentary on the making of the movie. The movie essentially ends with Joe and Simon and Richard reunited at base camp. You KNOW that both climbers need urgent medical attention and Simon will require surgery for his shattered leg and the "what happens next" fills in some of those blanks.

The behind-the-scenes documentary gives you an idea of why the story depicted in the movie ends where it does. Simon comes under criticism from the climbing community when Joe and Richard are staunch supporters of his actions on the mountain. Joe returns to the mountain and memories he has suppressed for 15 years come flooding painfully back and he withdraws from the remainder of the crew. There is an emotional detachment in both men that seems odd to those of us in the audience but none of us have descended from the top of Siula Grande. They both experienced horrors that can't really be imagined even with the assistance of this movie. They have mentally walled off the events of 1985 into a place they don't allow others to and it seems obvious they don't want to go there either.

The "special features" complete the story, and don't diminish the magnitude of the bravery, perseverence, etc seen in the movie. Recommended for those who want to see what humans pushed to the edge can do. My hat is off to Joe and Simon and Richard as well it is plain that Richard was crucial to the survival of the other two.

Save 31% Off

The Three Stooges (2012)

Amazon notified me via email that the new Farrelly Brothers' "The Three Stooges" was ready to be pre-ordered, so I linked over to do so--I hadn't had that much fun in a movie theater in a long time, and couldn't wait to re-visit the film at home along with the usual bounty of DVD extras the Farrellys usually provide (I hope). Imagine my shock when I read the supposedly authoritative "Amazon.com Editorial Review" posted at the film's page with the reviewer saying it was the Farrellys' "weakest effort to date" and "terminally unfunny." Look, I'm smart enough to know one review is just one person's opinion, and that comedy is very personal and a heckuva lot harder to pull off than drama (what's funny to one person is often simply irritating or annoying to another), but when the review is posted on a film's page as the authoritative last word, I have to put my two-cents in. Here's my short review: I either smiled, chuckled, or laughed out loud through the ENTIRE running time of this film, and that very rarely happens for me, hence my 5-star rating. Most comedies, even the best, have slow spots you wait out until the next laugh--it's often the natural flow of a film to have peaks and valleys, but this film had none for me--it was all peaks. Every scene had something for me to at least smile at, whether it was the Stooges themselves, Jane Lynch as a Mother Superior (!), Larry David as a cranky nun (!), Lin Shaye showing up out of the blue in a small role (I love her), Sofia Vergara gamely sparring with the guys, or small touches, surprises, and sight gags that flew by so fast you knew you'd be laughing all over again when you saw it a second time (if we'd had the time we would've gladly stayed to watch it a second time the day we saw it--the friend I saw it with had as much fun watching it as I did). The three leads were perfectly cast, and if you know the Stooges, you'll appreciate even more how perfect they are. It's uncanny how close they are to the originals, and the entire production feels like a respectful and loving homage to them. There is no doubt in my mind the film will spark even more appreciation and discovery of the original Stooges and their huge body of work, and that's exactly what you hope for: that the new film not only succeeds on its own but sparks viewers' interest, appreciation, and respect for the originals.

The Three Stooges started out as short subject films before a feature film, and it's good to see The Three Stooges back on a theater screen.

"The Three Stooges" doesn't have an involved plot or great subtle nuanced acting, it doesn't need it. The plot is pretty basic, the stooges are dropped off at an orphanage some time in the late 70's and as they grow up they wreak havoc on the nuns running the place and of course they're unadoptable. After they grow up Moe (Chris Diamantopoulos), Larry (Sean Hayes), and Curly (Will Sasso) still live at the orphanage and wirk as handymen. Yes, I spelled it wirk because they aren't the brightest bulbs in the socket although they may stick their fingers in the socket! When the orphanage runs into financial problems the boys are sent out into the world to raise $830,000 to save it (shades of the Blues Brothers). Out in the world they're instantly picked by Lydia (Sofia Vergara) and Mac (Craig Bierko) planning to murder Lydia's husband. They give the trio a song and dance of wanting the stooges to kill Mac, but the story is a ruse to get the stooges to kill her husband. In all their bumbling good intentions to collect the $830,000 they foul up the murder plot, and provoke the ire of the murdering couple. All standard stooge fare.

There are a lot of good actors and actresses in "The Three Stooges", Jane Lynch, Brian Doyle Murray, Larry David, Stephen Collins, Sofia Vergara, but Diamantopoulos, Hayes, and Sasso are rightly front and center as the stooges and they do just about every classic stooge bit including a few new ones. And the usual foils of cops, doctors, lawyers, and high society matrons are the brunt of the stooges antics. A note, Moe becomes a reality star on Jersey Shore and its worth the price of admission to watch him dole out some well deserved punishment to the Shore cast.

The movie is episodic to recreate the feel of the original stooge shorts and directors Bobby and Peter Farrelly realize less is more and don't try to make this movie anything more than it is, good popcorn munching fun! Yes, it is violent, but some of the routines seem more intricate than dance routines and the violence is very cartoonish. If there are some of you out there that still aren't convinced, there's a postscript demonstrating how all the hammers are rubber, and how the eye poking is faked.

There are chick flicks and "The Three Stooges" may be a dude flick. I'm not a huge Stooges fan but the movie made me laugh and it was a lot of fun.

Buy The Three Stooges (2012) Now

The Three Stooges, and their unique brand of slapstick humor, are an American comedy institution. The trouble is, you are either rolling on the floor laughing at them, or you think there material is the dumbest shtick in the world. If you fall into the latter category, stop reading this review now, as you will hate this movie with a flaming passion. If a Stooge appreciator or connoisseur, however, then this big-screen adaptation will have you short of breath once again!

For a basic plot summary, this movie follows the head-slapping, hair-pulling, eye-poking adventures of Larry (Sean Hayes), Moe (Chris Diamantopoulos), & Curly (Will Sasso) as they try to raise money to save an orphanage. In typical Stooge fashion, they bumble around for awhile and engage in the sort of hijinks one would expect from the trio. Along the way, they run into the cast of the Jersey Shore, Moe becomes a famous reality star, and the gang even have to mend a relationship issue stemming from their collective past.

This film is a rousing experience because it works on two (well, three, really) levels...

1. It serves as an ode to the original Stooges. Though nothing will ever quite be the same as old Howard, Fine, & Howard, this movie captures their subtle nuances as best as humanly possibly. The original sound effects are used, the casting is spot-on (especially with Moe...one could close their eyes in the theater and think it was Moe Howard himself), and the physical comedy is at its best. Besides the actors themselves, though, some of the plots, music, and camerawork itself honors the original shorts. The movie is split up into three "shorts", the music is the same cackling Stooges theme heard countless times throughout the ages, and some of the cut-aways feature easily-identified dummies being hurled or pummeled in obvious fashion (as happened frequently in the original slapped-together shorts).

2. It is also a re-imagining of the Stooges for a new generation. Instead of re-treading the same old material, the Farelly brothers put the trio in today's time period, what with its similar Depression-era themes and new technological gadgets that befuddled the bumblers even further. The directors even add a bit of a backstory to the characters that actually works pretty well in the context of the overall plot. You can't say this film is utterly devoid of sense or emotion.

3. Finally, in keeping with the hearty Stooges tradition, this movie is just plain funny! As a huge Stooge fan, I came into it with a healthy mixture of excitement and doubt. It vastly exceeded even my wildest expectations and had me belly-laughing throughout. Does every single scene work for everyone? Of course not. However, enough DO work to keep you yuking (or nyuking, if you will) it up for ninety minutes.

Overall, the bottom line for this flick is this: If you enjoy Stooge-type humor, give this one a shot...I think you'll be glad you did! If you don't care for the slapstick style, than stay away or prepare to be bored. This is also a very child-friendly flick that can be enjoyed by literally all ages.

Read Best Reviews of The Three Stooges (2012) Here

When hearing about the making of this movie, I had mixed feelings. You see, my father is a huge Stooge fan and owns about every episode of the three bone heads. While I usually take my mom's side of the entertainment boat, I have always found myself enjoying the Stooges. It's more than just smacks and puns. It's the characters, their history, and their ability to make you laugh.

So when this movie came out, I was worried. Hollywood has a tendency to.....how do I put this.....slaughter TV history's most lovable characters. And when the trailer was realized I was also a little worried because of the dreaded and unneeded "bikini nun" scene.

But during the time of the release my father was very stressed. You see, he is a pastor and a police officer. Both jobs don't really fall under the "fun" category. Some things popped up at the church and county work was starting to get to him. So I thought it might be good for us to wing a visit to the local theater and take in an hour and a half of the Stooges.

Grabbed my popcorn, sat down, and my fingers were crossed....Either this movie would do justice or ruin the Stooges for everyone.....and before I could even finish my first handful of popcorn I started choking on it....from laughter....

Another fact you may want to know is that my father doesn't laugh much. He's got a gift for making people laugh and he's got an amazing sense of humor. But, he doesn't laugh that much. Well, as soon as the movie started that all changed. I have never, repeat, never heard him laugh so much. This movie left you with a huge smile on your face. They did the Stooges, they weren't just doing them, they WERE the stooges. The quirks, the gags, and the "NUKS" were all there.

It took me a full day to get rid of that stupid smile I had on, but that didn't stop me from seeing it again (mom dodged it the first time, but the second my dad MADE her see it). He now calls it his "Favorite movie".

I'm a pushover for movie with good writing....and that's not really what I saw here, there were more slaps than words. But to see the Stooges after all these years come to life again, that was priceless. Would I recommend this movie? That depends. If you loved the Stooges, you need to see this film. If you didn't, then don't torture yourself. But again, for those people who know them, and enjoy them. This movie will make your day and always bring a smile to your face when you think about it.

Want The Three Stooges (2012) Discount?

How did they do it? How did they manage to revive the Three Stooges in such a flawless fashion? They even divided the movie into 3 episodes (Which all follow the same plot, but still!), making it like as if they had created new episodes of the classic slapstick comedy! Believe it or not, this movie fits right into the days of old!

While the plot may have a bit of seriousness involved (The Stooges are trying to save an orphanage where they had spent time there due to them never being adopted as kids And there's sorta more to it, such as attempted murder), it was easily overshadowed by numerous comedy bits (Which come around just as often as in the original show), tons of clever moments, and even the casting alone (The Stooges look EXACTLY like how they were back then, and I didn't think it'd be possible!)!

There is so much to like about the Three Stooges movie that it's impossible to tell it all under this one little review. I recommend you go watch the trailers online. Or better yet, you may as well just go watch the movie right now! You will NOT be disappointed! My little brother, my dad, and I went to go see it just today. We each had enjoyed it GREATLY. I hope you will enjoy this movie as much as we did (And maybe you'd get the same kind of nostalgia my dad did).

Save 42% Off

Mimic (The Director's Cut) (1997)

"Life finds a way." Ian Malcom, "Jurassic Park"

This famous line from Steven Speilberg's dinosaur adventure has become a popular lesson of many science fiction films today. "Mimic," a film in which genetically altered insects become something never intended, is no exception to this particular lesson; in fact, the movie uses it to its advantage on numerous occasions, that, and some very sophisticated special effects and filmmaking techniques. Mexican director Guillermo del Toro, who directed "Cronos," turns what is a basic nature-gone-mad movie into something more terrifying, more chilling, and more suspenseful than anything we've ever seen done before.

That's not to say that "Mimic" is as fresh as a spring breeze. There are elements at work in the film that are all too familiar if you know your science fiction well. There's the obligatory explanation for the havoc surrounding the central characters, scenes involving them being trapped somewhere beyond any help, and a hero in the group that will devise all the plans for escape and the way in which to kill their opponent. But under a new premise, and some very strikingly intense moments, "Mimic" makes the old seem new again.

The hero (or heroine, in this case) is Dr. Susan Tyler (Mira Sorvino), who is called upon by the city of New York to find a cure for a fatal disease striking the city's children. Along with husband Peter Mann (Jeremy Northam), they create a genetically altered breed of insect (revealed as a cross between a cockroach and a praying mantis) to wipe out the disease-infested cockroaches underneath the city.

Of course, the bugs, named the "Judas" breed, were altered in ways that left them with a short life expectancy of only six months, plus a sterile female so that no mating will take place. But, after three years have passed, Susan encounters a bug closely resembling the "Judas" breed insects, and it becomes apparent to her that they have survived.

How did they survive? The movie never explains it, which is best; it's better left as a mystery. It also leaves room for the ensuing action sequences, as Susan and Peter, along with a police officer (Charles Dutton), make their way into the underground subways and abandoned facilities beneath the city streets.

This is where things get really interesting, as del Toro works his magic on us. A simple scene in which Susan attempts to retrieve a flashlight by sticking her hand in a dark hole is full of suspense, while a claustrophobic intensity permeates sequences involving an abandoned subway car where the group seeks refuge from their predators. Accompanying all of this is a heightened sensory perception. Del Toro toys with shadow and light, along with sight and sound, to add an atmospheric feel to each setting. Not since "Seven" have I seen a film that uses this technique so masterfully.

And the message behind it all? It's one we're well familiarized with, that playing God gets us nowhere. Sure, Susan's intentions were in the right place, and we even understand her reasons after an early shot of her in a hospital ward filled with sick children. I think the general theme behind all of the mayhem is not one of toying with science, but one on the many ways that life can change, and evolve into something previously unknown.

"Mimic" has a good cast in its favor. Mira Sorvino shines in a role that differs from others roles of her career, such as "Mighty Aphrodite." But she proves herself able to play a convincing character in any situation. Jeremy Northam is the last person you'd expect to see running through tunnels and putting himself in dangerous situations, but he pulls it off. F. Murray Abraham makes an appearance as Susan's mentor, Dr. Gates, playing the well-educated man to perfection, while Charles Dutton is superbly comical and heroic as Leonard, the police officer.

"Mimic" is a dazzlingly intense adventure that is genuinely suspenseful and totally entertaining. It's ability to tighten the intensity surrounding its sequence of events is a trait rare to this genre, as is its ability to bring us into the atmosphere of the film's murky settings. Del Toro has fashioned a new evolution of sci-fi out of old-school tricks; I highly recommend this film.

I enjoy "Mimic," the movie. I have owned it on VHS, DVD, and now on this nice Director's Cut Blu Ray (Best Buy started selling the Blu Ray on September 6 . . . everyone else will have it on September 27). I am happy with my purchase and I will keep my Blu Ray of "Mimic" because the movie is kind of awesome in that science gone wrong giant bug sort of way.

My three stars for this review are strictly based off of the fact that this Blu Ray release is marketed as a Director's Cut and every single movie website, fan site, movie reviewer site (I think you are getting my drift) has been overjoyed in the fact that Guillermo Del Toro is finally given the chance to "reclaim" "Mimic." There is this whole back story involving executive producers, movie studio big wigs, and creative differences that plagued the development of "Mimic" (It is one of those typical Hollywood stories). It became such a problem, that Del Toro believed "Mimic" was not really his movie, he lost control of it, and did not like the outcome this is all pretty much stated within the new "Reclaiming Mimic" featurette found on the Blu Ray. With a back story such as this, yes, people should be excited for a Director's Cut . . . Del Toro finally gets to reinstate his vision or, at least, what's left of it being that he cannot go back and re-shoot the movie. But, as stated in the "Reclaiming Mimic" featurette, Del Toro is finally happy with the movie's Director's Cut. Without re-shooting the entire film, this is the cut of the movie Del Toro wants the audience to experience.

See, there's a lot of hype. Del Toro did not like the original cut, but is more than happy with his own cut. The studio was too hands on the first time around and completely changed his vision. With all of this promise behind Del Toro reinstating his vision, to me, I was somewhat just disappointed when the movie really wasn't all that . . . different.

(Vague spoilers below . . .)

The action remains the same. There is no alternate ending. There are more character scenes, which are always made to make you feel more for the characters' situations, but . . . I already felt for the characters. So the scenes did not make me "feel more" about them because I already liked them (originally). There are scenes which help to fill in some of the timeline of the narrative and I enjoyed those because they filled in some of the gaps. But again, it doesn't make "Mimic" the Director's Cut a wholly different experience. And that is why this Director's Cut is disappointing and a little bit over-hyped. With all the problems happening behind the scenes of the original, this Director's Cut had a lot of weight behind it, but, if this is all the Director's Cut is, it makes me wonder why exactly Del Toro didn't like the original movie because his vision is really not all that different from what the studio saw.

(Ok, so this review is getting long and I'm going to wrap it up.)

My final word on the subject is this: Buy this movie in order to have a good science versus nature movie on Blu Ray, but do not expect the "Director's Cut" to be a miracle or even all that different, because it is not.

Buy Mimic (The Director's Cut) (1997) Now

A terrific if flawed fantasy/horror film, "Mimic" suffered from studio interference as the film was taken away from Guillermo Del Toro prior to release and recut. In the wake of his success with "Pan's Labrynith", Del Toro was given the opportunity to recut the film, alter the pacing and tone of the film to reflect as much of his original vision as possible and that included reinstating some scenes cut prior to release.

Unfortunately, the meddling began well before the film went before cameras and the pre-production screenplay truly represents the "Director's Cut" of the film but, sadly, that film was never shot. As it stands though "Mimic" is still a terrific fantasy/horror/thriller even if it isn't what he had originally hoped for.

Shot for less than $8 million the film did decent business at the box office (well enough to inspire two sequels that Del Toro wasn't involved in)making $25 million. This new Blu-ray release sparkles with a sharp, nice looking transfer. The film has always looked dark and the Blu-ray gives this film the visual depth that it has always needed and this is a much needed upgrade from the rather murky looking DVD released in 1998.

The presentation isn't perfect however but it still looks exceptionally good particularly compared to what has come before and kudos must be given to Lion's Gate for allowing Del Toro the opportunity to return to this film and improve it. The film has always looked quite grainy and the Blu-ray remains true to the "look" of Del Toro's conception.

Special features include an introduction from Del Toro and a commentary track where the director discusses the challenges he faced making the film from pre to post-production. We also get a fine featuette on the creature design and "Reclaiming Mimic" covers some of the same ground as the commentary track. "Back into the Tunnels" demonstrates what a shoddy DVD we got in the beginning as it provides us with lots of behind-the-scenes footage about the production of the film (the original DVD was virtually bare bones). Finally we get a gag reel, deleted scenes, animatics and the threatrical trailer (outside of a "digitial" copy of the film).

Although compromised (to some degree from the very beginning), "Mimic" has a marvelous idea and the re-editing does a nice copy of capturing the creepy mood that Del Toro was going for as well as restoring some of his original intent in making the movie. We'll never truly get a "Director's Cut" of the film because, quite frankly, there was a lot of stuff that was never shot for the film. Still, what Del Toro has done here has improved the film and the extras go a long way to explaining what went wrong (Miramax and the Weinsteins)during the shooting.

The bottom line: While much remains the same about "Mimic" there's enough change to the structure of the over all film that improves it. Lion's Gate does a great job with the transfer considering the source and the extras are top notch. My only complaint is that for comparison purposes we should have gotten both cuts on Blu-ray.

Read Best Reviews of Mimic (The Director's Cut) (1997) Here

This may be a very personal thing, but my cousin once saw Mira Sorvino in a karaoke bar in Kyoto five years ago. I still regret that she (my cousin) didn't have my phone number to invite me.

Anyway, Mira Sorvino was here in Japan for the promotion of this creep film "Mimic." It was a bit surprise she took the role of entomologist Dr. Tyler, because it was soon after she got an Oscar for that Woody Allen film. But she judged right for this film turned out successful, being directed by Guillermo Del Toro, later to direct "Blade 2."

The story is, in my opinion, another clever look on urban legend. In New York, a deadly disease carried by roaches burst out, and many children suffer from that, most cases leading to death. Entomologist Susan Tyler (Sorvino), asked by CDC specialst Peter (Jeremy Northan, of "Emma" and "The Net"), embarks on a plan based on releasing a genetically enhanced new spieces. It worked; the disease soon is gone, but that's only the beginning of another plague that is more deadly.

And that is THE Thing, that acts like humans, but in fact, lethal enemy to us. They inhabit in a disused subway constructions where unlucky characters have to be trapped. Though the story seems derailed in the final chapter of the film, the film, as a whole, maintains its creepy atomosphere throughout, and those weird feelings that some people might get when they watch insects -something akin to awe and fear -are tactfully expressed in the darkly images of the underground world.

The cast is also superb; besides intelligent Sorvino, you see Charles S. Dutton ("Alien 3"), Josh Brolin ("NIghtwatch"), F. Murray Abraham ("Amadeus") and Giancorlo Giannini ("Hannibal"). And some may be amuzed by the stylish opening title sequence by Kyle Cooper, who did his job in "Se7en." and many others.

Basically, love or hate film, "Mimic" will engage the heart of the people who love the kind of film like David Cronenberg. The story's defect is obvious (and the film at several points resembles that of underrated John Sayles film "The Alligator"), but if you go in for an eerie feelings of his films, it is worth a look.

Want Mimic (The Director's Cut) (1997) Discount?

Director: Guillermo del Toro

Cast: Mira Sorvino, Jeremy Northam, Alexander Goodwin, Giancarlo Giannini, Charles Dutton, Josh Brolni, Alix Koromzay, F. Murray Abraham, James Costa.

Running Time: 105 minutes

Rated R for terror/violence and language.

"Mimic", like all great genre pictures, exists comfortably in two spheres: on the simple level, it speedily entertains as a gory fright film imbued with mordant humor; on the more difficult level, it provides symbolism and thematic undertow. Best of all, these two levels often work at the same time, such as when an old priest gets tossed off a building by one of the creatures, plummeting past a neon "Jesus Saves" sign, and crashing to a gory death on the pavement. A little while later, the creature drags the dead body into the gaping black maw of an open sewer. The latter is what "Mimic" is really really for: the importance of breeding and offspring. The movie's surreal opening, with its rows of linen-canopied hospital beds all in a row like so many little coffins, shows us sick children, gasping for air because a cockroach-borne disease is carrying them off. The battle lines are drawn in the first few moments: Us versus Them. Scientists Mia Sorvino and Jeremy Northam glean the cure for the dread disease by concocting a genetically-altered bug whose secretions kill off the diseased cockroaches; "Judas Breed", as it's called, will be the only true breed this couple will engender: Sorvino fails pregnancy tests at home, while their creature, supposedly unable to reproduce, grows apace underneath Manhattan's fallopian sewers. It merely seems like "nature's way" that the Judas Breed has mutated to the size of six feet, and can mimic standing upright like their human prey, It's also fitting that these creatures instinctively hone in on the vulnerability of children: they viciously rip apart two kids, and befriend another who has managed to communicate with them by clicking soup-spoons together.

This is an atmospheric thriller from Guillermo del Toro, director of "The Devil's Backbone" and "Cronos", who manages to mix great direction with good old fashioned monster horror to great effect. The concept itself is clever, even if the idea of bugs evolving to look very like humans is a little fa-fetched; however, once the action moves to the subway the fact that the bugs are clearly lethal no matter what they look like, makes this less important. The film is quite short and makes the action come quicker and seem more urgent. Several people get killed by the bug that wouldn't usually get killed in this sort of horror (children for example), this is very effective as it is quite scary to see the unexpected happen. The mood is dark throughout and Del Toro uses the sewers and subway to great effect, creating a real sense of claustrophobia, like the humans have entered the bug's world and not the other way round. The bugs are shown early on in the film usually not a good idea (keep it hidden in the "Jaws" way), but here the special effects are good enough to make the bug really believable, yet the horror is not in seeing the bugs but in they way they hunt and kill, but the fear is in what could happen. The cast are great, Sorvino especially is very good in the lead. Jeremy Northam and Charles S. Dutton are good in support and Abraham Murray adds a bit of cameo class (though his role is quite unnecessary). The director is the real star, adding some genuine scares and real mood to a film that could have easily been just another creature-feature that goes straight to video and straight to the back of your mind. Overall a superior creature horror film.

Save 13% Off

Grave of the Fireflies (2012)

I generally don't cry at movies. I love any movie that can move me enough to shed a tear or two. Grave Of the Fireflies is not one of those movies. In those movies even though I'm sad the final scenes leave me with a residual hope that while some tragic event has just occured the charecters involved will grow and live better. Grave of the Fireflies doesn't do this. There is no hope or possiabilty of things getting better. This is Life at it's cruelest. Life that will never get better. This movie doesn't move you, it shatters you.

Seita And Setsuko (the boy and His little sister) aren't Heros and their abusive aunt isn't the villian. Neither for that matter is either side of the war protrayed as good or bad in these movie. This is just a story of people being people. some kind, some indiffrent and some compleatly harsh. Seita makes mistakes that many children in his position would.

Although fifteen years old this film is still very beatiful. The images it portrays are quiet and subdued yet elegent. The final scene is something that shall forever be burned into my brain. It's touching and heartwrenching finality should break most people.

Well I love Grave of the Fireflies. I Love it for it's unflinching look at war and life, It's graceful bueaty as it portrays a young girl playing amidst Fireflies, and for what it does to me at the end.

Why must fireflies die so young?

"Grave of the Fireflies" ("Hotaru no haka") is one of the most powerful anti-war films I have ever seen, which means that it has no competition when it comes to emotional impact in terms of animated films. The death of Bambi's mother was a traumatic shock, but nothing like the sense of despair and grief that overwhelms you by the end of this film. The film begins with the spirit of a young boy showing us his death in a train station, after which we follow the fireflies into the past to see his story. At the beginning of the original movie of "Brian's Song" we were told: "All true stories end in death. This is a true story." So is "Grave of the Fireflies" because I have no problem granting the legitimacy of "truth" to fiction.

In the last months of World War II an American fire bomb raid destroys the port city of Kobe, where almost all of the buildings are made of wood. Seita (Tsutomu Tatsumi/J. Robert Spencer) is a 14-year old boy who survives along with his 4-year old sister Setsuko (Ayano Shiraishi/Rhoda Chrosite). They were separated from their mother during the raid, which spares them from her fate. Their father is a navy officer serving in the Imperial Navy at sea, and the two kids go off to live with an aunt. With both his school and the war factory where we worked gone, Seita does not know what to do. So he tries to take care of his sister. But his aunt constantly berates him and after trading his mother's kimonos for rice that she stingly shares with the children, Seita decides to take Setsuko and live in a couple of caves dug for bomb shelters. For a while their live remains idyllic, but then there is nothing left to trade for food, and no food to be bought for money. Seita has to steal food to survive while Setsuko is getting weaker and weaker from hunger.

This film is based on the semi-autobiographical novel written by Akiyuki Nosaka, which won the Naoli Prize, the Japanese equivalent of the Pulitzer Prize for Literature. Like Seita, he survived the fire bombing with a younger sister, who died in his care. Obviously the story stems from a sense of guilty and I believe telling this story was confessional rather than cathartic for Nosaka. Writer-director Isao Takahata turns this tragedy into what can only be described as a poetic experience, achieving a cinematic lyricism that could never have been accomplished in a live-action film (e.g., the way the fireflies have a counterpoint in the pieces of ash that drift on the wind after the fire bombings). There is a quietness to this film, a sense of contemplation that emphasizes important and small moments alike, and makes scenes linger as the heart-rending story plays out to its fatal conclusion. The voice work by both of the young girls playing Setsuko is extremely effective; I have a slight preference for that done by Ayano Shiriashi simply because it is much more naturalistic than what you usually find in anime depicting children.

"Graves of the Fireflies" is an unforgettable film, one which will reduce most viewers to tears if not outright sobbing. Watching it is a painful experience, but then a film depicting the horrors of war and showing what happens to young children is supposed to have that effect. Viewing it a second time makes the experience even more intense (you probably will not catch what Setsuko's last words are the first time through, but be prepared for what it will do to you when you watch the film again). You will never, ever forget this film and you should be very, very careful about showing it to younger children, because it will change forever what they think about animated films. It will do that for you as well.

Buy Grave of the Fireflies (2012) Now

Note: It seems a crime that this classic has been off the DVD market. Now this digitally remastered and restored version will be able to reintroduce the film to a new generation.

"Grave of the Fireflies" is a film that I'd heard about for years before I finally got around to viewing it. As one of the most well-respected early anime classics--of course, I expected great things. I knew vaguely what the picture was about and knew that its tone strove for realism as opposed to fantasy. But what I didn't really comprehend is that it would be such a mature story geared toward adult audiences. The sophistication, complicated subject matter, and sorrow contained within "Grave of the Fireflies" made it one of the more surprisingly moving films that I'd seen in quite some time.

The story is simplistic. Set in war-torn Japan near the end of the World War II, two kids must deal with the unexpected death of their mother in a bombing attack. With no one to care for them and their home destroyed, they attempt to live independently. Naturally, there are many obstacles to overcome, and the horrors of war are depicted with surprising candor. I had not expected the film to be so forthright in its depiction of such a serious subject matter.

What really distinguishes "Grave" is that it becomes a powerful story of love and commitment. As the brother embraces the responsibility of caring for his much younger sister, we see him take the reins of adulthood. It is a coming-of-age story by necessity. The relationship between the siblings is amazingly realistic and thoughtful. And even though the film is animated, it is perhaps one of the most stirring tales of familial loyalty that you can see. The plot unfolds in a heartbreaking way with moments of such tenderness, such love, and such inevitability. The film never condescends to its characters or its audience.

Not a cheerful or easy film, "Grave" easily transcends most animated endeavors. The film has, through the years, reduced many of my friends to tears. For a realsitic anime film to elicit genuine and earned emotions, that's an enormous success. One note on the technical animation. Keep in mind that the film was made in 1988, it's not going to be a glossy or polished Pixar film. Instead its appearance and style is appropriate for its timeframe and narrative. But beyond the visuals, more importantly, the film is a powerful and relevant meditation on war and family. KGHarris, 11/06.

Read Best Reviews of Grave of the Fireflies (2012) Here

First off, to get this out of the way, you should be watching this movie so you can know how beautiful and incredible animation can be this is a visually gorgeous and lush movie.

Beyond the animation, Grave of the Fireflies is truly in the top of perfectly written scripts. The subject matter of the film is war and death, but specifically how war affects the innocents. This is Japan in the end months of WWII during the firebombings, when food was scarce, and children without parents were left to die.

This story is incredibly sad, but so important to hear and see it not like a mainstream Hollywood sad movie that might make you cry while watching, but otherwise has no power to alter your perceptions of life. This is truly sad the young kids die, and they die very horribly sickness and starvation. The whole process is so well-written, you'll feel the hunger and the sickness yourself, and the animation adds to the effect.

It is so welcome to have a movie that doesn't turn out all right in the end, but turns out awfully darn depressing, because a lot of times, life just plain sucks and isn't fair, if not for me, then for many other people. It is good to remember that not everything always turns out okay, and nothing is wrong in showing this realistically in a movie. Would I show this to young kids? Hell yes I think young kids would identify very strongly. And if we can get our young kids to see the ridiculous nature of war at an early age, mayhaps we shall finally have a generation that doesn't feel a need to kill each other over irrelevant philosophic, racial, genetic, geographic, etc., BS.

This movie and the story has not left my mind since I saw it a point of proof that this is an incredible movie. But do be prepared to feel amazingly sad. I saw this movie in the winter. Then about 5 months later, in the summer, when I saw my first fireflies of the year, I was overcome with an incredible sadness. That's how powerful this movie is.

I will be using this with my youth groups, probably for many years. It has so much worthy of deconstructing and analyzing this is truly artwork, for it does all things that art is supposed to do it has the power to change you, and the power to not let you forget the story. Excellent all the way around!

And make sure to get one that is letterboxed, to get the whole movie (why are movies even released without being letterboxed? People are stupid...). And get a copy that is in Japanese with subtitles (unless, of course, you speak Japanese). You really, really have to hear the original Japanese, and the original actors. Amazing movie. A billion stars.

Want Grave of the Fireflies (2012) Discount?

im a diesel mechanic working on buoy tender ships in northern michigan, where its negative 30 degrees. i have a full sleeve tattoo, and a jagged scar on my face. my wife is ex military and a lumberjack's daughter. we bawled at this movie.

i canNOT express how good this was.

Save 40% Off