Puppet Master 2 (1991)

I recently dumped a lot of hard earned money into purchasing the rare out-of-print Puppet Master box set that contains the first 7 films. All the DVDs for the most part have decent picture quality considering what Full Moon Entertainment usually pumps out. Sadly the presentation of "Puppet Master II" is really disappointing. The picture is not good at all and is actually no better than the original VHS version. Some portions of the film turn digital for a short time. I might have forgiven the picture quality if the DVD weren't defective. Towards the end of the the picture gets all wavy. It's really annoying and makes the film hard to watch. I at first thought it was my DVD so I purchased another copy from a different seller. Some wavy picture. Every person I talk to says they have the same wavy effect on their DVD. I don't think this poor DVD transfer will be fixed anytime soon because the stock footage used from this film that was edited into Curse of the Puppet Master contanins the same annoying wavy effect. The box set would have been worth it if it weren't for the crappy presentation of Puppet Master II. If your willing to forgive the defective wavy picture, then by all means buy the box set. Otherwise...you've been warned.

Update 5/2/06: I did find it most almost humerous that I've been getting a lot of bad feedback on this review by sellers. They are just upset that I pointed out problems with the DVD to warn potential buyers because they want outragous prices for the film. My point is not to help sellers sell the DVD at high prices but to warn potential buyers so they aren't surprised and disappointed by the DVD like I was.

It was inevitable, wasn't it? You knew damn well while watching the first film that there would be more. It's a good thing though coz Puppet Master 2 is pretty good.

A group of paranormal investigators come to the abandoned Bodega Inn to research the wild claims made by the surviving psychic of the first film. Naturally the puppets are still hanging around. However, this time the puppets have managed to resurrect their master, Andre Toulon. We now find out that the secret elixir that gives life is a greenish muck made from human brains. The puppets need Toulon to create more of this mixture to bring life back to the ailing Jester doll, and they happily supply the brains needed for the brew. Toulon has other plans. The leader of the paranormal investigators, Carolyn, bears a striking resemblance to Toulon's deceased wife and he becomes smitten with her. He parades around the hotel in a bandaged Invisible Man getup waiting for his chance to get her.

By God, can Carolyn's new beau save her from being turned into a creepy looking mannequin??

While not as good as the first film, Puppet Master 2 is still a fun ride. At first it seems like a rehashing of the first movie, but ends up throwing some interesting plot points around. The investigators eventually get pushed to the back burner and the film focuses more on Toulon and his interaction with the puppets. The puppet FX are done once again by David Allen, who now also steps into the director's chair. A new puppet with a blowtorch arm is introduced, appropriately named Torch. Most screen time seems to be reserved for him and Blade, the rest of the puppets aren't shown as much as before. The film's a tad gorier than the first one as well.

What it really boils down to is if you liked the tone, mood, quirkiness and characters established in the first movie, there's really no reason why you wouldn't find this an entertaining movie.

Buy Puppet Master 2 (1991) Now

I saw this about 15 times and I love it.The Puppets are cool and evil and the wicked Puppet Master returns from the grave!

With hit music from the first movie and a hot cast this is a Puppet Master film that kicks butt!

Read Best Reviews of Puppet Master 2 (1991) Here

Not nearly as good, charming or fun as the original. But it's still worth it if you loved the part one and even more so if you are hoping for something silly and weird. Just lower your expectations...okay, lower them a lot...with beer.

SEQUEL SIDEBAR: This movie picks up right where Puppet Master (1989) leaves off.

A team of four paranormal investigators and older psychic Camille (Nita Talbot; Frightmare, Amityville 1992) venture to the very same hotel as in Puppet Master (1989) to learn just what Dr. Whitaker (part 1's survivor) saw that drove him mad. [There's a good way to reduce the budget of an already low budget horror: use the exact same set!]

Things get stupidly weird when the oddly wardrobed Eriquee Chanee, a thick accented man mummified in gauze, introduces himself as the hotel's owner. We quickly learn that he is actually Toulon, reanimated by his faithful puppets. Listening to his over-hammed up alchemical lectures to his puppets in that awful accent is truly painful. Puppet Master was a fun, playful romp that didn't take itself too seriously. This character turns the franchise in a farcical direction.

What's worse is that this part two's Toulon lacks the gentle, kind nature of part one's Toulon. They also gave him that ridiculous accent and basically made him into an evil, over-the-top villain with uber-weird motives that rely on freshly squeezed human brain juice serving as the necro-biofuel of eternal undeath. In part one, he was just a normal sounding nice old guy who made breathed life into his puppets by whispering some ancient Egyptian incantations; it was much more graceful and in better taste.

Generally, the acting is more wooden than the puppets, which come with their own amusing flavors. Pinhead has man hands (as in a stop-motion puppet with live-action human hands), Leech Woman magically regurgitates leeches, Tunneler has a drill on his head, Blade has a hook for one hand and a blade for the other but somehow seems the nicest, Jester strikes me as pure evil, and newcomer Torch has a flame thrower. Sadly, the puppet kills pale in comparison to part one.

This movie just gets weirder and weirder as it persists and this is largely the fault of this R-rated cartoonish Toulon character. The movie reaches its climactic ridiculousness when Toulon drinks some potion he makes from human brain juice, then slits his own throat above the open mouth of a dead victim he has fashioned into a man-sized female puppet so that the puppet-woman can drink it and assume the life of his wife who died by Nazi hands decades ago. There! Now did you really think I could say so many weird things in just one run-on sentence? I thought not!

Watch this for a beer, boobs and blood night with the guys. The movie will provide ample doses of the latter two, so you just need to bring a six pack.

Want Puppet Master 2 (1991) Discount?

My opinion of Puppet Master II is about the same as my opinion of the first Puppet Master. It's great when the puppets are on screen, killing and looking creepy. However, when the puppets aren't around, the movie isn't that great. It takes itself too seriously. I actually favor Demonic Toys over the Puppet Master series. That one at least had a nice sense of humor...and Tracy Scoggins.

Save 12% Off

Pale Flower (The Criterion Collection) (1964)

This is an absolutely beautiful yakuza film by Masahiro Shinoda. It is much deeper and thought-provoking than typical yakuza b-movies, which glorify violence and the gangster lifestyle. However, this is not a b-movie, but more of a poetic and artistic yakuza noir. It was films like this, and the famous yakuza films by Kinji Fukasaku such as the 'Battles without Honor' series, and 'Graveyard of Honor' that redefined the yakuza genre into morality plays that were highly critical of the criminal aspects of Japanese society. Thus, the film is not action-packed, but much slower in pace, which actually makes it much stronger.

This edition, released by Home Vision Entertainment, has a good transfer and picture quality, and the film also boasts a very good score. The music is especially powerful near the end of the film. Overall, it is a must for anyone who likes yakuza films, film noir, or Japanese cinema.

What can I say about a blu-ray Criterion black and white Japanese yakuza film so well executed that I have to watch it over and over? What can I say about purposely semi-overblown whites melting into grays and the blackest of blacks to create an magnificently incredible viewing experience? Nothing. Of course one has to appreciate film to appreciate this type of film....the score sounds like Lalo Schifrin meets Forbidden Planet. Don't get this one if you enjoy vhs or have ADDit's not very long, but you just won't get it. If you are new to this type of film and you can handle subtitles you need to see this....

Buy Pale Flower (The Criterion Collection) (1964) Now

(4 1/2) stars. "Pale Flower" is the complete movie package, with a strong primary story but also good looks in terms of how it takes advantage of its black & white, retro-style, and eye-catching lead characters. Unlike many other Japanese films of this genre and time period, the music was also a good fit and didn't suffer from trying to sound too "western".

The movie explores two people, a criminal and a criminal wannabe, who both seek a fast life they know is meaningless, who want to find something more even as their gut tells them there is nothing more to be found. The power of the film shows how easily people can be fooled by, and try to fill their live's with, superficial actions that provide only a temporary rush and escape. The characters know this, but feel life's other options are just as pointless or beyond their reach. Ryo Ikebe puts in a strong performance and oozes cool, I'm not sure why I haven't seen him in more leading man roles.

It is easy for the viewer to get seduced by the superficial highs as well, as you find yourself rooting for two very charismatic people who, while not outright evil, are certainly not trying to leave any meaningful mark on the world (being a killer doesn't help much of course). They know it is all a facade however, on the one hand feeling they should try to live the "decent life", but not enough to run the risk of being mired in the tedium of everyday catchings.

The 1960's Japanese gangster world of gambling is interesting, including playing some games I had never seen before, but serves mostly as a convenient backdrop to a movie that is primarilly about the human condition. Don't expect any happy endings here. While the climax of the movie is abrupt and ultimately feels unsatisfactory, it is never the less probably an appropriate ending that just comes too soon for a movie you don't want to stop watching, and for characters you care about even when you know their is little worth admiring. What sometimes looks like an attempt at heroism or honor might have just as much to do with a willingness to trade one bad set of circumstances for another. In the case of Ikebe's character, perhaps the best thing he can do is to remove himself from other people's lives before the corrupting influence of his presence can have its full effect.

Compared to some of Criterion's other Japanese movies from this era, this one is more of a "gritty" noir style despite its parallel retro good looks. While most of the characters dress like they could be out of a Japanese 007 Jame Bond, this is not a "pop" movie like Suzuki's "Branded to Kill". The closest I have seen to this is some of the material in Eclipse Series 17: Nikkatsu Noir (The Criterion Collection), but all of those suffer from some minor problems. "Pale Flower" is clearly the best of the bunch.

If you've already seen this and want to see a different film that also focuses on two people addicted to gambling, albeit with a totally different backdrop and with character's you can root for, also see Oscar & Lucinda Oscar & Lucinda. It's an English movie and in color, so if you're looking for more asian films by Criterion it may not be your cup of tea. And if you haven't seen "Pale Flower" yet, it is an excellent movie and definitely worth adding to your foreign film collection.

Read Best Reviews of Pale Flower (The Criterion Collection) (1964) Here

The shots of Tokyo that open up Pale Flower are fairly stunning. Pale Flower has great musical score and several nice set pieces set in the Japanese Underworld of the early sixties. I especially liked the horse racing sequence where the droll Yakuza bosses play chess with other people's lives brief though it is. Get out your checklist: Yakuza/Gangster/ Amor Fou/ Stark Cinematography. If those are on your sheet you probably will enjoy Pale Flower.

The extras are a little scant for a Criterion release (hence the deduction of a star) but the transfer and restoration are quite pristine.

Want Pale Flower (The Criterion Collection) (1964) Discount?

I won't go into detail about what this movie is about, cause you can read that anywhere, but will say to see it on Blu Ray is an incredible experience. Probably one of the best films I have seen.

Save 50% Off

Richard III (Criterion Collection) (1955)

Those who criticize Laurence Olivier and Alan Dent -co-authors of the screenplay -for taking certain liberties with Shakespeare's play should also criticize Shakespeare for taking certain liberties with the historical material on which he often relied so heavily. In this instance, Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland, Vol. 6, and various Tudor Historians. In my opinion, such quibbling is a fool's errand. This much we do know about the historical Richard III. He was born in 1452 in Fotheringay Castle, Northamptonshire, the youngest son of Richard, Duke of York. He was created Duke of Gloucester by his brother, Edward IV, in 1461, accompanied him into exile (1470), and played a key role in his restoration (1471). Rewarded with part of the Neville inheritance, he exercised vice regal powers, and in 1482 re-captured Berwick-upon-Tweed from the Scots. When Edward died (1483) and was succeeded by his under-age son, Edward V, Richard acted first as protector, but within three months, he had overthrown the Woodvilles (relations of Edward IV's queen), arranged for the execution of Lord Hastings (c.1430-83), and had himself proclaimed and crowned as the rightful king. Young Edward and his brother were probably murdered in the Tower on Richard's orders, although not all historians agree. He tried to stabilize his position but failed to win broad-based support. His rival Henry Tudor (later Henry VII), confronted him in battle at Bosworth Field (August 22, 1485), when Richard died fighting bravely against heavy odds. Though ruthless, he was not the absolute monster Tudor historians portrayed him to be, nor is there proof he was a hunchback.

Cleverly, this film begins with the final scene of Henry IV, Part III, the coronation of Edward IV (Cedric Hardwicke). Locating himself at a strategic distance from the throne, the Duke of Gloucester (Olivier) carefully observes those around him. He shares with those who see this film or read the play his most private thoughts and feelings, many of which are as deformed as his body. Gloucester's "winter of discontent" will soon end. With a systematic tenacity unsurpassed by any other of Shakespeare's villains, Gloucester's coronation as Richard III (his own "glorious summer") will be the fulfillment of his royal ambition. The acting throughout the cast is outstanding. I do not recall another film in which Olivier, John Gielgud (George. Duke of Clarence), and Ralph Richardson (Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham) all appeared together, joined by Claire Bloom (Lady Anne Neville) and Stanley Baker (Henry Tudor). Special note should also be made of Otto Heller's cinematography which is integrated seamlessly with their performances. It is a pleasure to have this film now available in a DVD format, one which offers much sharper images and much clearer sound. Other special features of this DVD version include high-definition digital transfer; newly discovered footage; a commentary by playwright and stage director Russell Lees and John Wilder, former Governor of the Royal Shakespeare Company; 1966 BBC interview with Olivier hosted by Kenneth Tynan; a 12-minute television trailer; a theatrical trailer; and an essay by film historian Bruce Eder.

Only two of Orson Welles' Shakespeare films rival "Richard III" for the title of greatest Shakespeare movie ever made. That said, Olivier's film may contain the most sheerly enjoyable performance any actor gave on film. His Duke of Gloucester is the definitive performance. Elia Kazan once said Olivier had a certain girlish quality, and that quality is used in the film: His Richard is seductive--a prancing, charming monster whose voice sounds like "honey mixed with razor blades." But one look into his black eyes, framed by false hawk nose, violently angled eyebrows and fright pageboy wig, will tell you that he's also stone-cold pure evil. Richard enacts all our homicidal, plotting fantasies as he cheerfully knocks off all his stuffy relatives and rivals.

Olivier emphasizes the black comedy and wittiness of Shakespeare's play, which he cut and refashioned into a star vehicle for himself. Though Sirs Gielgud, Richardson and Hardwicke co-star, they don't make much of an impression. (Blame that on Shakespeare too) Interestingly, Olivier later regretted not having cast Orson Welles as Buckingham.

You experience two major innovations concerning the filming of Shakespeare: the first is Olivier's old custom of using extremely stylized, artificial sets, thereby making Shakespeare's stylized, artificial verse fit in with the settings. The second is the source of Olivier's triumph: he delivers his soliloquys directly to the camera. This daring move destroys the fourth wall and takes true advantage of what the movies offer. He becomes our friend and confidante and we become complicit in his mounting evil. The production values are top-notch: we get deliriously vibrant technicolour, William Walton's pompous, irresistible music of pageantry, and the book-of-hours sets. And through those sets Olivier's camera subtly glides and skulks like the snake Richard himself is. Olivier is still an underrated director, and his grasp of the frame's spatial properties is excellent: he knew how to move the camera into and out of the frame for maximum impact. For an example, look at the moment Richard finally becomes King, and his satanic powers become unbottled: He slides down the bell rope to greet his minions, and expecting to shake his hand they approach, only to fall on their knees when Richard silently demands they kiss it. As they sink downward, the camera flees backward until the awful composition is complete, with half a dozen men in black on their knees as Richard presides all in the center of the frame: on twisted and bent legs as the bells announce the triumph of evil.

Buy Richard III (Criterion Collection) (1955) Now

This review is for the Criterion Collection DVD edition of the film.

Lawrence Olivier directed and stars in this great movie. As this is a Shakespeare release, I see no need to write a synopses. The acting is incredible and the photography is great also.

The Criterion Collection has done a fine job releasing this in a double disc set. It includes footage that was recently rediscovered and not seen for many years prior to the release.

The special features are:

"Great Acting: Laurence Olivier" A 1966 interview with Lawrence Olivier conducted for the BBC, a 12 minute featurette/trailer for the film as well as a theatrical trailer. There are also production and publicity photos and lobby cards. The film also has an optional audio commentary track by Russell Lees and John Wilders.

This is a must for Shakespeare fans.

Read Best Reviews of Richard III (Criterion Collection) (1955) Here

No one could rival Laurence Olivier (Hamlet, Henry V, Richard III) as the scheming, ruthless youngest son of the 3rd Duke of York, who stopped at nothing to be King Richard III. His first appearance was deceptive. I noticed only a big nose and recognized him only after he spoke. Burdened with a crooked back, limp and shrunk hand, his ambition for kingship only burnt more feverishly. With disguised humbleness, he made peace with other royalties. His words were sugar-coated and gay. He killed Warwick, the 'KingMaker' who helped enthrone his elder brother as King Edward IV, and wooed Warwick's daughter Anne(the beautiful Claire Bloom) to marry him shortly after killing her husband. His planned murders of his elder brother Duke of Clarence, Lord Hastings, his young nephews (heirs-to-be), his wife Anne made even today's politics pale and unexciting.

Yet the movie about such a dark character was beautiful in VistaColour, set and costumes, cinematography. Scenes of executions, naïve Lord Hastings (Alec Clunes) walking into his death trap, innocent heirs-to-be greeting uncle Richard and Richard's final battle are memorable. All the other characters exuded integraity, royality and humanity. They were handsome in appearance and noble in heart, so different from Richard III. Even the once accomplice Duke of Buckingham (Ralph Richardson), without whose help there would be no Richard III, showed a moment of caution in doing any more evil. Perhaps it's this great contrast between Richard and everyone else that made the movie luring and tragic. In his last battle of Bosworth Field, Laurence Olivier showed a more reflective and human side of Richard III. When nearly everything on his side was lost, he marched, with a handful of supporters including his royal page (Stewart Allen), and fought valiantly.

The movie also succeeded in its clarity and fluidity. The powerplay of an excellent cast of experienced actors with great screen presence made 155 minutes fly without notice. With no prior knowledge of the Wars of Roses (House of York vs House of Lancaster), I am not at all lost in the many characters and relationship. And the crowning of Henry Tudor, 2nd Earl of Richmond, as Henry VII marked the beginning of the most filmed Tudor dynasty a perfect prologue of films about the lives of Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth.

Want Richard III (Criterion Collection) (1955) Discount?

Anything filmed in Vistavision (or its wider cousin Technirama) will look incredible (like White Christmas) when properly transferred to blu-ray (unlike One-eyed Jacks), and Richard III does just that on blu-ray (Vistavision was not only wider than 1:33, but also taller--each frame was actually two frames, with the film running horizontally as opposed to vertically, which was necessary to give it more detail).... It looks fantastic, with great detail and tremendous colors.... We all know the story (or should, anyway), so I will stick to the quality of this release.... The mono LCPM 1.0 audio works very well with the great score and the dialogue-heavy script and does just what it should.... As far as the extras are concerned, they are pretty much the same as on the DVD, with the addition of a restoration comparison hosted by Martin Scorcese (wherever there is great color, he will thankfully appear), which shows what a great job was done restoring this masterwork.... Must-own....

Save 25% Off

Frozen Planet ,Life Exclusive 2 Pack (Blu-ray Disc) (2012)

First and foremost, the blu-ray quality on both of these is amazing. These two blu-ray are probably some of the very best qualities you will ever find. Absolutely amazing. Secondly, David Attenborough version is by far my favorite, but please keep reading.

Life

I own both the David Attenborough and Oprah edition of Life (I already had the David Attenborough edition when somebody bought me the Oprah edition just recently, but I kept them both). There are major differences in narrative quality, but all in all I think Oprah did a pretty good job. I try to stay optimistic and positive about everything, so needless to say, I was pleased.

If you like Oprah and her personality, then I think she brings a little something different to this documentary. David Attenborough, an actual naturalist, has been my favorite narrator since I was a kid so it will always be hard to beat his version of Life. That being said, I can't fairly deduct stars from this review on the sole basis that she did not stack up to David Attenborough expertise. These two Life's do not have identical dialogue. There were times I thought that Oprah's edition could have elaborated on certain scenes, but again, this is basing it off of the detailed paid by David Attenborough's edition. Some reviewers on other sites felt Oprah's edition seemed dumbed down, which to be fair to those reviewers, could come off that way. The narrative when lacking depth, does seem like it misses some true educational platforms.

I have seen a lot of criticism about Oprah's edition, and for true David Attenborough fans this may be warranted. On the other hand, I don't feel that Oprah's edition is bad at all. I think Oprah did really well. I truly believe that if she had narrated it first people would be less critical. It's just unfortunate for Oprah that she had to go toe to toe with one of the greats in the business (considering that this is David Attenborough sole expertise in the industry). In Oprah's defense I bet David Attenborough would not rank as high as Oprah in the afternoon talk show department lol.

Conclusion: If you are a true purist of David Attenborough or the art of detailed documentary then go with David Attenborough edition. If you like Oprah and narrative that is a little more westernized then go with Oprah. I'm not taking anything away from Oprah's edition or even saying her version isn't good. I'm just saying more than anything......it's geared towards a totally different audience. In someways I feel that maybe Oprah's edition might be more suitable for children (PARENT ALERT), while David Attenborough edition is more in depth and sometimes uses words that is not customary to a child's vocabulary (but that may be highly debatable for some).

Frozen Planet

This is David Attenborough version of Frozen Planet so as I've already pointed out, this is automatic gold. David Attenborough as usual brings a personality and expertise that is unmatched in nature documentaries. There is really no need to go into too much depth on this one, but just know that it's fantastic.

Overall this set is a great deal. I got my double feature pack (Life and Frozen Planet) as a gift from Best Buy for $19.99 (the gifter didn't remove the price tag). Amazon has it for $39. Either way it's a great price for almost 14 hours worth of film.

***Disclaimer****

If you buy this edition then know that it clearly says Oprah Winfrey on the cover. It really wouldn't be fair to buy this and then complain that it's not the David Attenborough edition. If you want his edition it is also sold on Amazon. Hope this helps somebody make a decision.

The Five Deadly Venoms (1978)

First of all let me tell you how good is this Kung Fu classic. The story is good, about 5 Venoms who live a secret life and are trying to be found by the Poison Clan's master. I think we should all have this fun kung fu flick in our collection but! They have to come out with a better DVD. This DVD has no special features, no original language track, and the image quality has not been restored at all, they didn't even try! So unless you must have it, wait for a better print.

You can add me to the nostalgia group, having seen this movie as an 11 year old in 1981 on a Saturday afternoon matinee. I was quite thrilled to find the DVD a few days ago, having eschewed the then difficult to find VHS version. DVD quality is pretty poor, but they were of course hampered going from a disintegrating master. Ghosting and screen artifacts abound, but hey, that's really secondary to anyone who's been searching for this title for some time. While formulaic in the genre sense, [dying master tells pupil to avenge him / right a wrong using every ounce of technique] the story is carried out in a much more sublime whodunit, as a teasing mystery with spurts of action. The last of the Poison Clan practitioners [dying of course] commands young pupil to find the hidden money cache of an earlier teacher before his boundlessly corrupt former students do. Centipede, Snake, Scorpion, Lizard, and Toad already have a head start on our last pupil who hasn't mastered any one of the techniques mentioned, but is versed enough in all of them to be effective when combined w/ another. The story progresses as the rich teacher is found in turn by the various factions. Centipede and Snake have teamed up as have Toad and Lizard. The mysterious Scorpion does not make his true intentions known, skulking around in the darkness to pick up the pieces and sow dissent. Slowly through the film, the members become clear and eventually fight one another which are the highlights. Who will prevail, who will our young student pair with during the end game, and what of the Scorpion? All answered in due time, well, actually in long drawn out periods of slack but when it does start cooking it certainly does. My favorite: the fight between my preferred poison The Snake, and the Toad. Watching and listening to the sound effects as the Snake struck, probing for weak points while the Toad would flex and bounce him off 10 feet was fun then and now.. and surprisingly mirrors the battles based on this scenario I would have with my 8 year old sister. Hah hah. This is a definite cult classic, campy enough in later viewing that it doesn't take itself too seriously, but with enough action to satisfy new viewers too. Recommended.

Buy The Five Deadly Venoms (1978) Now

When it comes to martial arts films, most claim that Bruce Lee's "Enter the Dragon" is the best ever made. I gather because it was a Warner Brothers production with it's producer Fred Weintraub. I also gather it is because it has a "multi-cultural" cast instead of an all Chinese traditional cast. Well, if you believe that to be the case or not, others suggest that "The Five Deadly Venoms" is either the next best thing or the best in and of itself!

No need to go into the story as many are familiar with it. This is one of the few martials arts films that has a decent story, suspense, action and intrigue. A few years ago, I bought the DVD version and I was very disappointed. It looked like a 3rd generation dub of a bootleg VHS tape! I wrote the company and they sent me another film (on a VHS tape!) to make it up to me. From then on, I get very concerned whenever a martial arts film get's released, let alone on Blu-ray.

I read one (non-professional) review and they said it was as good as they have ever seen it and the convinced me to buy it. I made the right call! The picture far exceeded my expectations! It is true HD, crisp, clean, very detailed and looks as if you are watching them film the movie in person! This is no BS! I cannot believe that I could not find s decent copy on DVD, but BD hits a homerun right out of the gate!

From the moment the picture starts and they show the masks and smoke, you know that you are in for something special because you have NEVER seen this film look this good! The whole film just looks so much better, that I would hope that all martial arts films could look this way! It is in mono 2.0, but who cares? Surround would have been nice, but I'll take the high level picture quality over an after-the-fact surround sound.

The only reason I give this 4 stars instead of 5 is becuase there are no extras. I would have at least preferred a trailor. A behind the scenes featurette or an interview with the actors would have been nice. My only other non-Hollywood martial arts film is "The 36th Chamber of Shoalin" which was in 1080i, not 1080P, but that still looked great too. Even "Enter the Dragon" was not encoded right. It has "jaggies" and it must be 1080i converted of something.

If you know what this is about, get this without delay, the picture is nearly flawless!

Read Best Reviews of The Five Deadly Venoms (1978) Here

Like so many others on Amazon.com, I used to watch weekend Kung Fu theatre programs on TV. Many movies I remember fondly (Kid With The Golden Arm and Shaolin Master Killer [aka 36th Chamber of Shaolin] come to mind) but one in particular stands out: Five Deadly Venoms. I caught it one rainy Saturday afternoon as a teenager and it has stayed with me ever since.

Set in "old" China and featuring a suspenseful plot (a mystery, no less), garish (yet not overly lavish) costumes/set design, and some great old school combat/camera work, this may not even be the best film from either the legendary Shaw Brothers or famed director Chang Cheh himself but there's just something about the pacing of the story which is in no hurry to go anywhere too soon. AND THAT'S A GOOD THING. It is creepy and the tension builds...perhaps not remarkable qualities for a vintage Kung Fu flick but this picture makes the most of it.

Another thing about the movie deserves praise: the absolutely fantastic score! It is austere AND comical, spare, seductive, and sinister without being cheesy. Extraordinary music! even if it IS "borrowed" from other movies as some say....so be it. To me, the score is what really puts you in the world of 5DV.

PLEASE READ: I own both the DVD and the VHS video (the Steeplechase/Martial Arts Video versions) and they are flippin' LOUSY, with the DVD having a marginally better picture/bad sound and the video having much clearer sound/a horrible picture tracking problem. I could be wrong, but in their mastering of the DVD, it seems that Steeplechase/ M.A.V. simply took a bad widescreen edition VHS tape of the movie and did a poor transfer (although I HAVE seen worse) via the ol' mirror in a shoebox technology. Ha! Typical! The soundtrack is muffled like when you play a non-Dolby encoded cassette tape back with the Dolby switch on. I can't speak for the Front Row Video, Inc. version they're selling on Amazon.com but don't hold your breath. Here's hoping that Celestial Pictures (who now owns the rights to many 1970s Hong Kong classics like this one) get their act together and release a spiffy new version of 5DV. Two essential things for a new release: Original film negatives for a better picture and, for Pete's sake, the original recorded elements for clear, non-muffled sound. Some subtitles would be nice, too. Note to Celestial Pix: Please do it justice, fellers!

The 5 stars given are for the film itself which is remains uniquely satisfying: classic, yet refreshing and timeless. The Five Deadly Venoms is still cool and I've tried to turn friends on to it, usually by forcing them to watch it with me so that I can "re-experience it" thru their eyes! It's hard to define how much unconsciously bigger this movie is than its own genre. But it is. In a way, it stands alone. :-]

Rent it if possible. If not, approach with caution or wait for the eventual "special edition". Good luck.

Want The Five Deadly Venoms (1978) Discount?

This DVD is a poor quality bootleg. A company called Celestial owns the worldwide copyright on ALL Shaw Brothers movies. Their digitally remastered DVD has been available for a couple of years, and puts this bootleg to shame. That catch is that you must purchase it from a Hong Kong based web site. Amazon is not allowed to sell it, so they have listed this bootleg. Find a Hong Kong based web site and purchase the official DVD!

Save 25% Off

Out of Time (2003)

"Out of Time" is the story of Banyan Keys chief of police Whitlock (Denzel Washington), a man in the middle of a divorce he does not want. Whitlock turns to his old high-school sweetheart, Ann Harrison (Sanaa Lathan) for solace, only to learn that she has terminal cancer and cannot afford the alternative treatment that might be her only hope. Whitlock can't just watch Ann die, so he steals a large chunk of money he bagged in a drug bust from his own department and lets her have it. But then Ann and her abusive husband Chris (Dean Cain)go up in smoke in an apparent arson, triggering a legal fallout that leaves Whitlock struggling to tie up all the loose ends as his life unravels around him.

"Out of Time" is a somewhat formulaic but still successful mystery/suspenser that slowly pulls the viewer into the web along with Chief Whitlock until there's no escape. Fans of this kind of movie will see a lot of familiar set-ups and plot devices, but the strong cast makes the story work as a whole even if you think you've got it all figured out. Washington's hapless cop is unfailingly appealing, even if he is guilty of some terrible lapses in judgment (but then aren't we all from time to time?). Cain and Lathan likewise do well with their roles, and Eva Mendes is a standout as Whitlock's estranged wife, a homicide detective in her own right who slowly discovers more than she wants to about her husband's role in the Harrison case. Will Whitlock be able to put the puzzle together in time to save his skin from a looming murder rap? And will Mendes help pull him out of the fire, or push him all the way under? You can't stop watching til you know the answers.

The film's seedy, noirish atmosphere is a great plus as well, and if it's not original "Out of Time" is still entertaining. Overall it's worth 3.5 stars, and certainly a movie you want to watch at least once if you like mystery or suspense films. Like many of its kind, however, it may not hold up to multiple viewings once you've learned the secrets, so it may be one to rent rather than buy. Either way, it's a great way to energize a lazy evening.

This is probably the most Hitchcockian thriller to come down the pike in a decade or so. You have the flawed man unjustly accused. You have a femme fatale who may or may not be dead. Thorny relationships with women. Atmosphere by the bucketload. Sexy, slightly violent, a tad morbid, bundles of wit and humor.

This was a sadly ignored film during its' theatrical run. Denzel does his canon proud with another strong performance. While it's not flashy or subtle, it's exactly what the film demands. It fits.

The women are, putting it bluntly, absolutely smoking hot. Eva Mendes and Sanaa Lathan are fine actresses, and do nice work here. But in often skimpy clothes in that Miami wet heat, they could recite the phone book and most males would be entranced.

Dean Cain is terrific as "the bad guy". His scenes with Denzel show him stepping up to the plate admirably. You'd expect Washington to blow him off the screen...and he doesn't. At all.

The screenplay has some nice twists and turns. A veteran moviegoer will recognize or anticipate a few of them, but I guarantee there will be several scenes or lines that'll raise everyone's eyebrows. It's not perfect; there are some clunky lines sprinkled here and there.

Carl Franklin is a talented director, no question, and this simply will add to his reputation. Again, not flashy, but this story will perfectly told.

A special mention is necessary on behalf of John Billingsley. This movie will have people sitting up saying, "who IS this guy?" He's an absolute laugh riot. Every time he's on the screen he's hysterical. His lines have the same improvisatory feel that Bill Murray's did in "Tootsie" (which most were, apparently).

This is a perfect movie for adults interested in an awesome crime thriller.

Buy Out of Time (2003) Now

I really enjoyed this movie! There was thrill, suspense, romance, and excitement. I would recommend this movie to any movie lover. Denzel, Sanaa, Eva, and Dean were all HOT in this movie! I loved the whole story line. There were a few parts that may be too explicit for young children, so beware parents!!! I have seen this movie on several occasions and it is like the very first time everytime I see it. This one is a classic, it should be a new addition to everyone's movie collection. I suggest this movie to anyone, especially Denzel lovers, he looked great in this one LADIES!!! Trust me! Check it out for yourself I'd like to hear what anyone has to say about it!!!

Read Best Reviews of Out of Time (2003) Here

"Out of Time" is a tautly paced crime thriller about a small town Florida cop investigating a double homicide in which all evidence points to him as the prime suspect. Despite the film's morally clouded ending, director Carl Franklin navigates the plot turns and twists with workmanlike efficiency, resulting in an engaging neo-noir tale of lust, greed and deception.

In my opinion, this film is a marvel, the plot twists every scene, and it leaves you on the edge of your seat every second. I'll admit, the start might be a little slow, but it is easily made up for by the rest of the film.

Want Out of Time (2003) Discount?

`Out of Time', a Denzel Washington thriller showcase directed by Carl Franklin is an object lesson in how to put a character into a bad situation, then turn up the heat until it seems he cannot escape his predicament, and he feels the pressure all the more so because it was created to a great extent through his own mistakes. It is easy to put heroic people into desperate situations, subject to terror and the brink of death, yet their entire predicament is for a just cause. The feeling you have, for example, for Frodo and Samwise on the slopes of Mount Doom surrounded by lava is quite different from the feelings you have for Washington's character. This is true not the least because it is so much easier to associate with a person bound in a web of his own mistakes than it is with a hobbit bound in the web of a giant spider.

This is the stuff that tragedies are made from, except that instead of being destroyed by the situation of his own making; the hero does manage to make it out in the nick of time. The best part of his ultimate liberation is that it is brought about by the help of a very good friend who covers for him on two critical points in the story without even being asked and with an assist from his estranged wife who also happens to be a police officer working on the case which drives the plot.

Washington is the chief of police for a small town on a small Florida key island, very similar to his role in his earlier movie `The Mighty Quinn'. His recently separated wife is a homicide lieutenant in some much larger, overlapping jurisdiction, possibly the Miami / Dade police force. Washington's best friend is the local medical examiner. In the opening of the movie, it is revealed that Washington is having an affair with an extremely attractive local dental technician married to a former NFL football player who is currently employed as a security guard at the local hospital. It is also revealed that Washington has about 450 thousand dollars in cash in his office safe confiscated from a recent drug bust.

The main action of the story is set in motion when Washington's mistress talks Washington to accompany her to her oncologist who reveals that an earlier malignancy has reoccurred and is in an incurable state. After the expected distress, compounded by what is believed to is an abusive husband, the woman signs a 1 million-dollar life insurance policy over to Washington as beneficiary. Washington, thinking the drug money will be tied up in court procedures for months, turns it over to his girlfriend in order to get expensive experimental treatment for cancer. Shortly thereafter, bodies of girlfriend and husband are found in the ruins of their house set on fire by arson shortly after a witness sees Washington running away from the victims' house.

All this easily adds up to evidence against Washington, giving him clear means, motive, and opportunity. The pressure mounts as Washington's wife is assigned the case and sets up shop in the town's little police station, right outside Washington's office. The pressure gets turned up as the head of the Miami DEA office calls Washington for the drug money and wants it `yesterday'. So, the second act is largely Washington desperately working at staying one step ahead of both his wife and the DEA.

The average viewer will figure out part of the mystery with little trouble, but I won't spoil the fun by revealing it here. The full story, however, is not revealed until the very end. And, the construction of the problem for Washington and his being able to resolve it at the very last minute makes great entertainment spiced up by the very believable situation. There is an almost dreamlike quality to Washington's predicament. No matter what he does, things just seem to get worse, without quite catching up to him.

The resolution between Washington and his wife after the case is closed seems a bit improbable, but I can live with that. This is by far the most excitement I have experienced with a PG-13 movie in quite a long time. The writers were even able to keep the body count down, limited to the immediate perps of the crime.

Highly recommended for all with reasonably good nerves.

Save 53% Off

The Exorcist (1973 & 2000 Versions) - 2-Disc Set ( Exorcist (Extended Director's Cut & Original The

This is the 2010 _Region_Free_ U.K. 2-disc Blu-ray release. It's the same as the U.S. 2-disc digi-book without the book, just the two discs in a standard Blu-ray two disc case. Case cover and disc have European markings. The blue and read seals with numbers (18; minimum purchase and viewing age) are the Irish (Rep. of) and U.K. These are their government equivalents of the U.S. film industry's MPAA ratings; film is rated "R" by MPAA which equates to the Irish and U.K. ratings. The discs have these two seals plus a third, German one (minimum age in Germany: 16). Unlike European DVDs which usually cannot play properly in U.S. DVD players (PAL vs. NTSC encoding; an issue completely unrelated to region protection code "flags"), region free Blu-ray discs should play without any problem in U.S. Blu-ray players. Indeed they should play in *any* Blu-Ray player in *any* region (that's had its firmware updated/maintained properly).

The 2000 "Extended" version is on Disc 1 with some of the extras; 1973 "Theatrical" version is on Disc 2 with more extras. Both discs are 50 GB dual-layer. The 2010 transfer of both versions is excellent without jitter and containing superb detail with equally excellent restoration to eliminate any significant print damage. Color rendition looks good (to me). I did not see any DNR issues. It's not 100% perfect, but quite likely about as good as can be done transferring and re-mastering 37 year old print(s). Some difference in film stocks and shooting units (cameras ??) can be seen in the beginning that was shot in Iraq if one looks carefully at these scenes. In addition, film grain can be seen in places. This isn't the transfer, it's the original film stock used, and the cinematography units and their cameras. In short, on a 1080p HDTV, it's about as good as you'd get as an optical projection of a film print in a theater. Original audio was monaural (surprised me some for a 1973 film). It's been remixed to DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 ES on the "Extended" and DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 surround on the "Theatrical." Sounds very good with things still well centered on the "center" channel; remixing was not over-done. Fidelity is quite good considering its source is a 1973 era analog monaural recording (the kind of fidelity and bass thumping found in current films isn't there and never was). Mid-level and higher home 5.1 systems will deliver better audio with finer details to be heard than anyone ever experienced in any theater in 1973. Purists might complain that the transfer was reformatted to 1.78:1 (16:9 HDTV ratio) compared to the 1.85:1 aspect ratio as it was originally projected theatrically using a projection mask on the theater projector's film gate. This was NOT done by cropping anything from what was originally projected in theaters, it was performed by opening up the frame slightly top and bottom during the transfer. The full-frame original negative and work prints are 1.37:1 aspect ratio (~4:3). Cinematography was composed in-camera for 1.85:1 projection during shooting using viewfinder masks. (This was and continues to be an industry standard alternative to shooting and projecting for wide screen using anamorphic lenses.)

What's to say about the film itself? It's a well-known classic even those (adults) who have never seen it generally understand its content. Completely deserving of its R rating by the MPAA due to extremely strong language, a very disturbing scene with sexual content involving the girl (while possessed), and graphically violent death scenes. It is only one or two steps shy of NC-17 although the MPAA has gradually become much more tolerant with film content over the years. Like most thrillers, suspense and horror genre of its era, its pacing is slower than many current films in these same genre that launch immediately into non-stop action. Instead, it lays the character and story groundwork while gradually building the frequency and intensity of disturbing and horrific incidents until the climax at the very end. As I understand it, the "Extended" version is the 2000 Director's Cut which restored nearly all (if not all) the scenes that were cut by Friedkin after the studio execs reviewed the film. Blatty, the novel and screenplay author, was extremely upset with Friedkin for many years over this, in spite of the film's immense success and continued popularity. The "Extended" represents what would have been originally released had a studio exec not suggested these cuts, or if Friedkin had ignored that exec's suggestions. It's become a horror classic that has withstood nearly four decades of other horror film writers and directors chasing after its macabre presentation of pure evil . . . and this done in an era without any CGI and other modern special effects. It doesn't need the modern audio-visual shock methods as its terror preys upon the mind as much or more as it does the visual and aural senses. Few since are its peer. The ten Academy nominations including Best Picture, and seven Golden Globe nominations it received . . . unheard of for a horror film including being the first one nominated for an Academy Best Picture . . . should be telling. In my opinion it's a "must see" . . . either version . . . for those that like or study the horror and thriller film genre (although I recommend the Extended).

Note that even now, the writer and director do NOT consider this a "horror" film and never have. They have always characterized it as a (theological) "thriller." Put it into whatever genre bin you wish. It still ranks as one of the "scariest" films ever made. Various scenes have remained shocking even with repeated viewing and knowing what will happen next.

Cirque Du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant (2009)

Cirque Du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant took me by surprise more than any other movie last year, and I couldn't wait for it to come out on Blu Ray. Horror comedies, in my opinion, are hard to pull off because the director is trying to serve two audiences at the same time. The Vampire's Assistant pulls this off very well as it simultaneously creates a dark, moody atmosphere while never letting things get too serious.

You can read about the story in the description, so I won't get into detail about plot elements. The main story moved along at a good pace with never really any down-time or uneccesary scenes. If anything the movie is probably a little on the short side. This film, I believe would have been more well received if some of the characters and plot points were fleshed out a little more. There is simply too much story to cram into just under two hours. Despite the time constraints the cast does an excellent job of creating a dark atmosphere, all centered around the delightfully absurd world of a freak show. The comic elements are subtle but work better than other horror/comedies such as Zombieland (which I also love).

Visually the film is a delight, with excellent make-up and special effects, as well as sets that perfectly set the tone for each scene. Everything from the old theater, to the graveyard and the freak's camp are visually stunning. The wolf man was probably the most impressive character in the film, and listening to the director (special features) talk about his vision of the wolf man and how it came to fruition in the film was very interesting.

I typically do not watch the special features, but I watched every single one and came away wishing there had been more. The tour of the freak camp was very cool, and each feature was presented in a creative manner.

This is a highly underrated film that probably could have done better at the box office with over-the-top gore or slap-stick comedy elements, which have become the status quo for Hollywood blockbusters. I'm not saying this film is for everyone, but if you're into vampire films and don't mind a good bit of comedy to keep things from getting to depressing, then I think you'll really enjoy The Vampire's Assistant. Get some popcorn, turn down the lights and turn up the volume. The show is about to begin...

I will preface my review of this movie by saying that I much prefer Blade, From Dusk til Dawn and Underworld type vampire flicks that all have tons of action, violence and gore in them. Whenever you get into the PG-13 world you are going to get a much more friendly and watered down film with less brutality, violence and language. Reality and financing dictates that the movie studios have to appeal to a broader audience when possible to make enough money to allow the films I mentioned previously.

I am not familiar with the book that this movie is based upon. That being said this was a fun 'teen oriented' vampire movie with no significant violence or gore. This is a PG-13 (unfortunately) flick; you know it's going to be in the vanilla spectrum so don't expect Blade or Underworld. The CGI animation and coloring of John C. Reilly's pet spider was amazing, but then again any quality CGI animation done nowadays should be and usually is amazing. The makeup effects, set design and costumes were well done and give the movie an interesting modern Gothic appearance and feel.

The characters were interesting and I found myself pretty involved in the story. Comparing this film to the wildly successful Twilight films, the two out so far any ways, Cirque is much more interesting. There are no moping or perfect looking Twilight characters and Cirque was just more interesting than both Twilight 1 and 2. I love John C. Reilly and vampire movies so this was my primary motivation for seeing this in the theater. Reilly's character was not in his usual comedic or musical roles so it was good to see him do something completely different. Willem Defoe has a smaller role in this film and plays a very interesting vampire character as well.

All in all this movie is worth seeing and if you are a genre fan it is probably worth owning.

Buy Cirque Du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant (2009) Now

Cirque du Freak is based on the first trilogy of The Saga of Darren Shan, a set of twelve books (four trilogies) by the Irish writer Darren O'Shaughnessy (pen name: Darren Shan, just like his hero's). These teen/young adult oriented novels have a worldwide following and been translated to over 25 languages.

Darren is a teen with a charmed life: popular, smart, from an upper class family, he is destined for a productive and orderly life of college-job-family. This order however is disrupted one night, when, after some prodding from his troubled best friend Steve, Darren attends a late night performance of Cirque du Freak. When Darren's actions put Steve's life in danger, a vampire performer from Cirque du Freak is the only one with the power to save the young man. And so, Darren strikes a deal: in exchange for his friend's life, Darren will abandon his family and become the vampire's assistant; a half vampire himself. Unbeknownst to him, a war has been brewing between the two fractions of the vampire world. Both Darren and Steve are destined to be major players in the coming events...

Even though, clearly, I am beyond the teen/young adult years, I found the story compelling enough to investigate further. I am pleased to report that most of the film's production values, including CGI, were impeccable. John C. Reilly as the vampire Larten Crepsley was surprisingly convincing. The number of big name actors who made an appearance in the film was astonishing. So, why only two stars? Well, there were two major problems:

1) The actors chosen to portray Darren and Steve not only lacked chemistry, but lacked the abilities to emote deep feelings. Consequently, what should have been a dramatic decision to leave his family comes across as nothing more then a minor blip on Darren's schedule. What should have been a complex feud between two friends who go on to become leaders of the opposing vampire fractions, seemed as nothing more then two silly characters bickering at one another.

2) Secondly, even though the story was great, the script was poor. Despite the fact that we learned of the events in a chronological order, their lack of clarity was unacceptable.

The film ended with many unanswered questions. Counting on audience support, there were three sequences planned, one for each trilogy. I suppose those plans must be on hold at the moment, given the poor turn out at the box office. Shame really. I think the books disserved better...

Read Best Reviews of Cirque Du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant (2009) Here

The film is visually lush and entertaining. As usual, John C. Reilly does not disappoint. I saw this movie on cable, and loved it so much I added it too my collection!

Want Cirque Du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant (2009) Discount?

I first saw this movie on HBO and loved it. Its fun and campy. I did see a lot of bad reviews on line about it not following the story line of the book series. And yes, it doesn't follow the books for the most part. If you want something that closely follows the books then this is not for you. If you can watch it as entertainment then go for it. It does have the basic plot of good vs bad and in this movie it's good vampire vs bad vampanese. It's geared for children but adults will enjoy it as well. I did enjoy the movie enough to buy all 12 of the Cirque Du Freak books. If you can view each as two seperate works and not try to match movie to books and just enjoy it as entertainment then you'll enjoy the movie.

Save 33% Off

Dead Man (1996)

How unfair is it that Tim Keogh of the Amazon.Com organization gets to lead off the list of reviews for this movie by stating "This disappointment from Jim Jarmusch stars Johnny Depp in a mystery Western about a 19th-century accountant named William Blake, who spends his last coin getting to a hellish mud town in Texas and ends up penniless and doom struck in the wilderness." I don't know if Tim was busy stuffing his face with popcorn but he makes three erroneous statements in this first line of his totally off-base review.

1) This movie is not a mystery! 2) Johnny Depp spends his last coin buying whiskey. 3) The "hellish mud town" of Machine is on the West Coast not Texas. (After all, it would take a while to ride by horseback from Texas to British Columbia where the Coastal Indian Tribes were located).

You may be asking yourself why I take issue with such mundane details? The answer is obvious to prove the point that Tim Keogh wasn't even watching this movie, and therefore, has no right to review it. Simply put, Dead Man is a cinematic masterpiece! Jim Jarmusch has made a number of strong movies, but Dead Man surpasses the others as a brilliant work of art.

You can see by reading the other reviews that support for Dead Man borders on fanatical. There are few movies that I have watched repeatedly but I continue to see this one over and over again. Everything about the film is different from the conventions of Hollywood mass consumption "fast-film". The story unfolds in a slow and methodical manner and requires much attention on the part of the viewer. If you invest in it, Dead Man will repay you many times over.

If you liked Forrest Gump and The Sixth Sense then you can go see another mindless mainstream movie with Tim Keogh and the majority of the ignorant American public. If you need more than that . . . buy Dead Man. I'll bet you watch it more than once!

I'm not allowed to refer to another person's review here, but at the time of this writing, Amazon.com was posting a review of this movie that was clearly written by a person who was raised in Disneyland. This is one of the best movies ever made. Chicago Reader calls it an Acid Western and rates it "masterpiece". It compromises to no filmmaking convention. It's hardly possible to review it without giving away important aspects of the film the viewer should experience for her/himself. The movie is not a story, even though it's told through a story. The evolution of William Blake from innocent Cleveland accountant to a symbol (for English-educated Native American reject Nobody, played by Gary Farmer) for poetry itself; the tiny little worlds of late-19th-century white Western of-necessity survivalists, and the effects these little worlds had on Blake; the hilarious campfire scene with Iggy Pop and Billy Bob Thornton (and a third person -can't find out who), and the dying beauty of the natives; the brutal innocence of the disenfranchised Nobody whose illusions (or were they?) propelled Blake to his -future ... I was completely immersed. There is only one thing wrong with this movie. I love Neil Young, but, unless I'm missing some important symbolism, his score could have been more, well, varied. There are not many movies I want to own but this is one.

Buy Dead Man (1996) Now

I did not see Jim Jarmusch's "Dead Man" when it first played in theaters, in large part because of the many negative reviews it received. Roger Ebert (who I admire) all but dismissed the film with his lowly *1/2-star rating. Ebert was a champion of Jarmusch's "Stranger Than Paradise", so I trusted him and avoided the movie. But now, having seen "Dead Man" on video, I feel many of these critics (who may have been expecting a traditional Western) were unfair in their judgements. This is a movie serious filmgoers should not miss.

Johnny Depp stars as William Blake, an accountant from Cleveland who travels west with the promise of a job. This westward journey the basis for so many other movies is not, however, seen as something positive (Blake, in fact, is warned early on that the Western town of Machine will only offer him a grave). Things do not start off well. He arrives to find out that the accountant position has already been filled. He tells the office manager (John Hurt) that he wants to speak with the owner. The owner (played by the late Robert Mitchum) is, unfortunately, no more sympathetic and forces Blake to leave.

Without enough money to return, Blake befriends a young woman who (like him) has had her romantic notions of the West crushed. She makes paper flowers, because a real flower would never be found in the ugliness of Machine. She shares her bed with him and is shot by her lover (Gabriel Byrne). Blake is also shot, but kills Byrne and escapes on his horse. He is soon found by an Indian named Nobody (Gary Farmer) who tells him that the bullet is close to his heart, so he is already a "dead man". The two take off together and Mitchum (Byrne was his son) places a bounty on Blake's head.

"Dead Man" is an anti-Western, in the same tradition as Robert Altman's "McCabe & Mrs. Miller". But the film, which is shot in beautiful black and white by Robby Muller, is unlike any Western I've ever seen. There's a poetic quality to the film. Blake is told that he shares the name of a great British poet not by any of the white people in the film, but rather by the Indian Nobody (who believes he IS the poet).

The movie is very much pro-Native American and I admired the film for pointing out some unpleasant facts: like the fact that a million buffalo were slaughtered as a means of wiping out Indians (buffalo was one of their staples). Blake witnesses such a slaughter even before he's left the train.

And while I suppose this message could be found in "Dances With Wolves", I found "Dead Man" to be the better film.

Read Best Reviews of Dead Man (1996) Here

Every time you watch this film, it reveals some more of its character. Is this a western, a road movie, a black comedy, surreal art or just something to look at while you listen to Neil Young's eerie sound track? To find your own answers you must watch it yourself.

Set in the late nineteenth century, we see Johnny Depp playing William Blake, a young accountant who gives up his sheltered life in Cleveland to head out to the Wild West. He has a job offer from a manufacturing company owned by John Dickinson (Robert Mitchum) in a lawless town called Machine which is literally, "the end of the line."

The film starts with his train journey out to the west and we see him becoming gradually more uneasy as the civilised East turns into the rough and dirty West. All too soon he is in Machine where he finds out that the job has gone to another man bacause Blake took too long in getting there. Out of money, he ends up in bed with Thel Russell (Mili Avital) the prettiest girl in town. When her boyfriend arrives, Blake's troubles get worse. After the ensuing gunfight, Blake flees, mortally wounded and leaving two bodies behind him.

The father of the dead boyfriend, Dickinson again, hires a group of killers to catch Blake. Also, he calls in the Marshals and posts public rewards. Since this is a road movie, Blake needs a buddy and he teams up with Nobody (Gary Farmer) an outcast Native American who just happens to have a passion for the poems of the more famous William Blake. Nobody accepts Blake as the embodiment of the real poet and assumes, because the the poet had already died and the man he sees now is slowly dying, that Blake must seek a place to die and return to the world beyond.

Nobody sets out to help and guide him on his journey. They must dodge the bounty hunters, marshals and citizens who want the reward and along the way, Blake turns into a man who can kill without remorse.

Surreal barely describes the people that they meet and, generally, kill on the way. There is a lot of humour ranging from Nobody's observations of European "civilisation" to the constant sniping (figurative and literal) between the three bounty hunters sent to kill Blake.

Shooting the film in black and white and using a soundtrack that is just a constant guitar presence rather than a set of songs, gives the film a outward appearance that well matches the content.

Many people will doubtless find this film deeply unappealing or offensive but they will be missing a movie that is as refreshing and stylish as anything else from the nineties.

Want Dead Man (1996) Discount?

... but it's obviously not for everybody. I, for one, found the acting, cinematography, setting, soundtrack and story to fit perfectly. This film just falls into place. It's most definately a sum of its parts. My favorite thing about this movie, is that it's filmed in black and white. I read one review where they wrote "filmed in black and white for no reason". Wrong:

1) As cliche' as it sounds, it adds to the films ambiance.

2) It's a film that takes place in the early 19th century. It captures the vintage setting. Schindler's List was filmed in black and white for this same reason.

3) It's haunting. The whole film is surreal, and the black and white helps set the mood for isolation.

But, whatever. It boils down to this: Ignore all the reviews here. Even the good ones. Rent this movie, at least, then see if you like it or not. I can promise that the good majority of you will love it.

9 (2009)

You need to know before going into this movie that this is NOT a movie for kids. It was strange watching it at first (how often do you see a dead body in an animated film in the first scene?), but once you get past the fact that this is an animated film for ADULTS, it's a very good movie.

~SPOILER ALERT~

For those of you who don't understand the movie, you weren't paying much attention. There were visual cues throughout as to where the machines come from (the BRAIN creates them) and also for where the characters 1-9 get their soul/s (they each get a *piece* of the scientist's soul). 9 gets the last piece of the scientist's soul, which is why the scientist died. Each character epitomizes various aspects of humanity: fear, survival, strength, courage, endurance, memory, self-sacrifice, etc.

The movie is rich with allusions and symbols that are drawn from human tendencies and survival instincts. I think it's one of those movies that you can watch over and over and find different meanings each time (if you're open to it). You could even go so far as to argue that the movie is religious in a way. The scientist gave his life to save humanity/life on earth. You could also say that the souls who are taken by the BRAIN are in a state similar to Limbo.

Also, one of the rag dolls is a female; what could be said about the fact that her soul came from a male scientist? Etc.

Very thought provoking and conversation starting movie. I loved every minute of it, and will watch it again.

Tim Burton has once again proven his subtle twisted genius as a storyteller. Like many, I saw previews for 9 in the movie theatre but missed seeing it on the big screen. I read the other reviews before renting this film & 2 out of the 3 rightfully praised the animation but sadly all 3 misunderstood the story. I hate spoilers but I feel it necessary to share a bit regarding the plot in hopes to inspire others to discover this wonderful film.

The 9 refer to 9 elements of the human soul which the Inventor never placed in his original creation and which were the only hope for a second chance for life on the planet. One reviewer mentioned that they were left with questions such as why are the 9 beings the only hope for humans when no humans were left on the planet. The answer is in the rain, which that reviewer must have missed. Rain/Water is a symbol of life universally.

Too often modern writers and directors spoon feed audiences everything so that it seems more and more modern audiences are hard pressed to add their own imagination/understanding to the story. Tim Burton has done a magnificent job of weaving ancient folk lore into a magical tale. I highly recommend this film to individuals & families alike. It is completely worth it!

Buy 9 (2009) Now

"9" is an animated film based on the 2005 Academy Award nominated short film of the same name (which is included on the DVD). The film is the work of animator Shane Acker and was co-produced by Tim Burton, who got involved with the project after seeing Acker's short film. Although Burton did not write or direct "9," the film is very consistent with his past animated work such as "Corpse Bride." Set in a post-apocalyptic world, the movie focuses on a rag doll robot (!) named 9 who suddenly becomes sentient. As he explores his world, he discovers that the only other inhabitants are other, similarly numbered rag doll robots as well as a strange cat-like machine who hunts them. He befriends the other robots and changes their world drastically.

The world created in this film is fascinating and unlike any other animated film I've seen. I particularly loved the use of contrasts, including having the robots made of burlap and other unexpected materials (Acker has referred to the bots as "stitchpunks"). The "look" of "9" is by far its main draw, though, because unfortunately the plot is a rather drab and predictable affair with the robots fighting the cat-like machine (and then other machines). I found myself getting irritated by the repetitious battles and wanted to see more of this intriguing world. Likewise, I wanted to see more of the adorable "stitchpunks," especially the "cataloguing" scholars 3 and 4. Unfortunately, as soon as the robots are introduced they almost immediately start chasing the machines.

As with other Tim Burton produced animated films, "9" is not targeted toward children (it's rated PG-13); however, the plot was too juvenile to keep me interested. I actually strongly preferred the short film, which I watched after the feature-length movie. Indeed, the short film packs a real emotional wallop that is sadly missing in the full-length version. "9" is a noble failure (well semi-failure), and I applaud what Acker and Burton have tried to accomplish with this terrific looking film. I just wish that the plot had been worthy of the animation.

Read Best Reviews of 9 (2009) Here

Just a heads up for those who prefer a lot of extras with their blu-ray purchase, this one does not come with the second bonus disc that comes with most blu-rays nowadays. No DVD copy and no portable copy.

Want 9 (2009) Discount?

I didn't know what to expect from this movie. I don't even remember it coming out in theaters. It was recommended for me on Netflix and I saw that Tim Burton was a producer so I thought I would give it a try. I wasn't expecting much, but I was pleasantly surprised. I really liked this movie. Not even taking the story line into account (it is kind of convoluted), the movie is worth watching solely for the creativity and attention to detail. I watched this in Blu-ray, but I'm sure it would be impressive on DVD as well. I love movies like this because they suck you in to another world. You forget you are watching something created by a computer. The characters movements and expressions are so realistic, even though they look like Little Big Planet characters on acid, you will be amazed. I'm not going to get into the plot, that isn't why I gave this movie 4 stars, although I might have given it 5 if it wasn't so desultory. I gave the movie 4 stars purely for the enjoyment of the aesthetics of this movie. It is visually brilliant. And it is rated PG-13 for a reason. It is scary as hell. I am surprised I didn't have nightmares, and I am a horror movie fanatic. Definitely not for young children, unless you want to scare the crap out of them!

Save 47% Off

The Butterfly Effect (Director's Cut & Theatrical Release) (2012)

Because most of the critics slammed this movie, I went to see it expecting a lot less than I got. I thought the movie was fine: rich plot, good pacing, intense drama, and solid performances by all of the actors. Ashton Kutcher, who has a great screen presence (I've never seen him before; don't watch much TV) played the role with just the right degrees of intensity, bewiderment, and desperation. Amy Smart's performance fluctuated convincingly from loyal lover, to air-headed ingenue, to hardened prostitute, etc. And I loved the way the other supporting characters changed personalities with time shifts.

The kid actors looked very much like their adult counterparts, especially in Kutcher's case, so that the constant transitions between pre-teen, teen, and adult versions of the characters were very smooth... this was important to keep the audience suspending its disbelief.

The screenplay delved into taboo subjects fearlessly, which I think added to its richness and made it all the more riveting.

Most of the critics didn't like this film, and I suspect a lot of that has to do with their personal disdain of Kutcher. That's neither relevant nor fair. Roger Ebert tried to be fair in his review and did say some good things about the movie, but he was bothered a lot by the inexplicably artistic quality of the drawing and the note-lettering penned by the Kutcher character. I agree that this high quality this was kind of odd, since the character was never portrayed as an artist, but I think that's a minor detail that detracted only slightly from one's enjoyment of the movie. Overall, Butterfly Effect was a handsomely-filmed, "sci-fi" movie that didn't rely on special effects to hold my interest and entertain me. It was a great ride. What more could the critics want?

While "The Butterfly Effect" wasn't critically acclaimed or well loved by everyone, I thought it was a pretty good movie when I first saw it at the theatres. It was a dark and completely disturbing film that made me want to look away at times, but at the same time I was very intrigued. My only problem was the ending. I thought it really contradicted the whole theme of the movie, but I always suspected that the so-called "happy ending" was forced upon since the movie is so dark and hard to watch that they thought there was no way people would like it if a more darker and depressing ending were added. Well, now you get to see the director's cut of the film that's on this very DVD, which offers the superior ending.

Evan had terrible blackouts when he was little, very much like his father. He would blackout during terrible situations and not remember anything. That's when it was suggested to him that he keep a journal to see if he could remember what happened during those blackouts. When Evan is all grown up, still haunted by his terrible past that had blanketed him and his friends, he discovers that he can relive those memories when he reads his entries. He can view it like a movie and finally see what had happened during his blackouts. Not only that, but he has the power to even alter those moments. Determined to fix the pasts of him and his friends, he relives those memories and tries to fix them so they will all have a better future. However, when he tries to change one thing, it leads to devastating results that he could have never foreseen. As the cover says, "Change one thing... change EVERYTHING."

I found this film to be very interesting and complex, even though I felt that the film itself was not perfect. The movie is very hard to watch at times, so it's not recommended for those who don't like being disturbed or who are extremely sensitive to such matters. I think it has a smart storyline and great acting. Believe it or not, Ashton Kutcher is able to act in a serious role. I didn't even recognize him at first, but he really pulled it off. He was able to convince me that he was in fact "Evan," as he played the role with determination and force.

As I said in the beginning, my major problem with the movie had always been the ending. While it was happy and nice to see that things worked out considering the absolute hell this movie can put you through, I still found the ending to be contradictive and a "cop-out." Now, all of that's changed as you are given the choice to either watch the theatrical version, OR the director's cut. The director's cut offers a few more extra minutes that adds more substance to the story (including an interesting find) and a more appropriate ending. If you were to ask me which version is better, I'd say that the director's cut is without any hesitation The new ending does a better job of fitting in with the theme of the movie and doesn't contradict the film as the theatrical ending does. The DVD also offers "infinifilm" features that give you a deeper insight to the movie itself. Extras included are commentary, documentaries, storyboard galleries and much more. I must say that the film looks great, and also sounds fantastic as well.

"The Butterfly Effect" proves to be an even stronger film with the director's cut version, even if it's still not a perfect movie. If you're looking for something a little more darker and sinister than your regular picks, then this is something to consider. Just remember that this movie does not let you off easy. It's brutal and extremely disturbing. If you're daring and think you can handle it, then pick this up and prepare for one unforgettable and chilling ride. -Michael Crane

Buy The Butterfly Effect (Director's Cut & Theatrical Release) (2012) Now

I saw a screening of this movie and as much as I expected to be non-plussed at best, it was amazing. Like a cross between Memento and a dark It's A Wonderful Life, the movie plays with time, reality, and the greatest "What if?" that there's ever been.

Ashton Kutcher plays Evan, a college student who can relive gnarly past events and in doing so, change the present. The outcome is always a surprising set of consequences. I don't want to say too much about the movie because I sincerely believe this is one of those few movies where you shouldn't know too much. While a number of movies have played with time travel (Terminator, Back to the Future, Etc...) this one does it with a gritty slickness that is truly different and very unpredictable.

People will definately be surprised at Kutcher's performance and this movie is an inarguable breakthrough for him as a dramatic actor. Amy Smart shows her dramatic chops as well, after doing comedic roles in Rat Race and Road Trip. It's kind of a dream role, in that she gets to play four characters in one movie, each one multi-dimensional and vastly diverse from the previous ones. I read that Eldon Henson, dropped and gained 30 pounds for his various roles as well. I think it demonstrates the dedication that the actors put into the project and it certainly pays off on screen.

It's an incredibly thought provoking concept with all these cool set ups and payoffs along the way. I was surprised by how violent it was at times, but it worked for the story and I'm not turned off by that kinda thing. By far one of the best movies I've seen this year and deserves some sort of critical acclaim even though it comes out at a time of year when movies are for the most part forgotten.

See this movie and you'll get your money's worth. I'm probably going to have to see it again because, like films like The Sixth Sense, it should be even cooler the second time around when you know the secrets.

Read Best Reviews of The Butterfly Effect (Director's Cut & Theatrical Release) (2012) Here

***1/2 Have you ever wondered how differently your life might have turned out had you taken a left turn instead of a right on the day of that fateful accident, or chosen a different college or career path, or not gone to that dance the night you met your one true love? All of us have played this "what if" game at some point in our lives, speculating about where we might be, whom we might know and what we might be doing now if even a single event in our past had played out differently. And how many of us would be willing to return to a key moment in our past if we knew that, by doing something different, we could forever alter the path our life ended up taking? And what if we discovered that by undoing that event we ended up altering our lives and the lives of those around us in ways we never expected? Would we still want to do it?

This is the premise for "The Butterfly Effect," an effectively creepy supernatural thriller that boasts a star-making performance by Ashton Kutcher. Kutcher plays Evan Treborn, a young man in college who, since his childhood, has been suffering inexplicable blackouts at key traumatic moments in his life. And traumatic his life has been! His father is consigned to a mental institution, suffering from an ailment that may have been passed on to his son. In addition, Evan is friends with a young girl, Kayley, whose father sexually abuses not only her but Evan as well. Kayley also has a sadistic little brother named Lenny, who inspires Evan, Kayley and a neighbor friend of theirs to perform malicious pranks and even sets Evan's dog on fire. Now that he's in college, Evan discovers he has the power to transport himself back in time to many of these key moments in his life in an attempt to rewrite history and undo the mental and psychological damage they've caused. The trouble is that Evan finds out that changing the course of history often brings a whole host of other unforeseen and unanticipated problems right along with it.

Directors Eric Bress and J. Mackye Gruber have fashioned a complex, intricate screenplay filled with plot twists that continually alter the plane of the film's reality. The story hurtles us back and forth in time, showing us what was, what is and then what might have been without a moment's confusion, all the while making us question whether Evan isn't simply insane after all. There are a few, perhaps inevitable, plot holes, the most glaring of which is why Evan is unable to find out how a prank he and his friends committed in their childhood turned tragically wrong (Evan blacked out during the event). Considering the fact that the tragedy was one that became common knowledge in the small town in which Evan lived, it is highly implausible that he would have to wait till his early `20's before he finally found out what had happened. In addition, one might question the propriety of using a topic as sensitive as pedophilia for a supernatural thriller. Still, those are minor quibbles for a story that works remarkably well at keeping itself credible and focused despite the inherent absurdity at its core.

Kutcher does an effective job carrying the film. By not being too handsome or too heroic, Kutcher keeps Evan life-sized and interesting. We're willing to follow him through this elaborate labyrinth because we can identify with the truths of his character. He's a young man who genuinely wants to make things better for the people he cares for, yet the mental anguish he is going through as he attempts to piece together some semblance of comprehensible reality from the jumbled fragments of his life comes through loud and clear.

"The Butterfly Effect" is not your usual mind-numbing, schlock thriller. It has intelligence and style and a very intriguing storyline. It will probably get you rewinding some of those key events in your own life, wondering might have been.

Want The Butterfly Effect (Director's Cut & Theatrical Release) (2012) Discount?

Before I go on to describe why I liked this movie, I should explain right away that this is mostly a rebuttal of what the critics say. I think that this movie has received an unfair amount of criticism and I want to rebut some of the main points people have brought up.

Firstly, if you go into the movie expecting Kutcher to suck in his role, then he probably will as far as you are concerned. It is tough to accept him as a dramatic lead, I admit, but if you try to not let his past interfere with your judgement, then it will free you to focus on the movie itself (something that very few mainstream critics seem to have done seriously).

Secondly, if you watch this with the wrong group of people, then its mood changes drastically. I saw it in a crowded theater full of people who either came in expecting a comedy or were just planning to trash it. What happened was that I really enjoyed the movie, but many others complained constantly. Because this opened up the floor for criticism, many others joined in--this is an effect you can see frequently in any event where there are a lot of people. If everybody's laughing, then you are tempted to laugh. So, I reccommend that you try to see this only with an audience that you know will take it seriously, because otherwise it will ruin your enjoyment of the film.

"The Butterfly Effect" is a lot like other major science-fiction movies from the past in that it tries out a lot of new things and worries only about the elements it was created to serve. A good comparison brings to my mind the movie "Dark City," which received very little praise or attention during its initial release. Both movies expect you to care for the characters without spending a great deal of time building them up. Both movies are more focused on answering the question, "What if?" and then trying to create a world where strange possibilities can be discovered.

The movie has been criticized for being overly violent and too melodramatic. Too violent? Not so. Melodramatic? Not really, although I'll grant you that one or two points are a bit heavy-handed. Extremely disturbing? Yes.

The violent content within is not exploitative in anyway--what it does is provides extreme environments for the "butterfly effect" theme to work with. The concept of the film is based on how much would change if you fixed one mistake in the past. To make these changes more interesting, the filmmakers have come up with some extreme material. For example, early in the film two of the main characters are sexually abused as children. By changing this event, the characters lives become drastically different. If Kutcher's character had instead went back in time and changed an event such as, say, his first hair cut, then there would probably not be a huge change in his life. So, the movie wouldn't be very interesting, nor would it explore the "What if" question very well.

In the end, this movie is about ideas and exploration. It is a great movie because it heavily explores the concept of time travel and its effects on the future. It is not a movie for everyone, but I have a feeling that many people who would like it are going to be scared away (probably by the presence of Kutcher, who does a respectable job).

I found it very clever, exciting, and thoroughly enjoyable. The acting is great all around and it is the first true thinking-man's (or -woman's) film I've seen for several years. Ultimately, though, I think it will find its audience on DVD and video. I can only hope, because it's a gem from our era.

Save 40% Off