Ray (Blu-ray + DVD) (2004)

This is a very good movie that houses an exceptionally great performance by Jamie Fox as music legend Ray Charles. I must confess that as a genre, the biopic is not my favorite, especially of figures as well known as Ray Charles. We usually receive in such films distorted portraits of them, or undeserved adulation. RAY is one of the more balanced biopics I have seen. Ray Charles is presented as a musical genius who had managed to overcome physical disabilities that would have stopped most others, but it doesn't attempt to mute the serious and unflattering personal moral problems he had with drugs and his exploitative treatment of women. Nor is he revealed as a moral saint or loving person. Though pleasant with others for the most part, Ray is shown as a proud, independent, and slightly self-absorbed, a bit selfish in his treatment of women. As a result, Ray Charles emerges in the film as a believable human being, capable of unfortunate decisions, but also extraordinary music and the occasional powerful moral stand, such as when he refuses to perform in a racially segregated crowd in a venue in Georgia. In fact, the film is built around three foci: his early childhood when he witnessed the death of his younger brother and gradually lost his sight; his musical career from 1948 until the mid-1960s; and his heroin addiction. The film ends with his overcoming his heroin addiction, which also-as numerous music critics have noted--corresponds to the end of the peak of his career as a creative musical performer. Charles continued to make albums after getting off heroin, but all of the great songs that we associate with him were written and recorded while on heroin. For the last forty years of his career, his sets consisted almost entirely of songs he made famous in the fifties and early sixties, with covers of songs by other musicians. There has been a long debate as to whether his addiction somehow aided his musical creativity, but even if so, no one would have wished him to continue to endanger his health and life.

Jamie Fox will without any possible doubt receive an Oscar nomination for this performance. This is considerably more than a good impersonation of Charles: it is almost as if Fox channels him. As much as I loved other biopics of music legends like THE BUDDY HOLLY STORY or WHAT'S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT, throughout each I was conscious that Gary Busey was playing Buddy Holly and Angela Bassett playing Tina Turner. I completely forgot that Jamie Fox was playing Ray Charles, and despite being quite familiar with him, imagined that I was actually watching Charles onscreen. Yes, he does a killer impersonation of Charles, but he manages that first on top of that provides an amazing dramatic performance. This is great acting, not merely a great impersonation. The only performance of recent years of an actor portraying a prominent entertainer as superb as this is Robert Downey in CHAPLIN.

I also really loved the look of the film. Since it ended in the mid-1960s, the entire film was essentially a period film. There was a sense of visual veracity from beginning to end. I loved the cars, the clothes (especially the ties! am I alone in thinking that the 1950s was the great decade for neckties?), the interior decors, the furniture. The scenes in the shanty town where Charles was a child were very effective.

The cast aside from Fox was quite strong, made up mainly of relatively unknown performers. There were many other things to enjoy about the film. Of course, the music is absolutely sensational, consisting either of remasters of original Ray Charles's recordings, or new recordings for which Charles provided the vocals. I also loved the relationship in the film between Charles and Ahmet Ertegun and Jerry Wexler of Atlantic Records. There is nothing of the stereotypical relationship between artist and executives that invests so many of the stories of musicians in the 1950s and 1960s. Ertegun is rightfully remembered as one of the truly great figures in the recording industry, someone who was in it more for the music than for the money, and who treated his artists with a degree of respect that was too frequently absent. The film does a good job of presenting Charles's dilemma: ABC-Monument made him an offer that he simply couldn't refuse, yet at the same time we are all aware that Charles was, in a way, screwing Atlantic over by leaving them for ABC-Monument. All in all, I loved this warts and all approach to the subject matter. There is absolutely no question that Ray Charles was one of the most astonishing performers of the fifties and sixties, and doing all he did despite his blindness is an amazing saga. He truly was a genius, even if he was a somewhat flawed person. But you have to love the way that he managed to overcome his personal shortcomings to become not merely one of the most successful but one of the most beloved musical performers of his age.

I went to see Ray in the theaters last night because my sister suggested it and because I was in a mood to see something "critically acclaimed". For the record, I knew very little about the man and so had very few preconceptions. What I saw made a deep impression in my mind and heart.

Ray Robinson, aka Ray Charles the singer, songwriter and musician, was blind since the age of 7. He had to deal not only with bigotry for his disability but for being black in Georgia before the civil rights movement. Throughout his life many people (both black and white) would try to take advantage of the blind man, ripping him off financially or hoarding his talent for their own gain. Ray had both the blessing and the curse of being a ladies' man, resulting in serial affairs while his wife stayed home and raised their family. It surprised me to learn that he fought an addiction to heroin for well over a decade before finally beating it in the `60s. Nevertheless, Ray carried all this baggage and more through the 40s and 50s as he made a name for himself playing piano in the Country, Jazz, etc. pop music circuits. Eventually of course he rose to become one of the most recognized and beloved musical artists worldwide.

The man that this film showed me was an incredible example of determination, charm and simple human spirit. I have heard others say that Jamie Foxx's acting was so good that they were half-convinced he was channeling Ray Charles' ghost. I'll take their word for it that it was an accurate performance, but regardless, it was also a great performance! Down the line each of the supporting actors was perfectly convincing and real, but none more so than Foxx. I will denounce the Academy if he isn't at least nominated for an Oscar.

The least of Ray's imperfections was his physical blindness --yet he had a powerful gift and the ability to reach into the collective soul of a nation. Over his long career as a musician and songwriter, Ray Charles Robinson created and performed some of the most memorable music to audiences across the country. Your color, age and creed doesn't matter; chances are, you've heard and loved at least one Ray Charles song in your lifetime. We'll never have another like him.

-Andrea, aka Merribelle.

Buy Ray (Blu-ray + DVD) (2004) Now

Does anyone suspect that Helen Keller edited this film?

Shame on the director for allowing the ruination of this great masterpiece in the extended form!

GREAT FILM RUINEDBY BY BAD EDITING.

Here is what others are saying: "The big disappointment for me was buying the Limited Edition version with the extended edition of the movie. 25 minutes of additional footage has been added back in for the extended version. Like someone posted earlier, When viewing the "extended" version my player had to pause every time it went to a "deleted scene." It had to pause again when it went back to the theatrical version. I have other disks in my collection which have extended versions with deleted scenes cut into the film that were done seamlessly.

Not only was there a pause when switching between versions, but many times there was a shift in color cast and certain chapters (18 & 19 for me)of the movie became unwatchable and just froze up. For 30 Bucks I found this to be disgraceful and I will ask Best Buy for either another copy or just get the standard edition..

You have the option to watch either the original version or this extended version. The image quality, color and clarity vary a bit as it cuts between the theatrical version and the deleted scenes. Clearly, this wasn't recut and retimed for this "extended" version. The difference between the finished film and the added scenes are quite noticeable and jarring. A flawed masterpiece, Ray would have been a better film if the 25 minutes of additional footage had been integrated into this DVD in a better fashion than it is. No justice for the consumer, and none for the artists of the film and artist portrayed in the film."

(NOTE TO UNIVERSAL:If you can't do it right,then don't do it at all.)

I know a lot of people had problems with the extended version of the DVD, but it warns you that it might not play well on certain DVD players.

Might not?

How'bout ANY player? And the two second delay seems HUGE, . . . stop action . . . wait then it jumps sometimes forward and sometimes backward UNTIMED!

This is not a review, but more of a rant on my part as a DVD Collector of 1,260+ DVD's. Please view this as an individual opinion on Universal, not on the content of the Film, Ray.

Read Best Reviews of Ray (Blu-ray + DVD) (2004) Here

I like "Ray." The music is strong, using Ray Charles' own tracks for both background and performance shots. The storyline is complex, flashing back to Charles' youth as he reflected on the loss of his eyesight and the death of his brother.

From his days as a child in a poor rural community, through his early days as an unknown musician struggling to get a fair deal, to his mid-career with management problems, affairs, hits, and drugs, and then, finally, as a one of our national heroes, we see Ray Charles in full color.

We learn how he manipulated women, cheated on his wife, became addicted to heroin, found his sound, got his name, and learned to work aggressively as his own musician. He deals with racism at first by avoiding it, and then quickly, takes a harsh stand, shaming the bigots and segregationists. Now, in a state where he was once banned from playing, his work, "Georgia on My Mind" is now the state song.

Biopics of celebrities are difficult to describe because of the chronology required to produce the movies. People don't live out plots written by screenwriters, but lives that have events that do not always make sense. Ray Charles' life didn't always make sense, but he lived it.

We have two views of Ray Charles. One is as a fighter, working hard against adversity to become the musician we now know. The other is as a womanizing addict who used his charm, position and trust of his wife to diminish all that was good about him. He eventually beats the drugs, holds onto his marriage, but these failures brought down my respect of him.

Jamie Foxx never impressed me before this. I found his comedy more off-color than I prefer, and expected that his version of Ray Charles would be mediocre. I heard the hype that his performance was Oscar-worthy, and watched the movie with the eyes of a skeptic. Now, I am impressed.

Jamie Foxx has a new fan. I hope he gets roles that allow him to shine like he does in "Ray."

The DVD for "Ray" adds to the movie. Normally, a DVD brings little extra that is interesting, but watching Jamie Foxx and Ray Charles interact was touching, as was hearing Foxx describe his experience in learning the role. We learn Foxx not only can play piano, but is trained at a high level. Those are his hands on the keys, and not movie magic. He respected Charles and the difficulty of playing an icon, and earned Charles' respect in the process.

Anthony Trendl

editor, HungarianBookstore.com

Want Ray (Blu-ray + DVD) (2004) Discount?

I somehow missed this at the movies but I was determined with all the Oscar buzz and hype Jamie Foxx was receiving, that I'd buy it and form my own opinion. I have to give it up for Jamie Foxx, he just didn't play Ray Charles, he practically was Ray Charles. His acting was just absolutely flawless. The supporting cast of Clifton Powell, Regina King, Kelly Washington, Larenz Tate, Bokeem Woodbine, and the newcomer who played his mother (I forgot her name that quick) who's never been in anything outside of a local theatre when discovered, all did a marvelous job as well. I was never a really big Ray Charles fan but I loved the music in the film. However, the big disappointment for me was buying the Limited Edition version with the extended edition of the movie. Like someone posted earlier, When viewing the "extended" version my player had to pause every time it went to a "deleted scene." It had to pause again when it went back to the theatrical version. I have other disks in my collection which have extended versions with deleted scenes cut into the film that were done seamlessly.

Not only was there a pause when switching between versions, but many times there was a shift in color cast and certain chapters (18 & 19 for me)of the movie became unwatchable and just froze up. For 30 Bucks I found this to be disgraceful and I will ask Best Buy for either another copy or just get the standard edition. The special features on Disc 2 were excellent including the uncut performances that were cut short in the original film and the meeting of Foxx and Charles in a studio in 2002 to see if Foxx met Ray's approval (which it obviously did). Foxx is not only a talented actor, but an extremely gifted pianist come to find out. The sky's the limit for this brother and I hope he comes away with the Oscar cuz his performance again was flawless. I'd suggest buying the standard edition just to avoid all the nonsense I had to go through with extended edition. If not for the sorry DVD transfer this would easily been a five star classic. Who knows maybe they'll do like everyone else and come out with another edition with better film transfer. Great Biopic though.

Save 25% Off

Orlando (1993)

This is an amazing, ironic film, based upon Virginia Woolf's whimsically mock-serious epic about an immortal English lord, who experiences 400 years of history, changes his sex to that of a woman after refusing to participate in warfare (a feminist point that is subtly made), and never bores or condescends to us. What surprised me when I first saw it is how dry, boring and pompous it isn't; the film has a nice lightness and dry humor that make it digestible. The photography is beautiful and the film never drags, and the performances, which a lot of critics have suggested are somewhat two-dimensional, are that way for a reason: Orlando's adventure is too awesome to be rendered realistically; the people and adventures she experiences are meant, I think, to be represented symbolically---each character is actually a rough composite of perhaps hundreds of such types she meets in her journey from 1600 to 2000. Billy Zane, who is seen in the movie's poster, plays an American adventurer who romances the female Orlando, but to all of his "Titanic" fans, a word of caution: he's in the film for roughly twenty-five minutes, if that much. The real star of the show is the ethereally lovely, brilliant, and mysterious Tilda Swinton, whose male Orlando is unnervingly convincing; so much so that "he" almost seems to be doing a drag bit once the sex change happens---and because Swinton is so eye-pleasing and delightful, this is not a bad thing. Her intelligence and talent radiate from her face, which is so expressive that many shots consist simply of gigantic closeups of it---she can say more with a gaze than many lesser performers do with a page of dialogue. I first saw this film in 1993, as an exchange student living in London, and it gave me an appreciation for British history and for Woolf's books that I had never had before. It's really quite a smart, funny, cool, hip movie, but with no explosions, car chases, or hot-button themes, it's by no means a populist-type entertainment. If you like period films, or anything English, you'll dig this a lot: Orlando isn't just English, he/she *is* England, and the country should be so lucky as to be compared with Tilda Swinton's long-suffering (centuries of it, in fact, what a burden) poetry-spouting nobleman/woman. Very cool.

Finally got this one on DVD after nearly wearing out my VHS copy. Sally Potter is one of the best directors and of course Tilda Swinton in the title role is mesmerizing in every way. Although a sharp departure from Virginia Woolf's source material, it retains the spirit and scope of the novel. Orlando's tranformation from man to woman half way through is a beautiful moment. Swinton proudly naked and observing herself in the mirror looks directly into the camera and says "no difference really, just a different sex" it brilliantly blurs the line between what it means to be a man and woman. And when I say blur, I mean it in a good way. The gender, sexual orientation and race lines all need to be blurred until they disappear. Orland is a good salvo in that war.

Buy Orlando (1993) Now

First let it be said that while I love the film Orlando it is simply impossible to get all the themes and events of the novel into one movie, so I strongly urge all viewers, whether they loved or hated this movie, to read the book, Virginia Woolf's unique love letter to Vita Sackville-West.

The inevitable failings involved in translating a book into a film aside, 'Orlando' is visually exsquisite, the costumes and locations sumptuous and splendid, fully evoking the decadance and contrasting squalor of the centuries in which Orlando lives his/her life. The score perfectly compliments the surroundings, the atmosphere and the themes of each scene, and is beautifully composed and performed.

Though some have expressed doubts over Tilda Swinton's ability to play Orlando, the aristocrat born as man who turns into a woman half way through his/her life, I thought she was the perfect choice. I believe knowing she is a woman initially taints people's ability to find her convincing as a man; to me she played the part with great charm, amiability and empathy, and became even more charming as a woman the character of Orlando at this stage in 'her' life becoming more rounded, more sympathetic, more knowledgable and Swinton captures that well.

This film does not follow the 'rules' of the 'real' world besides changing genders, Orlando lives for 400 years and does not age a day. It is the story of a pursuit for life, for meaning, by one individual determined to discover what that means. Accept it, and enjoy.

In its attempt to capture the most important of the book's events the film does have a slight recurring bump in continuity, it seems, and will no doubt be pretentious and boring to some, if not many. Nonetheless, Orlando is a sometimes humorous, sometimes haunting movie, thought provoking and richly realised.

Read Best Reviews of Orlando (1993) Here

The movie starts with Tilda Swinton playing Orlando, a male role (so far), and Quentin Crisp playing Queen Elizabeth. Already, physical sex and social gender have been neatly divided. Later on, Orlando abruptly transforms from man to woman with no reason or mechanism given. S/he takes it in stride, but her place in her social world changes around her. Given the magical premise, it's an effective way to comment on the attitudes of men and women towards each other, based on complete and mutual ignorance.

There was only one small problem with the casting. Swinton is just too lovely a woman to play even an androgynous male convincingly. It took some effort to go along with Tilda the man, but it was worth it for the sake of the plot.

And, if nothing else, I could always watch the incredible costuming and scenery. Architecture and landscaping seemed to have quiet lives of their own, tolerating the people that moved among them. Many scenes were chosen for strong, almost confrontational symmetries, something that definitely attracted my attention. Another scene near the end actually costumed the landscape, Christo-like, for reasons I never worked out. There were a number of night scenes, too, and many seemed to be filmed using natural light. Those scenes often had a grainy look, but not enough to be distracting.

This is an odd movie, but I like it. Swinton's little asides to the camera, sometimes just a glance, added a quirky note. It's a thoughtful movie, about tone and appearance rather than action, and delivers well in those areas. However much I like it, though, I come away a bit unsure what to make of it. Maybe that's why I keep coming back to it.

//wiredweird

Want Orlando (1993) Discount?

Sally Potter is one of the few directors to achieve the near impossible to create a movie that actually surpasses the original novel.

Not wishing to take anything away from Virginia Woolf, whose The Waves is one of the most brilliant and defining novels of all time, Potter's film version is nothing less than a work of art.

As other reviewers have indicated, when the Orlando character, who was based on Woolf's friend and lover, Victoria (Vita) Sackville-West, crosses gender to become a woman, she automatically loses the right to own the very same property that, as a man, she/he had owned for eons. Even as a socio-political commentary, (see also Woolf's A Room Of One's Own) this speaks volumes about a patriarchal society in which the lowliest, most moronic male had infinitely more rights than the most brilliant and gifted female.

Our society is still dealing with the legacy of the tyranny of gender and the legacy of the Inquisition, in which nine million women were murdered for being women.

Yet despite the dark insanities that underly the film's pivotal transition, Potter's modern classic is a rich and joyful romp, filled with love, hope and transcendence, with a simply breathtakingly beautiful closing section.

A rare and inspired work of genius, in which the production direction and casting cannot be faulted.

Save 25% Off

Save the Date (2012)

A real film about how life sort of just happens. very relatable story and characters. The story plays out like events would in life and that was what made this movie so great. if you enjoy stories that are more realistic then this is for yo Lizzy Caplan and Alison Bree are stellar and you will fall in love with them. The dialogue is key in this film so enjoy and pay attention. i will say the last scene wasnt my favorite but the rest of the story makes up for it

Early on in Michael Mohan's keenly observed film -in fact, in the first shot -we see our protagonist Sarah hunched over a table in the bookstore she manages, drawing Save the Date cards for her sister Beth's impending wedding, when the ding of the "Ring Bell for Service" bell pulls her and her attentions up from her sketchbook. More than just slyly introduce the title of the film, this brief scene actually sets up the entire conflict at the heart of Mohan's film, that of the individual juggling the obligations of work, family, and self.

As played by Lizzy Caplan, Sarah is aloof on top and a jumbled bag of conflicting emotions underneath. Despite personal reservations, she is moving in with her boyfriend Kevin (Geoffrey Arend), who is in a band with her sister's fiancé Andrew (Martin Starr). Alison Brie plays Sarah's sister Beth with an air of lightly affected conviction to the superiority of her own judgment; she chalks up Sarah's reticence to immaturity, telling her, "it's time to grow up."

Beth represents two hurdles for Sarah. In addition to being Sarah's sister, with all of the familial obligations entailed therein, she also embodies the straight-world, grown-up deference to consensus that Sarah, as an artist and as an individual, rails so intently against. "This whole thing feels very... practical," she laments about moving in with Kevin, with resignation. Beth, on the other hand, is incapable of seeing "practical" as a pejorative; she is fussy and fastidious with her time, her money, and her emotions. To Brie's credit, Beth never exhibits any malice or indifference -she means well, but has simply allowed the onus of responsibility to rest too strongly upon her. She considers her sacrifices of will a virtue and fails to understand why they're not appreciated.

Sarah, however, has a distinct point at which she will no longer compromise her instincts, and that point is marriage. She is happy for Beth and Andrew, but is adamant in her own distrust and disbelief in the practice. Despite this, Kevin makes the ill-advised decision to propose to Sarah at the first show of their band's upcoming tour. When she runs, mortified, out of the club, Kevin is decimated. She moves out and he goes off on tour, but video of his failed proposal has made it to the internet; the constant reminder of his heartbreak is too much for him to bear, and they cancel the remaining shows.

Sarah, meanwhile, has been starting a tentative relationship with Jonathan (Mark Webber), a frequent patron of her bookstore. Jonathan is not an opportunist, and both are aware of the pitfalls of a rebound relationship, but their chemistry is strong. After dinner at Sarah's apartment, they share a brief first kiss. "I don't know what I'm doing," Sarah confides, to which Jonathan gentlemanly responds, "I know, and for that I'm going to leave."

Beth struggles to see past Sarah's seeming disregard for Kevin's feelings, but Andrew more quickly warms to Jonathan. It is Andrew, in fact, who remains the calm center of the film, and Starr's straightforward, guileless performance anchors the other four performers. He is level-headed and even-tempered, able to read people accurately and willing to do so without letting preconceptions or bias get in the way.

There are two moments in particular in which Beth's silent repentance betrays her reliance upon Andrew for emotional perspective. The first is early in the film, when she chastises him for making coffee when they have to hurry to the post office to drop off their Save the Date cards. Andrew, a few steps behind, approaches Beth, standing tersely at the intersection outside of their house, waiting to cross the road; he hands her one of two travel mugs, at which she smiles ever so slightly. The second comes much later in the film, after the conflict between Beth and Sarah has reached a fever pitch. Climbing into bed, Andrew -uncharacteristically blunt -says, "The girl that you're acting like right now is not the girl that I fell in love with." The look on Beth's face as she stares at him in the darkness could almost be anger, but as it lingers in silence, we see that any anger she may have is directed at herself.

Mohan and his co-writers Egan Reich and the cartoonist Jeffrey Brown wisely never stray too far from the relationship of the sisters, and the veracity of their interactions is possibly the film's greatest asset. The dynamic between Brie and Caplan is perfectly rendered with just the right balance of disdain, obligation, and genuine affection; throughout the film I couldn't help but be reminded of my wife's relationship with her sister and how true these episodes rang to me.

Brutal emotional honesty is actually an asset that the film in general can claim, offering none of the characters easy answers, nor offering the audience a tidy resolution. Over the past decade, critics have been using the term Mumblecore to describe the work of a small group of filmmakers who have turned no-budget filmmaking into a venue for intimate character studies and relationship dramas. As scene progenitors like Joshua Leonard (with the criminally under-seen and under-rated The Lie) and The Duplass Brothers (with the phenomenal one-two punch of Cyrus and Jeff Who Lives at Home) have been successfully transplanting their DIY aesthetic to major studios, many established actors and filmmakers have ben borrowing from the strengths and lessons of this new style of personal filmmaking. Within this growing genre, Save the Date represents the most honest, unadorned look at what it means to commit to another human being, with fine, sympathetic performances all around and an astute screenplay that respects all of its characters as well as their circumstances equally.

[originally published on Considering Film]

Buy Save the Date (2012) Now

Lizzy Caplan steals your heart as a complex, self gaurded 30something who has love thrown at her when it's the farthest thing she wants. She most choose between the love she has become comfortable with, and the rebound guy turned soulmate. As well as her sister's (Alison Brie) wedding witch she feels obligated to help with. Great performances from Mark Webber, Geoffrey Arend and Martin Starr also.

Read Best Reviews of Save the Date (2012) Here

Really enjoyed this movie and the dark humor was a nice departure from the standard, cliched romcom. Sad at times and i wish it didn't end where it did (not that i'm always opposed to ambiguous endings), but I'd definitely watch it again! Loved the cast and in particular thought Lizzy Caplan did SUCH a credible job with the role.

Want Save the Date (2012) Discount?

Save the Date is a sweet and yet serious indie flick about two sisters who are as different as night and day. Sarah is terrified of commitment (Lizzy Caplan) and Beth (Alison Brie) is happily engaged. Sarah's live-in boyfriend proposes to her in a very public setting and she breaks up with him, and immediately begins a sexual relationship with Jonathan (Mark Webber). Beth is cynical about Sarah's new situation, she feels her sister is just passing time and is afraid to take risks in her safe little world. I thought Lizzy Caplan and Mark Webber have intense and wonderful chemistry, and I also thought Caplan's performance was heartbreaking and electric, this is the best I've ever seen her. Save the Date is a great film, it's not for everyone but if you're a fan of indie flicks then this one is for you. Enjoy!

Save 17% Off

The Muppet Christmas Carol 20th Anniversary Edition Amazon Exclusive (Three-Disc BD/DVD Edition)

This DVD contains a 4:3 version and a 16:9 widescreen version.

Disney Home Video reps have confirmed that only the 4:3 pan & scan version is the home video version which contains the full version of this movie. The widescreen version is the theatrical cut and does not include the song "When Love is Gone".

Reading the Blu-Ray description included here, it says that the running time is 85 minutes, which is four minutes shorter than my copy on laserdisc. This can only mean that the exquisite song "When Love Is Gone" is STILL not being included in this release ...

... which means I'm not buying it.

Sorry, Disney, but I refuse to spend my money on a sub-standard presentation, no matter how HD it is.

The story of A Christmas Carol is about Ebenezer Scrooge, not the Muppets. His character arc is the most important factor. Michael Caine gives a fantastic performance, and his greatest moment is during this scene as he tries to sing with the woman that Ebenezer loved and lost -and he winds up losing his emotional control, unable to finish the song. This is why he turns to the Ghost of Christmas Past and says, "Spirit, show me no more. Why do you delight in torturing me?"

If "When Love Is Gone" is not included, that question has no meaning.

This wonderful film should not be released on Blu-Ray without including that moment! Disney, where's your brains?

Buy The Muppet Christmas Carol 20th Anniversary Edition Amazon Exclusive (Three-Disc BD/DVD Edition) Now

I was happily watching my VHS copy of The Muppet Christmas Carol with my lovely wife the other evening and decided it was time to own it on DVD. I popped open my laptop and ordered it as the movie was playing on the TV. Sadly I did not take time to read the reviews before placing my order because if I had known that the song, "When Love is Gone", was omitted from the widescreen version, I would have saved my money. So I can watch the complete film by choosing the 4:3 aspect ratio option but the image quality is vastly inferior to the 16:9 presentation. Basically I paid fifteen bucks for nothing. Thanks a bunch, Disney. Bite me.

Read Best Reviews of The Muppet Christmas Carol 20th Anniversary Edition Amazon Exclusive (Three-Disc BD/DVD Edition) Here

First of all, the most of these reviews are for previous releases. Second of all this blu-ray will not include the song, "When Love is Gone." I will not be buying this anymore. The songs adds so much, and the edit is so glaringly obvious and not smooth at all. I am also surprised that in this day and age, 2012 (almost 2013) Disney can't just release the complete version. Have they never heard of seamless branching? Anyway, I won't be buying this.

Want The Muppet Christmas Carol 20th Anniversary Edition Amazon Exclusive (Three-Disc BD/DVD Edition) Discount?

Disney has ruined THE MUPPET CHRISTMAS CAROL yet again by only including the cut theatrical release version of the movie, minus the song When Love is Gone. This is a song that not only is the heart and soul of the entire movie, but it was at one point added back into the film BY THE DIRECTOR, Brian Henson. Nobody involved in the production wanted the song removed -it was taken out by the studio because they felt little kids would get bored during it. As it is, the film still has an awful cut where that song was supposed to be...and the intended, full version of the film will remain sitting on a studio shelf because Disney wants it that way. Pathetic.

Save 10% Off

To Kill a Mockingbird (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy) (1962)

The film, truly an American classic and, for my money, one of the 10 best American films ever made, is splendidly rendered here with a mint-condition print. The DVD also offers a superb mix of additional features, most especially the remarkable documentary on the film, "Fearful Symmetry," by Charles Kiselyak, and compelling yet unassuming commentary by the director, Robert Mulligan, and the producer, the late Alan J. Pakula.

Besides interviews with Mulligan and Pakula, the documentary includes interviews with the actors who play the children, Mary Badham as Scout and Phillip Alford as Jem, as well as with the screen writer, Horton Foote, and the composer, Elmer Bernstein. The documentary also includes interviews with several residents of Monroeville, Ala., the real Macon, to round out a sense of "Macon" then and now.

Among the revelations in the commentary is that production designer Henry Bumstead (Vertigo) masterfully recreated the children's neighborhood on the Universal backlot using houses that would have been demolished by the construction of a freeway. The main titles, by Stephen Frankfurt, with Bernstein's theme, manage brilliantly to capture not only the essense of the film but an essence of childhood, about which both Harper Lee's timeless only published novel and the film itself are very much about. Only later do we discover the nature of that blend of innocence and experience alluded to in the William Blake poem from which Kiselyak takes the title of his documentary.

My only regret is that Harper Lee, though she helped Kiselyak in producing the documetnary, declined to be interviewed for it. In its stead, however, we have another evocation, that of Ms. Lee's voice in the rich tone of nostalgia and reminiscence with which Kiselyak infuses his own small but mighty masterpiece.

Everyone who has ever taken high school English classes will no doubt be familiar with Harper Lee's time honored story. As is mentioned in the accompanying DVD, Fearfull Symmetry, it is second only to the Bible in the hearts and minds of U.S. readers. This is probably also the most often-shown film in said classrooms. No need to reshash the story-line, then.

This DVD set offers an excellent transfer of the famed black and white cinematography of the prolific Russel Harlan. It's a real treat to hear from so many of the people who were involved in the production, from the producer, Alan J. Pakula, to the now grown actors who played Scout and Jim. The audience gains great insights into what made this film so special, not only to the legions of its admiring fans, but to everyone involved in creating it. We learn the scenes that Horton Foote, the screenwriter added from the book to advance character development (the scene showing Atticus putting Scout to bed and her questioning Jim about their mother as Atticus overhears them from the porch, was not in the book, for instance). We get to hear from Elmer Bernstein talk about the genesis of his unforgettable soundtrack. Due credit is also given to Stephen Frankfurt, for his highly creative and original title design, which sets the tone so beatifully for the rest of the film.

There is no question that this is director Robert Mulligan's greatest film, nor that in his portrayal of Atticus Finch, Gregory Peck found the role most perfectly suited to his character and rock-solid persona. This is a film about integrity, essentially, and there is not a false moment in the film. This compilation should be included in any film collector's library. I hope it continues to be shown in English classes until time immemorial. It's message and its relevance to the human condition will never go out of style, one hopes. Major Praise to Universal Studios and to all those involved in assembling this perfect DVD special edition.

BEK

Buy To Kill a Mockingbird (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy) (1962) Now

Like so many teachers, I've used the VHS version of "To Kill A Mockingbird" to teach the Elements of Literature to high school students.

Today, the internet has a wealth of resources to assist teachers and students using this classic adaptation of Harper Lee's novel. The documentary, "Fearful Symmetry" produced in 1998 to be included on this DVD Collector's Edition, is great resource for teachers, students and all those who love and have been touched by "Mockingbird."

The 130 minute documentary, written and directed Charles Kiselyak, both discusses how the film was made and it's general literary elements. The film is one of the most effectively edited documentaries I have seen, linking key scenes from "Mockingbird" with talking heads, still photos and black and white film taken in various localities across the south.

The documentary narration, written by Charles Kiselyak and read with great emotion by Mary Williams, is literary and quite sophisticated.

The talking heads include: screenwriter Horton Foote, director Robert Mulligan, producer Allan J. Pakula and composer Elmer Bernstein. Members of the cast appearing in the film: Gregory Peck (Atticus Finch), Phillip Alford (Jem), Mary Badham (Scout), Collin Wilcox (Maybella Ewell), Brock Peters (Tom Robinson) and Robert Duvall (Boo Radley).

Director Charles Kiselyak with the help of Harper Lee was able to get three residents to discuss their lives in Monroeville, Alabama. A.B. Blass and Norman Barnett recall life in the small town during the depression, and Ida Gaillard, a retired high school teacher, brings an interesting perspective to what life was (may have been) like in the town Harper Lee used as the model for Maycomb.

The literary and social significance of the "Mockingbird" are discussed by black attorney, Cleophis Thomas, Jr., and Claudia Durst Johnson, author of "Threatening Boundries."

In the DVD's printed supplement, Charles Kiselyak indicates that while Harper Lee was not willing to appear in the documentary, she was very helpful in the production. She was thrilled with the director's plan to open the documentary with the first verse one of her favorite poems, William Blake's, "Tyger:"

Tyger, Tyger burning bright, In the forests of the night; What immoral hand or eye, Could frame they fearful symmetry,

Kiselyak's film discusses Lee's novel as both a way of life and a passage from innocence into experience and then back toward innocence -"Fearful Symmetry."

"Mockingbird" and it's DVD documentary will touch your soul.

Read Best Reviews of To Kill a Mockingbird (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy) (1962) Here

In a twist of time and fate I was viewing 'To Kill A Mockingbird' on DVD when AFI released their choice of Gregory Peck's portrayal of Lee Harper's character Atticus Finch, the Southern lawyer who defends a black man unjustly accused of rape, as Hollywood's all-time movie hero. No character in film history has more deserved to be designated as the best 'good guy'. Peck garnered a well-deserved Oscar for his role as a man of understated wisdom and quiet courage and the quintessential father-figure all men should aspire to be and all children long for in their lives. The fact that this film, it's participants, and the basic story are still being honored after 40+ years is a testament to the solid message if offered and the effective manner in which it was presented.

I read this Pulitzer Prize novel when it was published and saw the film upon its theatrical release. The memory of both have long lingered. Enough can't be said about the wisdom of Universal's decision to release this Collector's Edition DVD. The public owes them a monumental 'thank-you'. Interviews with Gregory Peck and commentary by director Robert Mulligan and producer Alan J. Pakula make us privy to their precious memories surrounding how the charming novel was transformed into the perfect film. Seeing Mary Badham (Scout) and Philip Alford (Jem) (non-professional southern children starring in an Oscar-nominated film) as adults offering insights into their unique experiences was an unbelievable treat. To watch Robert Duvall make his screen debut as 'Boo Radley', and what a debut that was; and to hear his comments nearly a half-century later proves as never before the value of the DVD format and special features.

Watching this film upon its release it was inconceivable that we could one day far in the future hear and see the inside story of its making in the comfort of our homes and from the mouths of the individuals so instrumental in the process of creating a legend.

This DVD is priceless. The details of the making of this time-honored film have now been documented forever in a piece of movie-history that deserves to be savored by any true movie-buff as well as by a generation not yet born at the time of it's release. The message and the method of communicating it are timeless and dear. Please do yourself the honor of viewing this film.

Want To Kill a Mockingbird (Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy) (1962) Discount?

"To Kill A Mockingbird" premiered in U.S. theaters on Christmas Day 1962. Those who were lucky enough to see this movie on the big screen that December 25th came out of the theater with another Yuletide gift of sorts -they had just watched one of the finest motion pictures ever produced (IMHO).

There probably aren't enough glowing adjectives in the dictionary to describe the loveliness of this film. A truly fabulous piece of American cinema -all the way through -with a tender and bittersweet ending that always leaves one of those "trying to hold it back" lumps in the ol' throat.

The cast is ideal, with each actor seemingly molded for each of their individual roles. There's "Scout" (Mary Badham), "Jem" (Phillip Alford), "Dill" (John Megna), "Boo Radley" (Robert Duvall), and "Tom Robinson" (Brock Peters).

And "Atticus Finch" (Gregory Peck), one of the truly most memorable characters ever brought to the screen. And it's hard to think of how Mr. Peck's Academy Award-winning portrayal of that southern lawyer and father could have possibly been any better than we see it here. Peck always seems to have that "controlled" quality in his movie performances that are always a pleasure to watch. And never more so than as the low-key "Atticus" in this film. I doubt that it's possible to watch this movie and NOT admire the strength of character and unwillingness to stoop to such levels of vulgarity after Atticus is spat upon by "Bob Ewell". It's one of several scenes in the film that illustrates the type of man Atticus is, and the type of example he's setting for his young children. Some might be apt to call Atticus a coward in that scene. But they'd be wrong.

This film offers up many highly-memorable moments indeed --Atticus sitting in front of the jail reading by the light of his living-room stand lamp. .... The mystery of Jem's ripped pants. .... Boo Radley's spooky house. .... Atticus impressing his children when he shoots the rabid dog. .... That old hollowed-out tree that keeps filling itself up with all kinds of cool stuff. .... "Stand up, your father's passing". .... Plus, that beautiful and stirring Elmer Bernstein music score. Utter magic.

There's also a good deal of humor residing in this screenplay. I always get a good healthy laugh when viewing the scene which has Dill drenching his dinner in syrup, to the shock and dismay of Scout ("Look, Atticus! He's gone and drown-ded his dinner in syrup and now he's pourin' it all over!"). A true LOL moment that's always good for at least two replays. :-)

And possibly the most memorable quote comes at the end of the film, when Atticus says to Scout: "Miss Jean Louise -Mister Arthur Radley". With these few words, Scout's fears of "Boo" vanish forever. The dignity with which Atticus "introduces" Arthur ("Boo") to Scout is what makes this quote memorable for me.

Universal Studios Home Video, on September 6, 2005, issued a beautiful-looking new Two-Disc DVD version of "To Kill A Mockingbird", which comes with a bountiful helping of bonus supplements, as well as the very first "enhanced" (Anamorphic) Widescreen transfer of the film on DVD.

Packaged under its "Legacy Series" banner, this 2-Disc Set sparkles in virtually all respects, especially the video quality of this iconic black-and-white film. It looks very nearly perfect to my eyes. Very few distracting artifacts can be observed during the running of this 130-minute main feature (which is presented in its intended 1.85:1 Widescreen framing here). And the nighttime scenes are rendered in fine fashion, with next to no video annoyances visible at all. The film passes the "Freeze Frame" test as well -i.e.: you can "pause"/"still" an image on screen in virtual perfect clarity, without the image blurring at all, which I usually take as a pretty good sign that what I'm seeing is a darn-good transfer of the material to DVD.

There's a choice of five separate audio options for the feature film on Disc 1 -with one of the five being a Commentary Track with Director Robert Mulligan and Producer Alan Pakula, which was recorded for the first DVD edition of "TKAM" in 1998. Tragically, Pakula was killed in a freak auto accident in November of 1998, not too long after he recorded the commentary track for the DVD. He was 70 years old.

Other audio options for this two-disc edition include the original English Mono (in 2.0 Dolby Digital), a French 2.0 DD Mono track, and two newly-created multi-channel 5.1 Surround audio tracks (a Dolby Digital 5.1 plus a DTS 5.1). The DTS track isn't listed in the specs on the packaging, however. But it IS on here.

Audio tracks cannot be changed "on the fly" (as the saying goes) while watching the movie (unfortunately). You must go to the "Languages" Sub-Menu to switch the audio. To switch to the Commentary Track, you must access the "Bonus Features" Menu on Disc 1. There's no "Commentary" option available from the "Languages" Menu (for some reason).

Subtitle options: English, French, and Spanish. .... These subtitle choices are also ALL available when viewing any of the Bonus Features throughout this two-disc DVD set (including even the movie's trailer).

A bonus item that was originally scheduled to be a part of this set, but was ultimately not included, is a replica of Gregory Peck's "working script" (with handwritten notes by Peck). That bonus was evidently replaced by the 11 "Theatrical Poster Reproductions" that are included here. These poster art copies are very nice, being re-printed on high-quality paperboard stock, which have a glossy look to them. Included are a few USA poster copies, plus several from foreign nations, like Argentina, Japan, Italy, Poland, among others. The artwork's country of origin is printed on the back of each of these reproduction prints. A well-done extra bonus, IMO. (Although I would have loved to have had Mr. Peck's working TKAM script too. But, oh well.)

Also in the envelope with the 11 poster re-prints is a signed message from "To Kill A Mockingbird" author Harper Lee.

Let's have a look at the DVD Bonus Features.............

Disc 1:

> Gregory Peck's acceptance speech after he won the Oscar trophy as "Best Actor 1962" (the only Oscar statue he was ever to take home, amazingly enough). This vintage 1963 B&W video clip runs for 1:28.

> Excerpt from the "Academy Tribute To Gregory Peck", with Gregory's daughter Cecilia. This is a 10-minute bonus item.

> "American Film Institute Life Achievement Award" presented to Gregory Peck. Run Time: 10 minutes.

> "Scout Remembers", which is a 1999 NBC-TV interview with "Scout" herself (Mary Badham). This bonus runs 12 minutes. .... Mary Badham, for those who may not know it, is the sister of John Badham, who directed such motion pictures as "WarGames" (in 1983) and the enormously-popular and successful John Travolta film "Saturday Night Fever" (in 1977).

> The Original Theatrical Trailer for "To Kill A Mockingbird" (Length: 2:53). The trailer is in Full Frame (1.33:1) format. Excellent sound quality too. Video quality is lacking a bit, but it's not too bad.

> Production Notes. (Text screens only.)

The only thing missing here are the "Cast And Filmmaker" bio text pieces that were included on the '98 disc. Too bad, too, because those biography notes were quite good (and extensive), and covered several of the various TKAM players and execs.

Disc 2:

There are two first-rate documentaries on the second disc of this set. These two extra DVD programs amount to 3 hours and 7 minutes of added "Mockingbird" entertainment, pretty much the equivalent of two entire additional movies.

The Disc-Two programs are:

> "Fearful Symmetry: The Making Of 'To Kill A Mockingbird'" (90 minutes; B&W; Non-Anamorphic Widescreen 1.85:1 Video; 2.0 DD Stereo Audio; 24 Chapter Stops). .... This is the same feature-length, behind-the-scenes documentary that was also included on the earlier DVD release of "To Kill A Mockingbird". Wonderful stuff here. Lots of interesting details about how this classic film got to the screen. Includes many on-camera comments by Gregory Peck. Produced in 1998.

-And: --

> "A Conversation With Gregory Peck" (97 minutes; Color & B&W; Full Frame 1.33:1 Video; 2.0 DD Stereo Audio; 18 Chapter Stops). .... This sensational movie-length documentary was produced by Gregory Peck's daughter (Cecilia) in 1999. It is a very nicely-constructed presentation, with a good music score too, which delves in great depth into the personal side of the great Gregory Peck, who proves here that he was still more than capable of holding an audience's undivided attention at age 83.

This documentary could very easily have been called "Gregory Peck's Life: In His Own Words". It's quite literally a biography on the personal life and movie career of Mr. Peck. It's certainly one of the best "bio" pieces I've ever seen on the life of any actor.

This "docu-bio" contains video clips of many of Peck's films, plus old home movies, several talk-show clips featuring Gregory, and lots of other interesting stuff that help to give even more insight into the life of this amazing American actor (who was born in California on April 5, 1916).

Gregory Peck takes center stage during portions of the program (literally), as he talks and jokes with large audiences around the United States, and conducts various Q&A sessions.

There's lots of candid footage of Peck (and family) here too, including some impressive shots taken at Niagara Falls. And in Paris, too. And Ireland. And in Washington, D.C., as Gregory gets an award from then-President Bill Clinton.

Near the end of this thoroughly-engaging bio/"Conversation", we see proud granddaddy Gregory holding his just-born grandson (who was named "Harper", after TKAM author Harper Lee). The scenes of Little Harper will make you want to reach into your TV and scoop up this adorable munchkin. He's one of the cutest little tykes I've ever laid eyes on. It's no wonder Gregory looks so proud here. These tender scenes with Gregory and his new grandson add the perfect sweet and sentimental finishing touches to the whole documentary.

This "Conversation" bonus is a genuinely unique program. It was produced with an obvious large dose of love and affection by Mr. Peck's daughter (and all others who were involved in putting it together). After viewing it, you can't help but feel like you know (and admire) a man named Eldred Gregory Peck quite a bit better than you did just ninety-seven minutes earlier. And that might be the best compliment I can pay this very special and heart-warming documentary.

Mr. Peck passed away in June of 2003, four years after he filmed this program. He was 87. He will be missed forever by multiple generations of movie fans who loved his work in the cinema for many decades. His talent is one that we'll likely not run across again, until we reach heaven. But thank goodness for fabulous documentaries like this one, plus all of his cherished films as well, which enable fans to retouch the magic and greatness that will forever be associated with Mr. Gregory Peck.

----------------

The packaging for this "Legacy Series" edition has a very solid and collectible feel to it. It's a three-panel folding "Digipak" type of a case, which sports an attractive "leathery" texture on the outside of the case. Unfortunately, there's no outer slipcase box (sleeve) included here, which will probably displease some collectors who wish to display this set "face out". That'll pose a small problem, because the case always wants to "spring" back open (due to the lack of a restraining outer slipcase). An outer box would certainly have been useful, but even without one, this package stands out as a "classy" DVD item on the shelf.

Additional Packaging Note -This "Mockingbird" set is not packaged the same as "The Sting" (another Universal 2-Disc Legacy set). "The Sting", which is also worthy of a purchase IMO, comes in a two-panel "book-like" pack, which "snaps" firmly closed on the outside -just like the "Lawrence Of Arabia" 2-Disc Limited-Edition DVD release, which came out in April 2001.

For continuity sake, I would have preferred the "Sting" type of closeable Digipak for the TKAM release. The two sets would look better side-by-side if they'd been packed the same. But, no big deal really.

Both the "TKAM" and "Sting" Legacy versions lack any Chapter List inserts or paper enclosures (which is a bit of a debit). However, if you own the previously-released single-disc DVD "Collector's Edition" of "Mockingbird", I'd recommend hanging on to the excellent multi-page fold-out insert that came with that disc. It can be used with this new DVD set as well. It has a complete Chapter Selection listing for both the movie and the "Fearful Symmetry" documentary, and the chapter breaks are in the exact same spots on this newer Legacy version, with the same chapter titles used as well (39 total Scenes/Chapters for the Main Feature). There are also some interesting Production Notes and photographs printed on that 1998 TKAM insert.

Also -Make sure to disregard the "Color" notation marked on the loose piece of paper on the back of the DVD case that lists this "Legacy" set's contents. The film is in B&W, not color. That's obviously just a misprint.

----------------

A Final Glowing Blurb.......

"To Kill A Mockingbird" is a masterpiece of personally-felt moods and memories. Who among us doesn't have at least one childhood memory that can be rekindled through the actions of Scout, Jem, or Dill? This is a motion picture you can watch again and again -and each time take away something different when that incomparable final act fades to black (usually something that requires yet another hard swallow with which to combat that ever-present lump in the throat that this movie masterfully induces each and every time it's watched).

Any DVD collection of great American motion pictures is unquestionably incomplete if "To Kill A Mockingbird" does not occupy a prominent position on the shelf reserved for such magnificent movie treasures.

Save 40% Off

Jason and the Argonauts (1963)

I've reviewed quite a few films featuring the work of special effects artist Ray Harryhausen and found reasons to like them all, but Jason and the Argonauts (1963) features some of his most fantastic effects, and is considered to be one of the greatest fantasy pictures ever made. Would I say it's the greatest? No, but in terms of influencing many, including a majority of special effects artists in the business today, this film is a cinematic landmark, and deserves to be treated as such. Produced by long time Harryhausen collaborator Charles Schneer (The Valley of Gwangi, The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, Clash of the Titans) and directed by Don Chaffey (One Million Years B.C., Pete's Dragon), the film stars Todd Armstrong in his biggest role, but not his voice, as that was dubbed over by Tim Turner, a British actor who did a lot of voice over work on film trailers, including the trailer for this film. Also appearing is Nancy Kovack (The Silencers), and a whole bunch of British actors including Gary Raymond (El Cid), Laurence Naismith (The Valley of Gwangi), Niall MacGinnis (Night of the Demon), Jack Gwillim (Patton), Nigel Green (Countess Dracula), and Honor Blackman (Goldfinger), to name a few.

As this fantasy epic begins, we see the plight of Jason as an infant, his father slain and kingdom usurped, as so the seemingly fickle Gods have decided. Jason grows up, returns to re-take the land and peoples that are rightfully his, only to be sent on a quest, by the Gods (geez, who died and made them Gods? Oh yeah...they ARE Gods), to recover a golden fleece, one that would bring peace and prosperity to the troubled land. Only problem is the fleece is across the world, to where no one has sailed before. To meet this goal, Jason has the finest ship built, and gathers the greatest athletes Greece has to offer, and sets out on a perilous journey that involves dangerous waters, mighty bronze titans, a deadly, multi-headed Hydra, an army of skeleton warriors (can seven really be considered an army? Maybe more like a task force...), and treachery within his own ranks, among other things (as if that wasn't enough). The quest seems an impossible one, but with Jason's determination, the loyalty of his men (the non-treasonous ones, of course), and even a little help from the Gods themselves, he just may be able to survive and return with the treasure to reclaim what is rightfully his, and bring and end to the tyrant reign that has plagued his lands for the past twenty odd years.

Alright, I will say some of the acting isn't all that great (actress Kovack seems to be on some kind of depressant, as her performance is about as deadpan as I've seen), and some of the non-Harryhausen special effects are extremely noticeable (the matte usage in some scenes stands out a lot more than they probably would have liked), but despite these points, this is really a fun and exciting movie. There are elements of the story missing (the 2000 television CGI-laden version starring Jason London was a bit more inclusive in this respect, but lacked the charm, for me at least, of this one), but the makers of this film did manage to cram a lot into its' 104 minute running time, and the capable direction kept the story moving along at a rousing pace, rarely slowing down, and keeping my interest. I did enjoy the sets (especially those on Mount Olympus, and I have to say, Honor Blackman makes for one sexy Goddess, playing Hera, Zeus' wife...hotchie momma!) and the location shots where wonderful, adding a lot to the story. The Argo (the boat that carried Jason and his crew, hence the term `Argonauts') was suitable, although that figurehead of Hera (she was one of the Gods assisting Jason) freaked me out, especially with the opening an closing of its' eyelids. And I can't review this film without mentioning the work of legendary Hollywood composer Bernard Herrmann (Citizen Kane, The Ghost and Mrs. Muir, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Psycho, Taxi Driver)...well, I mentioned him...but seriously, it's pretty rare to find a composer as `in tune' with the material he's working with as Herrmann (think how different Psycho would be without its' frightening score). The best parts of the film, by far, are the stop-motion effects by Harryhausen. What makes his work so good, in my opinion, is not only his eye for meticulous detail (it would often take months to produce a 3 or 4 minute on screen segment of stop-motion work), but also his ability to create the appropriate movements for the characters he was presenting. An example within the context of the film is Talos, the bronze titan, compared to, say, the winged harpies. The character of Talos moved exactly how you would expect a giant made of bronze to move, rigid, lumbering, and generally slow, compared to the very fluid and animated movements of the winged harpies, or even the multi-headed Hydra creature. It's the supposition of how the creatures would move, infused with the created models that set Harryhausen apart from his peers, and made him a legend in his own time, influencing so many others that came after him. It's pretty rare to see stop-motion work in major films nowadays, as it's been replaced with computer generated images (which is probably cheaper and less time consuming, but can often appear just as unrealistic as lesser stop-motion work).

The picture looks pretty good on this DVD, and is available in both widescreen (1.85:1) and full screen pan and scan formats. The audio, Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono, is relatively clear throughout. Special features include subtitles (English, French, and Spanish), the original theatrical trailer, short production notes inside the case, and a lengthy interview with Ray Harryhausen conducted by John Landis, featuring clips, still photos, and even a prop or two from the films.

Cookieman108

I popped in this DVD very wary of how I would feel about an old childhood favorite after years of not seeing it. Well, I was pleasantly surprised that the film is still a lot of fun. Yes, a lot of the effects (blue screen, etc.) are unconvincing and show their age, but geeeez, the movie's almost 40 years old so what can you expect. This was a real stunner in it's day and Harryhausen's stop-motion sequences still outshine any boring CGI effect in today's cookie-cutter movies (just look at the awful recent TV remake with all those cheesy computer effects --there's no contest!) The skeleton battle is most well-known, but I have a special fondness for Talos which was the first scene that caught my eye as a young kid on Saturday afternoon TV in the late 60's. Glad to see that "Jason" still has it's magic (along with some acceptable campiness) and the DVD is a nice presentation (there are some slight flaws to the print materials and grain in some scenes). The Harryhausen interview (with John Landis) is interesting and the original trailer is also included on the DVD.

Buy Jason and the Argonauts (1963) Now

One of my fondest childhood memories was to spend Christmas Eve sitting near a warm fire watching the annual screening of "Jason and the Argonauts". As a teenager I stopped watching the film deciding that I had grown beyond it. A couple of years I rediscovered the film and found that I enjoyed as much as I ever did. All I need is to find a cabin somewhere in the wilds, take my DVD player up there and spend Christmas Eve as it was meant to be next to a warm fire with "Jason..." playing away.

There is a sense of wonder and imagination to this film seldom echoed in the special fx epics of today, all bogged down with stupid (rather than stupendous) stunt sequences. This is good fun, highly enjoyable and a wonderful story.

This is a good DVD transfer the picture is excellent (finally, the chance to see it in widescreen) and the sound is good. If you remember this from your childhood and wondeer if it is as good now then let me assure you that it has lost none of its magic.

Read Best Reviews of Jason and the Argonauts (1963) Here

Jason and the Argonauts is generally regarded as Ray Harryhausen's masterpiece (although my personal favorite is still Mysterious Island) and one of the greatest mythological fantasy films ever made, perhaps second only to the Kordas' Thief of Bagdad, if not better. This review, however, is not about the movie itself, but about the Blu-ray transfer versus the previous DVD release.

A number of reviewers have weighed in (both pro and con) on the Blu-ray transfer, but I wanted to add my two cents, having just cued up, synchronized, and directly compared the Blu-ray and DVD versions. Those complaining about the transfer could not possibly have compared the Blu-ray side by side with the DVD. Switching back and forth between the two, the superiority of the Blu-ray transfer is not only very noticeable, but indisputable.

The contrast, color balance, sharpness/detail, and black levels are all much improved in the Blu-ray. The DVD looks flat (low contrast) in comparison, the sharpness and detail are soft, and the color balance is considerably off, with the whole frame exhibiting a reddish-orange cast. In contrast, the Blu-ray is very sharp (even on my analog projection TV), fleshtones are natural, and the entire color palette is far more accurate (especially the blues and greens), revealing subtle gradations in hue (such as the slightly different colors of the two harpies) I had never even noticed before. I can only imagine how much better it looks on a digital TV.

Furthermore, visible film grain in a movie of this age (particularly in the optical effects and Dynarama shots) is to be expected and NOT a problem with the transfer. Grain can be reduced somewhat with Digital Noise Reduction, but applying it so heavily as to eliminate the grain will make the image look "plastic" and unnatural. A number of Blu-ray transfers have reportedly ruined the source material by trying to eliminate the grain with DNR. Personally, I think they did a fantastic job with this movie, striking a nice balance between restoring the image and respecting the original source material. Those reviewers who say it looks no better than the DVD are just flat-out wrong. If they had bothered to actually compare the two side by side, they would have seen a huge difference.

If you are a big fan of this film, the upgrade to Blu-ray is a no-brainer. I guarantee you will not be disappointed unless you are (unrealistically) expecting it to look like a movie shot in the last decade. I am very happy with the Blu-ray and can't see myself ever looking at the DVD again, especially after comparing the two.

Want Jason and the Argonauts (1963) Discount?

We refer to Star Wars as a George Lucas film, ET as a Steven Spielberg film, and Terminator as a James Cameron film. It's always "a [director's name] film."

Unless it's a Ray Harryhausen film. Because Harryhausen's spellbinding creations are always the real stars of his films, his name just has to come ahead of the director's. And nobody, but nobody will ever question that departure from protocol.

For the uninitiated, one viewing of Jason and the Argonauts will help you understand just what I mean. Employing the painstakingly difficult, low-technology method of stop-motion animation, Harryhausen delivers a fantasy-adventure that's absolutely breathtaking. Jason, leading an intrepid band of warriors that includes Hercules himself, encounters the seven-headed Hydra, the winged Harpies, the metallic 200-foot-tall Talos, the Merman Demigod Triton, and a band of sword-wielding skeletons. Not only are the creatures brought to life, they interact with the humans with seamless, eye-popping realism. And remember, this is a 1963 film.

How difficult is stop-motion animation? To give you an idea, Harryhausen took four and a half months to complete the skeleton battle scene, which lasted just over three minutes in the final edit. As for the Hydra, Jason had it easy. All he had to do was slay it. The really difficult task was Harryhausen's: he had to bring it to life, keeping all seven heads in constant, menacing motion.

The difficulty of this method naturally brings about the temptation to take short-cuts, moving the creature a centimeter here and there instead of the needed two millimeters. But Harryhausen worked hard at his craft, spending long nights in his studio to achieve the most realistic movements possible. And get this: he worked ALONE. Throughout his career, he NEVER had a staff or even an assistant.

So it was only fitting that in 1992, Harryhausen was honored by the Film Academy with a Lifetime Achievement Award. It was, to my mind, a long-delayed recognition. After the awarding, the emcee paid his own tribute: "Some say Citizen Kane, some say Casablanca, I say Jason and the Argonauts is the greatest film of all time."

The emcee: a guy named Tom Hanks.

Save 27% Off

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986)

In the early 1980s, a group of guys wanted to make a new kind of horror film. Due to a very limited budget and time constraints, they knew they couldn't make one involving complex special effects and hideous-looking monsters gore was not really an option. John McNaughton, first time Director, decided on a film about the everyday life a serial killer, set in modern day America. Much of the shoot would be on location, so no flashy soundstages or huge sets to eat up the budget. They cast an unknown in the lead and kept the cast and crew minimal. Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer was born.

The effect of watching this film will flood you with many emotions as you go through it anger, fear, empathy, sympathy, disgust to name but a few. It's very simple plot a serial killer moves in with his ex-con cellmate and sister, then goes round killing people, is disturbingly simple. Absolutely everything about this picture works the shoddy locations, the precision character acting (easily Michael Rooker's best film and his most intense performance) and matter-of-fact manner in which the murders happen, make this one of the most disturbing films ever made.

I think it is a masterpiece and creates feelings in the audience that go well beyond any that the huge Hollywood blockbusters could hope to get near to. It is I would say, the most disturbing film I have ever seen (and I've watched many, many horror films) because it works on an entirely different level these are people you pass in the street, that live near to you. McNaughton offers no explanation as to why the things we watch on the screen happen, they just do which ultimately makes this more terrifying. Thus, we are left with an almost flawless character study of a serial killer in his prime, no hope for redemption, Henry kills because he enjoys it, no other reason and we, as the audience are implicated into that, by our fascination with evil deeds and violence (otherwise why in the first place, would you even want to watch a film like this?).

Perhaps the most interesting element of the entire film is right at the beginning before it starts a warning is displayed, giving the audience a taster of just what they're going to experience. McNaughton has oft claimed that anyone who sits through the whole film needs it, that those who leave early or don't watch it, don't need it. We are left with a film that makes you feel depressed about enjoying onscreen violence, forcing you to question just why you'd want to see people being killed and surely this can only be a good thing?

The DVD is fully uncut and includes insights by McNaughton which are interesting and add to the general feeling of the film it's certainly worth getting this version if any, but be warned this is a one-off no ghosts, ghouls or buckets of gore, nothing so easy I'm afraid.

The reputation of John McNaughton's "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" is enormous in the realm of independent cinema. Made on a budget of over one hundred thousand dollars back in the 1980s, the movie went on to polarize viewers and critics alike. Some praised McNaughton's unflinching vision, his nihilistic portrayal of two lower class killers with nothing to live for and nothing to lose. The other camp rejected the film outright, deriding it as the worst sort of exploitative trash cinema. I tend to favor the former opinion; I think McNaughton's film is a brilliant look at a microscopic segment of society we all know exists even if it is rarely discussed. Besides, bashing the film as exploitative beggars the question of who it is exploiting. Serial killers? Guys like Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Henry Lee Lucas (the killer McNaughton loosely based the film on) could stand to have a bit more mud slung on their already malevolent reputations. I cannot find one scene in the movie that idolizes what these two guys do in their spare time. And, unlike slasher films and sundry other horror films, "Henry" demonstrates that violent acts have serious consequences.

"Henry" takes place in the dirty, gray streets and alleyways of Chicago. Henry (Michael Rooker) and his prison pal Otis (Tom Towles) spend their days working low paying jobs, drinking beer, and watching television. Otis toils at a gas station in between trips to his parole officer. Henry works as an insect exterminator (!). Things start looking up when Becky (Tracy Arnold), Otis's sister, moves in with the pair to escape the doldrums of small town life. Although she has some problems back home with a troublesome boyfriend, Becky takes a shine to Henry almost immediately. She pesters her brother for information about the man and is not disturbed in the least when Otis tells her that Henry went to prison for murdering his mother. In fact, she finds this information rather intriguing. Henry comes to like Becky too, so much so that he steps in when Otis treats her in a disturbing manner. The presence of Becky complicates the odd relationship between the two men, a relationship that is soon to take a horrific turn as Otis discovers what Henry does in his spare time.

Henry is a serial killer, a despicable murderer who preys on total strangers. He thinks nothing of following a potential victim home from the mall, or picking up strangers in bars and then dispatching them in grisly ways. Henry likes the feeling he gets from his crimes, and he soon involves Otis in his gruesome activities. Why his friend decides to help is a mystery. Perhaps he feels Becky driving a wedge between him and Henry. Otis exhibits many of the behaviors associated with a follower, and Henry is definitely a take-charge sort of guy, so maybe that is the overriding reason. Whatever the case, Otis soon becomes as enthusiastic about murder as Henry. When Otis complains about being angry one evening, his pal helpfully relieves the tension by tricking a passing car into stopping so the two can shoot the driver. A broken television set provides the impetus for a killing at a fence's office. The absolute worst crime involving these two, however, is something we see on videotape as Henry and Otis relive their thrills. Predictably, Becky soon discovers what her brother and his friend do when they aren't at home. The conclusion to the film is a shocker.

Any way you cut it (no pun intended), "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" is an excruciating experience. The crimes, while not overtly gory, revel in the sheer sadism of the act. If McNaughton was attempting to evoke a sense of outrage on the part of the audience, he succeeded wildly. You cannot even stand to look at these people after awhile, so repulsive are their actions. I found myself praying for a police officer, a security guard, a neighborhood watch guy-anybody in authority to show up and put a stop to these two goons' activities. But as evil in real life often goes unchecked, so do Henry's and Otis's extracurricular activities in Chicago. The film accomplishes what it sets out to do largely because the performances of the two actors playing the principal characters do such a good job. "Henry" was Michael Rooker's first film, and I agree with McNaughton when he says in the interview on the disc that this actor had star written all over him. Rooker plays Henry as a sort of withdrawn, soft-spoken type that probably would appear unthreatening to potential victims. Just as good is Tom Towles as the grubby Otis, who portrays his character as an insufferable extrovert who occasionally sinks into pouty silences. Without these two actors, one wonders whether "Henry" would have become the cult classic it is today.

The DVD version of the film is a good one. A lengthy interview with John McNaughton tells the viewer everything they ever wanted to know about the movie. The director explains the long road to finishing the project, his experiences when it finally opened in a theater, and the lengthy battle with the MPAA over the rating for the movie, a battle which saw the censors pushing for extensive cuts to avoid the dreaded 'X' rating while McNaughton fought to keep his vision intact. Considering some of the extreme films floating around out there today, the concerns of the censors seem rather archaic now. Still, the film has lost little of its power to disturb deeply. Fans of offbeat cinema, if they have not done so already, will wish to pick this one up soon.

Buy Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986) Now

I don't know if these days, this movie is that great of an idea to watch. If you're already freaked out by the news, and too scared to do much, you might want to hold off. But if you feel nice and safe when you are somewhere alone....and want to really feel something cold slowly move up your spine...

As far as non-supernatural horror goes, this movie and Last House on the Left are the scariest movies I've ever seen.

I saw this at a film festival and the audience was very, very quiet (except when they screamed or gasped). My friend and I just sat there quietly cowering most of the time. It's just way too realistic. The opening and closing are probably the most frightening, and we don't even see Henry killing anyone, just the bodies of his victims and their terrified screams in the background, echoing. It will give you chills down your spine.

The stuff in the movie that scared me wasn't any big "jumps" or gore, just very disturbing, creepy moments (especially if you knew someone who was been the victim of a homicide, as I do). My friend I saw it with worked at the city prosecutors office and heard about plenty of local murder cases and said it rang very, very true to life. One of the most chilling scenes is early on, when Henry goes to a mall and just sits patiently in the parking lot, scanning. The camera looks coldly and calculatedly at different women in the parking lot from Henry's point of view. There are so many shots you almost start to wonder what the point of the scene is until it hits you: they are ALL potential victims, this is how he looks at women. I have always been careful as a woman whenever I am alone but after seeing the film, to this DAY I do not walk to my car alone at the mall without my mace in my hand, and I look all around me and never turn my back on anyone. The movie also does not glamorize the killing or violence against women at all. Also, it's a good primer on home and personal safety. (a good ruleDo not EVER let a stranger into your house when you are home alone if you were not expecting him. Think I'm paranoid? Watch this movie and see how safe you feel).

The plot sounds simple but it's not boring. The movie follows the exploits of Henry, a young man who is practically a textbook case of a serial killer (male, white, 30's, drifter, soft-spoken, shy). Conflict comes when his disgusting nasty inbred cousin Otis Toole stays with him, along with his pathetic sister. One night Otis and Henry pick up a couple of prostitutes and are having sex with them in the car. Henry kills both of them sort of offhandedly, with no more emotion than you would swat a fly. Otis starts joining him on his exploits. Henry is more sympathetic than Otis, however, because while Henry does these things because he is sick and doesn't have a choice, Otis seems to get off on them, and also should know better. Things sorta go downhill from there, and the sister complicates things because she is so desperately lonely that Henry starts to look good to her. It culminates in one of the most chilling, downbeat endings of all time. I still find this one of the most disturbing, unsettling movies ever made. You haven't seen a really scary movie until you see this movie.

Read Best Reviews of Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986) Here

Most horror films are like roller coaster rides--we get thrills and chills, but we also laugh; we know we're safe. It's only an illusion of fear, not fear itself. John McNaughton's Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is fear itself. We cannot laugh after this movie, cannot recount its most famous scenes with pleasure, because this film stands as one of the bleakest, most relentless depictions of a murderer ever put to celluloid. It's practically a documentary. I rank it with "Psycho" as one of the greatest of all-time horror films.

This film is light years from Hollywood treatments of serial killers. Sure, Se7en was really good, but come ON people, when did you EVER hear of a murderer with such an apocalyptic, clever, and convenient M.O.? Henry, as played by Michael Rooker, is an emotional blank, a human cipher. He's not sympathetic at all--no wisecracks, no catch-phrases, nothing that we can latch on to to understand him.

Therein lies the power of the movie. If Henry revelled in his bloodshed, we could despise him. If he suffered crippling feelings of guilt afterwards, we could pity him. But you can't do either. You just kind of watch him, hoping he won't go too far... that he'll stop soon... that some tough detective would track him down... But none of these things happen.

"It's always the same, and it's always different," Henry tells his friend Otis (Tom Towles), who eventually ventures out with Henry on his killing sprees. Why? Because he's stupid, restless, filled with unfocused loathing. What more of an explanation do you need? "It's either you or them, one way or another." That's all the rationale you'll get for Henry's compulsion, and it's as good an explanation as any.

The plot, such as it is, takes a twist for the worst when Otis' sister Becky (Tracy Arnold) comes to stay with him and Henry in Chicago. Lonely and destitute after the break-up of her marriage, she finds Henry someone she can talk to because he's not "judgmental." Read: he's a blank slate upon whom she can project whatever she wants, and right now she wants someone to understand her. In one subtly chilling scene, she tells Henry how she had been beaten and raped repeatedly by her father as a teen. Henry says to her in his deadend rasp, "Didn't get along with your Daddy, huh?"

Henry's normally placid demeanor dissolves only when he talks about his abusive mother. I like how he misremembers how he murdered her. That strikes me as really true and accurate; serial killers are like THIS. "It ain't what she done," he says, "it's how she done it." We see how brutality breeds brutality, how violence and despair and rage are almost a genetic code. But the director, John McNaughton, isn't making a message movie--you gotta pick up on this stuff yourself. Go watch an Oliver Stone movie if you want socially redeemable violence (which is an oxymoron).

While certain watchdogs of morality in film howl that the realistic depiction of violence in movies ultimately desensitizes the viewer, nothing could be further from the truth in Henry. Can anyone watch the videotape sequence herein, where Henry and Otis slaughter an entirely family and not be left feeling disturbed, violated, empty? The murders are virtually bloodless, and yet it may be the most unsettling screen violence I have ever seen (well, up until I saw Mr. Orange's torture bit in 1992). I wanted it to... go away... But then, real violence makes you feel that way. That's what makes Henry brilliant--no cheap thrills. McNaughton is playing for real. Like many people, I cringe when I see violence in a film, but unlike many, I can't turn away. We need films this raw and immediate and rough to explore such foul things--you can't expect Hollywood to do it.

"But if you strangle one, and stab another, and one you cut up and one you don't, then the police don't know what to," Henry explains. And there's the moral center of this movie. Sorry. This is not about good and evil, because there is no such thing in the serial killer's world. Don't pretend that there is. Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is a horror film in which the truly horrified is not the character on the screen, as it too often is, but the audience itself. This is not an enjoyable film, but it is one you must see.

Want Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986) Discount?

John McNaughton's directorial debut has been hailed as one of the best by any first-time director. I won't be one to disagree with those who agree. McNaughton took $125,000 dollars, an idea of fictionalizing a week in the life of one real-life serial killer Henry Lee Lucas, and a dedicated crew of filmmakers to create a raw, unflinching, visceral piece of filmmaking. Originally filmed and finished in 1986, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer languished in ratings limbo as the filmmakers struggled with the MPAA over its X-rating. In fact, it's been reported and written in many publications that it is one of the few films screened by the MPAA where they saw no way an edit here or there can ever lower it to an R-rating. I think its fortunate for film fans and academics everywhere that McNaughton and company decided to release the film in 1990 unrated.

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer was loosely-based on the life of one Henry Lee Lucas. One of the most prolific (though Lucas has since discounted ever killing over 600 people) serial killers in American history. From the beginning, Henry plunges the audience into a world seen through the eyes of a sociopath and as, Ebert once wrote in his own review: "an unforgettable portrait of the pathology of a man for whom killing is not a crime but simply a way of passing time and relieving boredom."

The first scene is haunting in its graphic and realistic portrayal of the randomness of a serial killer's passing through the myriad roads and highways that criss-cross the American landscape. It was this stark and realistic portrayal of the aftermath of violence and death that has made some people label McNaughton's directorial debut as a snuff-film masquerading as an arthouse production. It's difficult to disagree with such people since the violence (though it doesn't go as far as most horror films of the era and barely a blip on the MPAA's radar in today's mega-blockbuster-shoot'em-ups) has no look of articiality and not glossed-over with your typical horror/suspense sensibilities. It doesn't have that exploitation look that the horror films of the 70's and early 80's. What it did have was the look and feel of a documentary. The titular character (chillingly portrayed by Michael Rooker) commits his murders as one who sees nothing wrong in what they're doing. To Henry what he does he does to pass the time and to break-up the boredom of his existence. This behavior shows the banality of Henry's view of the world around him. It goes to show that as horrific as Henry must seem to the audience there's a sense of reality in what he does. We read about it on the news, in true-crime documentaries, and in the sensationalist shows dealing with serial and mass murderers.

But Henry is not the only one who wades into the dark underbelly of American life and society. There's Henry's former cellmate, Otis (played with relish by Tom Towles) who at first seems like a buffoon, but later shows his own pathology for senseless killings as Henry finally brings him into his own world. In fact, Otis' reaction to Henry's revelations about what he does in secret looks similar to the reaction of the violence addicted mass audience who revel in the violence in action films and horror retreads. Otis is at first confused and knows that he should be disgusted with the killings he first witness Henry committing, but he later gives in to his own primal impulses. He soon revels in the act of murder and even sees it as his own form of entertainment. It's during the home-invasion and subsequent murders of the home's family captured on videotape by Henry and Otis that this change in Otis hits home.

This is the juncture in the film that posits the damning question the filmmakers want to ask the audience. Do we recoil in horror and disgust at this horrifying, voyeuristic sequence or does the audience continue to watch with the dispassionate eyes of one who has become desensitized to onscreen violence. There's no clear answer to this question and the filmmakers don't condescend to the audience and try to sugar-coat the violence. It is also this sequence where we see the difference between Henry and Otis. Henry almost feels remote and disconnected from the acts he's committing. To him breaking the neck of a teenage boy might be the same as stepping on an ant. But to Otis the killings themselves becomes his addiction and only form of joy. He's willing to go beyond what his mentor has done to sate his appetites. We see Henry's reaction to this change in Otis and realize that as much as the audience want to hate Henry, he is the lesser of two evils. He doesn't take joy from his work and we cling to that barely there shred of decency in the hope that salvation and redemption is at the end of the ride.

To the filmmakers' credit Henry doesn't trivialize the gruesome events from scene one right up to the end credits by tacking on a Hollywoodize happy ending. As the final reel comes to a conclusion and we see Henry and Otis' sister, Becky driving off into the night (a sort of reverse-negative of the typical riding-off into the sunset of Hollywood past), the audience is ready to breath a sigh of relief from the relentless visual and emotional pounding the film has put on the audience. But the rug is pulled out from under the audience's feet. McNaughton and his writers do not believe in the redemption of Henry. In fact, they know that such things are only seen in Hollywood and fairytales. What they give the audience instead is a scene that continue to show that the film is steeped in the real world. People like Henry do not find forgiveness and salvation from their evil deeds. People like Henry continue to ply the roads and highways of America. Their seeming normalcy hiding the calculating, sociopathic murderous instincts just below the surface.

I credit Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer as one of the truest work of American filmmaking. A great character study of a sociopathic individual whose banality can truly be called the face of evil. McNaughton's film is admired and reviled and both sides have credible points in taking their sides. It is a great piece of work that shows that filmmaking can go beyond its basic need to entertain. It is also a brutal piece of film that didn't have to be made the way it was made, but to do it in any other way would've diluted the message and impact of the story. 10/10

Save 67% Off