Brick

I have to say it, "Brick" is probably the best movie I have seen this year so far, and I don't think I'll see another that will top it. I had heard about "Brick" for a while now, and when I heard the premise of it, I knew that it was something that I would have to check out. I'm glad I did, because not only did I end up enjoying it the first time I saw it, but I watched it again the next day. Not many films can do that for me, but this one most certainly did. There was no way I could have ever bet that I would've ended up loving this movie the way I do.

If you're unfamiliar with the approach to the movie, it's pretty much a detective-murder-whodunit movie with a catch; it's set in modern times and it involves high school kids. Yet, the kids talk in the manner that you would expect from your typical hard-boiled detective movie. The story concerns Brendan Frye, who is contacted by his ex-girlfriend by phone. On the phone, she sounds frightened and troubled, but doesn't say much about what is the matter. Two days later, she ends up dead. Brendan knows that she got involved with the wrong crowd, so in order to find out who is responsible for her death and why, he has to go in deep into the underground drug world that has consumed a good amount of his schoolmates. The deeper he goes, the more risk he puts himself in.

This film is extremely well done and well made, and that caught me off guard. I wasn't expecting a movie like this, nor was I expecting that I would end up loving it so much. The film seems innocent and fun at a glance until you really get into it, and then you realize how dark and brutal it can get. Just because it involves high school kids, it doesn't mean it's child's play. It's film noir at its finest, and it even pokes fun at itself a little here and there, but overall it's a pretty dark and serious movie. What really sells the movie in the end is the great performances from the cast, especially the lead actor.

Because of how odd and different "Brick" is, there's a good chance that more people will end up not liking it so much. That is the risk these kinds of movies take, but it's nice to see something that isn't so "commercial friendly" for a change. It stands out, and that's something that has to be admired to some degree. I would recommend renting it first because of this. Also, I recommend that you see it more than once. As much as I liked it the first time, I really appreciated it for what it was more during the second viewing. The DVD doesn't have a whole lot to offer, sadly. There are some deleted/extended scenes, audition tapes from two of the actors in the movie, and cast/crew commentary. It's a shame that they don't give you the trailer, which I thought was really good. I also would've liked to see some behind-the-scenes features.

"Brick" took me for a ride and I have to say that I loved every minute of it. It's an exhilarating and brilliant film that takes a lot of chances without apologizing to anybody in the end. It's one you'll either love or hate, but I think it's definitely worth the time checking it out. If you're looking for something that isn't typical or dull, then I highly recommend it. It's too soon to say, but I think if you give it enough time it could become a classic. It's high up on my list of favorite movies now, and that only took two days. -Michael Crane

Joseph Gordon-Levitt stars in "Brick" as Brendan, a high school student searching for his ex-girlfriend, Emily. After they broke up, Emily started "eating lunch" with a more popular, yet mysterious crowd ("The Upper-Crust"). As he delves into their world, he finds a sickening subculture of drugs, double-crosses, and worse.

The movie is set in Orange County (San Clemente), and the movie's big hook is that it's an update of those terrific film noirs of the 1940s and 1950s. Yes, the movie sometimes comes across as "The O.C." mixed with "The Lady from Shanghai," with just a touch of "Blue Velvet." However, as such, "Brick" succeeds very well. The dialogue is full of clever pithy lines and slang that went out with Eisenhower (Beautiful woman: Do you trust me now? Brendan: Less than when I didn't trust you before.). The directing is also terrific kudos to first time director Rian Johnson. Finally, Jospeh Gordon-Levitt makes a likeable protagonist amidst the crazy proceedings and characters, including a rather magnetic Lukas Haas as "The Pin."

Although making the film in noir style is essentially a stunt, the tone helps make the movie deeper, more satisfying easily one of the most intricate teen dramas ever made. The plot is full of holes (what film noir isn't?), but the noir style and look smoothes out the rough edges; yes, style does sometimes trump content. There were a few times when the "Brick" verged on being a typical teen movie; fortunately, Johnson manages to get back on track. Highly recommended for fans of film noir or sophisticated teen dramas.

Buy Brick Now

Rian Johnson's "Brick" won a Special Jury Prize at the Sundance Festival for originality of vision, and seldom has an award been more deserved. This witty, breathlessly entertaining low-budget flick conflates modern-day high-school angst with the mean-street conventions of 1940s detective fiction and movies. The surprise is that director/screenwriter Johnson plays the story absolutely straight, and gets away with it, while at the same time touching on some uncomfortable truths about growing up in America. Brendan Frye (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), whose delicate, poetic looks belie his limitless resources of toughness and courage, goes underground among his school's drug-addled "upper crust" to uncover the murderers of his ex-girlfriend Emily (Emilie de Ravin). He endures multiple beatings from the goon Tugger (Noah Fleiss), as well as threats from both The Pin (Lukas Haas), a cadaverous criminal mastermind who still lives with his doting mother, and Assistant Vice Principal Trueman (Richard Roundtree), who basically plays the Barton McLane role to Gordon-Levitt's Bogart. Then there are the femmes fatales in training, Laura (Nora Zehetner) and Kara (Meagan Good), who may or may not be helping Brendan. "Brick" is remarkably stylish and atmospheric for its miniscule budget; Johnson is masterful at capturing the claustrophobic milieu in which Brendan and his antagonists lurk. There are scenes of action and suspense here that put big-budget epics like "V for Vendetta" to shame, simply because Johnson knows how to edit, and because he makes us care about the characters, especially Brendan. I never paid much attention to Gordon-Levitt until I saw his performance as an emotionally damaged male prostitute in Gregg Araki's "Mysterious Skin." Based on his performances here and in that film, I would say that Gordon-Levitt is quickly becoming one of the truly great American screen actors. All the other actors are also fine, including Matt O'Leary as The Brain, Brendan's informant and only true friend, and Noah Segan as the pathetic "reef worm" Dode. Some critics have complained about "Brick's" convoluted plot and stylized dialogue--Johnson creates a language for his characters that is half Chandleresque slang, half teen speak. But for me they only added to the film's fascination. You'll probably need to see the film more than once to catch all the details, but, then again, you'll WANT to see it more than once. Myself, I can't wait for the DVD to come out.

Read Best Reviews of Brick Here

Brick is a strange animal that seems to appear almost out of nowhere. A lot of people my have come here because they've heard about this movie and haven't yet seen it. Some of you may have come here because you tried to watch it but had to turn it off because you couldn't understand what the hell they were talking about.

Let me suggest this: TURN ON THE SUBTITLES.

Yeah, I know it's in English and you recognize the main character from that TV show: Third Rock from The Sun, but this isn't a sitcom on NBC, and this isn't your typical run-of-the-mill, teen flavored High School drama. In Brick, you're about as far from John Hughes territory as your going to get and closer to the backyard of Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler than you might realize. As a huge fan of The Big Sleep, I was really caught of guard by this film and stunned when I realized just what was going on. Seeing 1940's film noir, soaked in a teen centered tale of woe, works better than I would've ever thought. And for the record, I don't think anyone, other than the writer dared attempt something like this and succeed at it too. Bravo.

Rian Johnson makes a writing and directorial debut to rival most of his peers and mentors. This film is enough to make the Gods tremble, hopefully he'll be able to follow it up appropriately. On a side note, Rian offers up his screenplay, the novella he wrote that goes with it, an essay and drawings for no charge on his site, which is easily found, if you're interested in reading.

Nora Zehetner as the smoldering and cold-calculating heroine is also a definite high point, and her career and longevity in films is assured.

This film could easily be the Blade Runner of this generation.

Want Brick Discount?

I can understand why reviews of this movie are so split down the middle. It's a very strange and weird idea: Shoot a film noir and do the dialogue and structure as if you were adapting a Hammett novel back in the day, but set and shoot the movie at a contemporary California high school. Either you think this is brilliant or you think it's totally idiotic.

From my own experience and from talking to others, I think it is tough to get into this movie primarily because of the patterns of speech. Everybody talks very fast with a stylized delivery as if they were in a movie from the 30s or 40s, using a lot of slang most of us don't use, and the sound quality isn't so great. My suggestion to anyone who wants to give this a go but winds up having a hard time is to try it out with SUBTITLES, believe it or not (and I am *not* kidding about this). Because once I did, I realized I was mishearing certain words and I started to pick up on the rhythms, hear things correctly, and the dialogue started to sound natural; eventually I got into the flow of it enough to get rid of them (though I admit in a few scenes I wound up going back and putting them back on just to make sure I got the lines right).

You might ask, what's the point of doing a movie this way if it winds up creating a problem like that? Well, I think that the reason for dealing with this is because this oddball strategy of Rian Johnson's winds up actually creating one of the more successful attempts at a contemporary film noir. For whatever strange reason, the artificiality of the dialogue and farcical nature of the proceedings works quite well once you give in to the conceit. Many other attempts at doing a modern neo-noir wind up feeling way too "retro" and nostalgic and they stumble over themselves trying to figure out how to be modern but yet try to keep all the elements of old detective thrillers that people miss and want to see (see Kiss Kiss Bang Bang for an example of sort of the tricky questions that come up in trying to do contemporary noir). The high school setting actually defuses that problem because it is silly and anachronistic already, so having modern day kids talking in old fashioned out of date tough guy lingo is no more strange than having anyone else, adult or not, talking that way these days. The plot is predictably convoluted in the old noir-detective style and there are all the usual archetypes and manipulations. Somehow they seem sort of fresh in the setting of high school. And since most of us tended to discover detective novels in our teen years, it seems perfectly fitting to project their tropes out into that world, to imagine that high school is a microcosm of all the things one read about in pulp fiction.

So I'll take sides with the "pro"-Brick crowd; I enjoyed it.

Save 53% Off

Newton Boys (1998)

I give this movie 7 stars out of 5 stars. First rate blue ray, and first rate audio. Very interesting story, with first rate acting. Movie you should enjoy watching many times. Like Bonnie & Clyde should go down in film history. Must buy if you enjoy these bank robbing movies.

Save 23% Off

The Lion King II: Simba's Pride (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo in DVD packaging) (1998)

Yeah, I know that this direct-to-video sequel was put out to cash in even more so on the original, which itself grossed over $300 in U.S. box office receipts to become the most successful Disney film ever! However, after watching this a couple of years back and revisiting it today, I know that there was another, much better, reason: four years after THE LION KING, we were all missing the characters...and we were hungry for more. As much as us fans of the original did not want the possibility of having the franchise tainted by an inferior sequel, it seemed to be worth the risk.

And it was. In 1998, Disney got most of the principal voice-over actors back from the original---Matthew Broderick as Simba, Moira Kelly as Nala, Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella as Timon & Pumbaa, respectively, and of course, Robert Guillaume as the hilarious Rafiki---and made THE LION KING II: SIMBA'S PRIDE, which follows our favorite Lion hero (and King) & family as they pick up from where they left off in the first film. Now Simba is the King and his young offspring is a lioness cub named Kiara; he's the worried dad in this one, always fearing for the safety of the young precocious girl, but they're nevertheless a happy family just the same. Of course, danger lurks in the shadows, as Zira (Suzanne Pleshette---yes, *that* Suzanne Pleshette), the villainous ex-mate of Scar, is training her young son Kovu to grow up to avenge Scar's death by killing Simba. However, Rafiki, the silly-acting but nevertheless wise monkey, finds out to his horrified amazement that Kiara and Kovu are destined for each other. Sure enough, Kiara and Kovu meet each other as cubs and take an immediate strong liking to each other. Can true love overcome true evil?

This film, by itself, is very well-written and acted, with excellent production values for the fact that it is a direct-to-video sequel. It has really no flaws of its own, just one obvious inconsistency between it and the first film: Scar's 'ex-mate' Zira (and, by extension, Kovu) simply did not exist in the original THE LION KING! She was obviously made up just to have a sequel. However, this is the only major thing to overlook, and if you can forgive this movie for it, then you should be able to easily enjoy yourself. As I said, this is a good animated movie, and I recommend it for any fan of the original. This sequel isn't quite as dark; however, I still would not recommend showing it to very young kids. Suzanne Pleshette does a surprisingly good job as the evil, scheming, vengeful Zira (basically a female versdion of old Scar himself). Neve Campbell does a solid job as the voice of the adult Kiara, and Jason Marsden does excellently as the conflicted Kovu, who wants to do good, but...he made a promise to his mother...didn't he?!

Listen, THE LION KING II: SIMBA'S PRIDE is not the masterpiece that THE LION KING is...however, it is much better than it perhaps should be. Fans of the original should definitely own it.

RECOMMENDED, AGES 8 & UP

The Lion King II-Simba's Pride is a better than excellent movie! I really loved it. I watched it at a friend's house a few months ago and we all loved it. Simba is grown up and has mated with his childhood sweetheart Nala. He has a daughter, Kiara, who wanders onto the territory belonging to Scar's mate, Zira. She starts playing with Zira's son, Kovu, but soon Zira finds out and she snarls and all. Simba comes to the rescue and forbids Kiara to go there again. Kovu is sent to Simba's territory to live there and kill him. But, like any Disney movie, Kovu and Kiara fall in love! It's about the relationships between Kiara and Kovu and Simba and Kovu. In the end there is a fight, but I'm not going to tell you who dies or lives! Watch this movie that brings The Lion King back to life!

Buy The Lion King II: Simba's Pride (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo in DVD packaging) (1998) Now

The Lion King II: Simba's Pride is by far one of the best, if not the best, Disney sequel produced to date. It has sold more copies than any other Disney sequel, and for good reason -it is a worthy successor to the throne.

The animation is high quality, especially for a direct-to-video sequel. Instead of using hand-drawn characters and computers to color the images, TLK2 was done in traditional cel animation, unlike the original Lion King. This makes the movie even more classic, and easily appreciated not only for its wonderful story, but the artwork involved in creating it.

The story is stunning and picks up basically where TLK left off. Simba and Nala's daughter, Kiara, is being raised to become the future queen. In the meantime, she encounters a cub from a tribe of outsiders named Kovu, and they immediatly become friends. However, both of their families stand in the way of their friendship continuing, and they never see each other again until they are adults and that's where things really get interesting! Zira, the leader of the outsiders and Scar's mate, is trying to kill Simba, and Kovu figures into the plan. In the end, both tribes clash in all out war. You'll just have to watch to see how the story ends.

Definitely a worthy sequel to the first, get a copy if you can.

Read Best Reviews of The Lion King II: Simba's Pride (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo in DVD packaging) (1998) Here

Set after Lion King and Lion King 1/2, Simba has defeated Scar and got the throne at last. Simba ( voiced by Matthew Broderick) and Nala now have a daughter named "Kiara" whom is the heir of the pridelands, one day while wondering around the pridelands she meets a mysterious lion cub named " Kovu" and becomes friends with him. Unknown to Kiara, Kovu is a young member of the banished outland pride whom were part of Scar's pride. Now there is a war between the prides lead by the dark Zira ( voiced by Suzanne Pleshette), only Kovu ( Jason Marsden) and Kiara ( voiced by Neve Campbell) with their love can straighten things up between the two prides.

Terrific sequel to both " Lion King" and " Lion King 1/2", it's another sequel that proves not all the disney sequels can stink. What works here is that some of the cast members from the original with a new one ( Robert Guillium, Nathan Lane, Ernie Sabella, Andy Dick) come back, the animation is theatrical quality on a good level and the soundtrack to it isn't bad at all.

The 2-Disc special edition is great! there are fine extras like " One By One" an all-new animated short from the makers of "Lion King" and " Lilo and Stitch", Timon and Pumbaa's virtual safari 2.0, fun games, pop-up trivia when you play the movie on pop-up triva mode, featurettes and great Picture & Sound quality.

Highly recommended movie but first watch the original then Lion King 1/2 and then this one, i think the Lion King trilogy is probably the "Star Wars Trilogy" of animated trilogies.

Want The Lion King II: Simba's Pride (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo in DVD packaging) (1998) Discount?

Personally, I feel that the two Lion King movies are probably the best Disney movies out. It's definitely worth watching if you like movies that have a combination of: tragidy, romance, adventure, and maturing. The songs are pretty cool. This movie definitely is a good sequil, I think that Disney should make a third Lion King movie.

In this movie Simba and Nalla have their kid "Kiara" (a girl). And the boy Kovu who is chosen by Scar to follow in his paw prints, as it's clearly stated in the movie. Kovu is raised by Zira, Scars mate. And like in the first Lion King Kovu grows up with a girl as a child hood friend named Vitanni and a klutz of a brother name Nuka. But the difference between the first and the second Lion King movie is Kovu doesent hook up with his child hood friend. Vitanni plays a main part in the end which helps change the minds of the outsiders and the pridelanders, suprisingly. And that's all I'm going to tell you about the movie, except for it's really worth seeing!!!

Save 27% Off

Arthur / Arthur 2: On the Rocks (2-Movie Collection) (2011)

For the price this is definately worth it. It comes on 2 discs in one case, a must have for comedy fans like me. Dudley Moore is at his best in these to classic 80's comedy hits. This is a plus considering that it's on 2 discs and not on the single 2 sided disc that seems to get scratched all the time and you have to decide which side of the disc you want to keep in good mint condition.

This (Arthur)being a favorite from years gone by, was excited to see it ON BLU-RAY, and 'WIDESCREEN'! Yippee, until I started to watch it. I then compared it to my old "full frame" copy (blu and reg dvd machines, comparing back and forth). Funny what they consider widescreen now days. My original says "formatted to fit your screen". I beg to differ, but the newer "W/S" is. Case in point, I froze the screen at 1 min. 18 sec on both copies, the scene where the streetwalkers are standing in front of a store/restaurant. The full screen has so much more image than the newer wide: the signage is more complete top and bottom, as well as the characters' lower bodies. Left and right also has more picture. It's as if a w/s matte (rectangular shape) was placed over the full screen image, to create a "widescreen" image. Sorry, but I am not impressed. The blu picture (what image they left of it) IS of a brighter nature, and the signage in this particular scene IS now clear to read. The original dvd picture had looked like this scene was filmed in shadows, but the newer (smaller) image is clearer to make out. I have not watched entire film yet, perhaps update later. I, for one, do not mind side bars, if the original screen image is left intact. Still a fan of film, but am increasingly disgusted with modern film marketing tactics. (footnote: this film does not really 'need' to be widescreen, and newer fans will likely not know what they're missing with newer version. Is still head and shoulders above the dreck remake, but I'm an old guy, so what do I know!) UPDATE (4/20/11): Confusion and consternation abound! Comparing a later scene (office receptionist), w/s has more image to the right side of screen, but is cut-off at the bottom, from full screen! Oye! BOTTOM LINE: film is a hoot, in any format (Sir John Gielgud richly deserved his Oscar). The 1.0 audio is ok for a dialogue driven film, but at least stereo would have been nice. Blu-ray has audio dubs in German, French, Spanish; subtitles same, plus English. My opinion, film: 5 stars, blu video: 4 stars (cleaned up, but not 'eye-popping': it's an older film!), and 3 stars for overall blu-ray release (pluses for language options, picture improvement; negatives for 1.0 audio, zero extras, and weird formatting.) Bonus update #2: Finally watched A2. UGH! I lost count of how many none-too-subtle references/rip-offs to original film there are, and the delightfully scripted/acted original characters (Linda's Dad, A's grandmom, Burt Johnson) are dreadfully treated in #2. Almost tarnished my enjoyment of original (file under "What Were They Thinking?").

Buy Arthur / Arthur 2: On the Rocks (2-Movie Collection) (2011) Now

So i've always been a Dudley Moore fan, and I wanted to buy the classic Arthur before that idiot Russell Brand screws up the franchise by polluting it with vulgar humour and sleazy sex jokes (at least more vulgar and sleazy than the original). Dudley Moore just brings a level of class and sophistication and even sympathy to everyone's favorite drunken playboy!

Read Best Reviews of Arthur / Arthur 2: On the Rocks (2-Movie Collection) (2011) Here

'Arthur' is a true classic. After Dudley Moore's star rose , starting with 'Foul Play' and continuing with the great '10', 'Arthur' is a film with an almost perfect script, casting, music, production design and direction. It succeeds in pulling your heart strings and stands up as well today as it ever did, maybe even more so. 'Arthur 2On The Rocks' , while enjoyable, is an anemic squeal at best but at times succeeds in capturing some small glimpses of it's predecessors genius and warmth.

With that said, this review will focus on the actual video and sound quality rather than the film itself so you the reader can decide whether this Blu Ray disc is a good upgrade from your standard VHS or DVD versions.

This release of both the original 1981 'Arthur' and it's 1988 sequel 'Arthur 2-On The Rocks' is presented on one 50GB BD housed in yet another el-cheapo "eco case" with no real artwork on the disc itself other than the film's titles. No extras other than the original film trailers are included.

So how does 'Arthur' fare on Blu ray? Is it worth your hard earned cash and what should you expect? This movie is one of my all time favorites and I have to admit to being disappointed somewhat in this BD presentation.

For starters, both films have been cropped slightly from their original aspect ratios to fill our HDTV screens. It is nothing too drastic but I always prefer seeing films the way they were shot, not minding a bit of black border here and there.

Bottom line is this: For now, this is the BEST 'Arthur' has looked (or probably ever WILL look) on home video. Nevertheless, the original film sports a slightly troubled transfer. With a relative low bit rate and an apparent lack of caring on the Blu Ray authors part, 'Arthur' has trouble with both image stability (telecine wobble) and contrast issues, namely some major blooming with bright light sources. The wobble is nothing that should worry the casual viewer, but videophiles will notice it each time it happens. Check out the headlights on Arthur's limo as it is parked in front of the restaurant he has taken "Princess Gloria" to. The limo is parked, but the lights keep shifting position. And notice the massive blooming from any indoor scene that includes outside windows. YIKES! My display is properly calibrated so what you see is what you get here.

Fine detail is frequently obscured by something appearing to be an overzealous application of DNR, but it doesn't introduce any other negative artifacts into the picture such as smearing or blurring. It is obvious to me that this film was basically run thru the scanner set on "Auto" and no human being sat and watched the finished results because the blooming alone would have been reason enough to ADJUST the relative Bright/Contrast levels for a much better and pleasing result. As it is, at times the transfer looks pretty darn good (Arthur, Hobson and Linda at the City bus stop is a good example) and alternately pretty bad (Arthur in his father's office whenever the outside window is in the frame)

On the positive side, the colors are solid and the color timing is beautiful.

'Arthur 2On The Rocks' fares much better picture wise. The image is stable, the contrast levels are much better, for both day and night scenes and the color timing mimics that of the previous release.

If you LOVE the original 'Arthur' like I do, while being slightly disappointed with the original films treatment from this rather shoddy transfer, you will have to admit it is the best it has ever looked in your living room or home theater. If only it could have been brought up to the visual level of the 2nd film, I would have nothing to complain about regarding the picture quality.

How about the sound? 'Arthur' is presented in it's original mono, albeit in uncompressed DTS-HD Master Audio. While not demo material for your surround system, the sound is good with nice, crisp dialogue and decent sounding music. The audio is actually better than the visual. On the other hand with 'Arthur 2' , the picture is much better but the audio is NOT. In fact if you watch and listen carefully you will notice the entire first reel of 'Arthur-2' has been 'looped' in post production and sounds like it is coming out of a cardboard tube. This improves as the film progresses and the sound on this one is at least presented in it's original stereo mix and again using DTS-HD.

Even with a less than stellar transfer and shoddy sound on the 2nd film I still have given this product FIVE STARS and the reason is because of the content (2 films with one being a classic) and because of the current very low asking price.

To sum it up, if you are a fan of this film or it's sequel, then this purchase is a must have and should be a no brainer. While this is far from the ideal presentation and falls somewhat short of my expectations and what could have been achieved with even the slightest amount of human involvement in this transfer, it is pleasure to finally watch and enjoy 'Arthur' in High Definition.

Recommended for fans and the curious alike, just don't get your hopes up too high for a great transfer as it isn't there.

Want Arthur / Arthur 2: On the Rocks (2-Movie Collection) (2011) Discount?

It was a good deal for the money (two films on Blu-Ray for under $15). I watched the first movie and didn't feel ripped off like I did watching some other Blu-Rays (First Blood and Total Recall), but was not impressed. The video quality was okay, but not great (I suspect better than a standard DVD). There was little or no grain, but it just did not look that great. But, it was okay for a movie that old, and at that price. The audio was "DTS-HD Master Audio", but was in MONO! What is the point of that?

I put in the second movie (Arthur 2) and immediately noticed grain. I didn't think it looked as good as the first movie. I skipped through it, and there was grain throughout the movie. But still, probably better than a standard DVD, which I have never seen. Grain just bothers me. I don't think you should see it on a Blu-Ray disc. The second movie had stereo sound at least, which was still a disappointment, but better than the original Arthur (first movie).

Still a good deal at this price, unless you are a big fan of the "Arthur" movies.

Save 30% Off

Paths of Glory (The Criterion Collection) (1957)

In 1916 France Commander Broulard (Adolphe Menjou) wants General Mireau (George Macready) to have his battered division take the "Ant Hill", an impregnable German fortress, promising Mireau a promotion and another story if he succeeds. Mireau orders Dax (Kirk Douglas) to lead the charge, which is a complete failure. When soldiers are pinned down by German artillery and machine gun fire Mireau orders his own artillery to fire on their own trenches, screaming, "If those sweethearts won't face German bullets, they'll take French ones!"

"Paths of Glory" has a deserved reputation as a great anti-war film but I think that director Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of Humphrey Cobb's 1935 semi-fictional novel is a rather specific indictment of both a particular military and a particular war. The suicidal attack in the first act of the film was loosely based upon the battle for Fort Douamont during the Battle of Verdun, where over 300,000 French soldiers lost their lives. The assault, doomed to fail before it began, is ordered by French generals more concerned with prestige and promotions than the lives of their troops or the actual prospects for success. In the wake of the disaster three men are selected to be tried and then executed for cowardice. They are defended in court by their commander, Colonel Dax, the lone voice of reason speaking out against the insanity of what has happened.

This film was banned for almost twenty years in France and it is an indictment of the French military on a par with those films that have touched on the infamous Dreyfus case. I have trouble extending this indictment beyond these French generals, not only because in cinematic history there is this sense of this being standard practice for the French military but also because hypocritically sending troops to such senseless death is rare in American military history. John Bell Hood sending Confederate troops in a series of useless charges to teach them a lesson at the Battle of Franklin comes to mind, but I remember most American generals as taking blame and responsibility for such slaughters (e.g., Ambrose Burnside at Fredericksburg, Robert E. Lee after Pickett's Charge, Ulysses S. Grant with regard to the final assault at Cold Harbor).

But there is also a sense in which we identify this sort of waste of young soldiers with World War I. In cinematic terms the obvious comparison is to "Gallipoli," where British troops are having tea on the beaches while Australian troops are gunned down in a needless charge ordered by stubborn British generals (another category of military leaders easy treat with disdain given how they are portrayed in the movies). The Civil War has provided amble evidence that troops charging entrenched or fortified positions was horribly futile and yet fifty years later European armies were still sending thousands of men against machine guns (the iconic weapon of the first World War). As the opening narration explains, "Successful attacks were measured in hundreds of yards and paid for in lives by hundreds of thousands."

The title of the book/film comes from a line in Thomas Gray's "Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard," where the poet writes, "The paths of glory lead but to the grave." This might be an anti-war film but it still shows the heroism of the troops as Kubrick uses a tracking shot to follow the Dax and his soldiers across No Man's Land against the German fort. After all, these men are fighting an army that has invaded their country, so there is a sense in which the title is inappropriate simply because these men are not involved in a quest for glory.

The film was shot in Germany and cinematographer Georg Krause provides one of the sharpest black & white films you have ever seen. The clarity is almost daunting and it is impossible not to think that it is not but another part of Kubrick's grand design. As for the performance by Douglas I would agree with the general consensus that this is his finest performance, even over what he would provide for Kubrick three years later in "Spartacus."

In the end Kubrick makes a final argument for the universality of human experience when a German singer (Susanne Christian, who was Christiane Kubrick wife of the director) is forced to sing a song for the French troops whose jeers turn to tears. There are, relatively speaking compared to other wars, relatively few films about the First World War. But it is rather impressive when you start listing the ones that immediately come to mind ("Wings," "All Quiet on the Western Front," "Sgt. York," "Gallipoli") how good they tend to be and how many of them are, at their essence, anti-war films. For that, I think the credit for linking that particular war with the idea of the futility of war clearly belongs to Erich Maria Remarque, author of "All Quiet on the Western Front."

When you are the one who gets to decide who lives and who dies, what are the criteria that the rest of us should buy into before giving our consent? If a general, or a CEO for that matter, asks the impossible, how far must men go in following their orders before disobedience is permissible? When is it ok for a cog in the machine to stop being a machine and start being a human being? This film suggests that the Ant Hill could only have been taken by live soldiers, and if all the soldiers were being slaughtered in the attempt to cross no mans land, the few survivors should naturally turn back, and live to fight another day. Under these circumstances, taking the Hill would have been impossible.

Ah, but that was an embarrasment for the general who ordered the attack. His judgement could not have been wrong, so, therefore, the men must be cowards. The role of Reason, the nature of absurdity, courage, and cowardice are all examined in this simple story, and the implication is clear that it is better to die bravely in front of a firing squad than to grow comfortable with mendacity and cower before the truth. The real cowards in the story were those who ordered these men to their deaths on the battlefield, because they were afraid to say no and risk their reputations for daring, and also those who ordered their deaths in front of a firing squad, and also those who concealed the truth out of fear of the consequences. Again, it is better to die bravely than live in cowardice. And the bravest of them all was the colonel played by Kirk Douglas, who fought for reason, justice, truth, and against the enemy on every side, even when the enemy was his superior officer. Yes, the enemy can be found in your own ranks, even among your commanding officers.

In the end they are all ordered back to the front. However, the next to the last scene in the cafe, is one of the most astonishing moments in cinematic history.

The soldiers, young and old, are making sport of a pretty young German girl who is being put forward by the proprietor for their entertainment. She has no talent, save for a little 'natural talent' he says, gesturing along the length of her body. "She cannot dance, she cannot tell jokes, but she has a golden throat, she sings like a bird", he tells them. They are laughing and taunting her, and she is nervous and intimidated, and begins to sing, haltingly, but plaintively, and one by one, the men grow silent. The camera moves from face to face, young, old, battle weary, her voice reminds them of all that is delicate and sweet, all that is not brutal and meaningless and horrible. And they all can remember a time, long ago, when they were not fighting and killing and struggling to keep alive, and slowly, one by one, they begin wiping away the tears, then picking up her melody and gradually joining in. Kirk Douglas peers in through the window when the sargeant comes up with their orders to return to the front. "Give them a few more minutes," he says, and turns heel. It is a devastating moment. This is a film with a clear and powerful message. But it is not an anti-war movie. It is anti-mendacity, anti-authoritarian, and anti-injustice. The war setting is just a timless trope to carry the weight of these more significant issues.

Buy Paths of Glory (The Criterion Collection) (1957) Now

It has been almost 50 years since this anti-war film appeared, one which was banned in France until 1970. It is based on Humphrey Cobb's novel. Directed by Stanley Kubrick and starring Kirk Douglas who also produced it, the film examines a fictional (but nonetheless wholly believable) situation during World War One when French troops are ordered to achieve an impossible military objective: Climb and secure the "Ant Hill," a heavily-fortified German position. Of course the troops are decimated. Whom to blame? General Broulard (Adolph Menjou) who gave the order? The troops' general, General Mireau (George MacReady), whose career ambitions overcame his doubts about the order? The officer (Colonel Dax) who led the attack? General Broulard gives a second order: Select three of the survivors, charge them with cowardice, give them a perfunctory military trial, and then execute them. Their commanding officer is Colonel Dax (Douglas) who had been an attorney in civilian life. He is ordered to be the defense counsel. After the inevitable verdict, the three representatives are executed by a firing squad.

Kubrick presents all this on film as if it were a documentary of actual events. Appropriately, he filmed it in black-and-white, in part to dramatize the obvious juxtapositions of right and wrong, good and evil, justice and injustice, etc. The battlefield carnage is extensive but not gratuitous. For me, the insensitivity, indeed inhumanity of the two generals -far removed from combat in luxurious comfort -is far more upsetting than the assault on the "Ant Hill." The men who followed orders and lost their lives or their limbs may have died in vain but at least died with honor, if not glory. Kubrick leaves absolutely no doubt about the generals who sent them into battle. Colonel Dax understands the need for military discipline. Orders must be followed. He eventually realizes that no matter how logical and eloquent his defense, the three men are doomed as were so many of their comrades were while climbing the "Ant Hill." Dax also realizes Broulard and Mireau will never be held accountable for the order nor for denying any responsibility for its tragic consequences. Dante reserved the worst ring in hell for those who, in a moral crisis, preserved their neutrality. Kubrick ensures that Menju and MacReady portray Broulard and Mireau not as neutral accomplices but as agents of evil: a more dangerous adversary than the one their troops face in battle.

With regard to Dax, he did everything he could to save the three men. He leaves absolutely no doubt in the minds of Generals Broulard and Mireau what he thinks of them, both as officers and as human beings. However, they are his military superiors and the war continues after the executions. I mention all this by way of suggesting a context for my opinion that the final scene in the cafe has a very important purpose: to communicate Kubrick's reassurance to those who see his film that even amidst war's death and mutilation, the very best of human instincts somehow prevail. They cannot be defeated by the "Ant Hill," nor by Broulard and Mireau and their obscene abuse of military justice. In my opinion, that is what Dax realizes in the cafe as he and other soldiers listen to a terrified girl sing. And that is the final "message" which Kubrick seems determined to leave with his audience.

Read Best Reviews of Paths of Glory (The Criterion Collection) (1957) Here

If it were made today, "Paths of Glory" would be a two-and-a-half hour long epic, loaded with self-importance and chest thumping. It would contain scene after scene of Oscar-baiting speeches performed by American actors with phony French accents, a soaring Hans Zimmer (or, most likely, John Williams) score meant to tug at the heartstrings, and more splattered blood than vampire's day at the Red Cross. But it wasn't made today. It was made in 1957. And not by some Hollywood hack, looking forward to awards season. But by Stanley Kubrick, a young director ready to burst through the doors of cinema history. "Paths of Glory" announces his presence, and oh what a wonderful noise it does make.

The film is set in France, 1916. World War I is in full swing, and the French front is stabilized. Trench warfare is prevalent, and though battle lines changed very little, the casualties used to make those changes are astronomical. General Mireau, a seemingly pragmatic man at the film's onset, is given an important task by General Broulard: take 'The Anthill", a highly important strategic position, currently in the hands of the Germans. Mireau knows it can't be done, for his troops' numbers are already depleted, but the promise of an extra star on his chest sways him. It is this moment that typifies the themes of the film: the glory of one is put ahead of the safety of many.

This opening scene between Mireau and Broulard establishes Kubrick's camera work from the get-go. It moves fluidly around the room, following the two men in conversation while capturing the posh luxury they live in. The camera appears to be doing figure eights. This highly stylized movement is maintained throughout the rest of the film. Most notable in this regard are the trench scenes. A series of long tracking shots, single takes all, establish the size and terror to be found in the trenches. It helps contrast the conditions in the trenches with the ornateness of the general's quarters, allowing the audience to almost understand why Mireau would do anything to maintain his position.

Kubrick's camera is on fire here, giving a stylized but relevant look to the film's court martial scene. It circles endlessly around the judges, the prosecution, the defense, and the accused, unifying them all in the grand room bathed in soft sunlight (the whole film is a textbook example of how light -and shadow -should be used to set the mood of a scene).

Kirk Douglas, whose star-wattage helped Kubrick and Co. get the film made, is an imposing presence. Besides the fact that his pompadour never looks ruffled, even during the battle scenes, Douglas' Colonel Dax has credibility and power to spare. Once the "foremost criminal lawyer in all of France", Dax leads the platoon charged with the impossible mission. Although he sees the folly in it, he's enough of an army man to not go against orders. But he does make his views known. A liberal pragmatist, Dax is sharp of tongue and doesn't suffer fools gladly, enough so that when Mireau gives the order, Dax can't help quoting Samuel Johnson under his breath: "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel". Douglas plays all sides of the man with skill and grace. He's at his best during the court marshal scene, where his anger nearly overtakes him, and his passion is palpable.

The supporting cast is, for the most part, fairly good, led by the three actors who played the condemned men. Timothy Carey previously worked with Kubrick in "The Killing". Carey is a weird on-screen presence, not much of an actor, but he's perfect for the nervous "social undesirable" that is Private Ferol. Joe Turkel, who would later play the bartender in "The Shining", looks tiny and unintimidating. But his small role as Private Arnaud calls for him to show a cool demeanor and then wield terrible anger. Turkel does well on both counts. Ralph Meeker is probably the soul of the film, as the doomed Corporal Paris. A man of principle and character, Paris is caught in a tough situation when a commanding officer, a former schoolmate who he doesn't respect in the slightest, bribes him into compliance with a cover-up scandal. Paris is the kind of soldier every army would die for, if said army wasn't awash in self-serving egotism. Meeker plays this dignified man perfectly.

There are some dubious performances here, most notably by George Macready and Wayne Morris. Macready, as Colonel Mireau, is little more than a cardboard villain. A crowded theatre would boo and hiss every time he comes on screen, his villainy is so one-sided. Macready is probably to blame, playing every scene with over-the-top hamminess. Morris, a real life war hero, is cast against type as the drunken buffoon, Lieutenant Roget. Although his amateurness works well in some scenes, it undermines the character in others. How could a man this foolhardy ever rise to such a position? We never see Roget as anything less than incompetent, and it hurts his credibility. Still, these minor quibbles don't tarnish the fine work of the entire cast.

"Paths of Glory" can be a frustrating film to watch, especially for those aghast at inequities caused by hubris and the hunt for glory. The court marshal scene, in which Douglas' Dax is set back at every turn, had me nearly screaming at my TV, as it became apparent that the officers were fully prepared to be selfish, and ruin the lives of a few innocent men. "There are few things more fundamentally encouraging and stimulating than seeing someone else die," says General Broulard at one point, with a beatific smile on his face. He thinks that his addressee, a subordinate, will accept his words as stated. Thankfully Colonel Dax, and Kubrick's remarkably compact film (running a taut 84 minutes), doesn't.

Want Paths of Glory (The Criterion Collection) (1957) Discount?

Probably Stanley Kubrick's most underrated film. Kirk Douglas's performance is extraordinary as the officer Dax who honorably defends three soldiers put to death because they refused to follow orders in attempting a suicide mission. If there is an antiwar film that has a powerful message, this has to be near the top of the list.

Save 27% Off

Starlet (2012)

I'm so happy it's already out on Bluray and DVD! Starlet was one of my favorite movies of the year. Absolutely in my top three. It completely caught me by surprise. I really don't want to spoil too much because the beauty of this film is to discover it on your own. Nonetheless, I think I can say that the performances are outstanding. There is such a natural way in which the actors exist in the film. It all feels so natural. Dree Hemingway's work is truly impressive and inspiring. The film carefully takes you in. There is a new revelation in every scene, subtle or big, the film never stops surprising. The film is harsh, sweet, naive, mature, it just is what is has to be when it has to be. I love that. A beautiful thing is that this film never ever judges any of its characters and truly makes you think that nothing is what it seems. Starlet is pure honesty. I feel that the director and people involved made this one from the heart. There is nothing better than an honest piece of work. Thank you.

"Starlet" is one of the most heartfelt looks at the people of the City of Angels I've seen in a long time. It is poignant and sincere. It doesn't need shock or artifice to make you pay attention. Love, love, love...see it if only for the doggie / Chihuahua that steals the show!

Buy Starlet (2012) Now

There's a feeling in the movie that makes the spectator relate with; an every day life loneliness, a void that we try to run away from but in the end its always there... and in between that, what seems to save us: finding am accomplice for that feeling. sharing it without even mentioning it.

The story is minimalistic. Silences are beautifuly placed and tell the audience more than what would dialogue do. Or at least, it gives the audience the space to relate with the movie, and fill the blanks with those feelings.

The music and photography are there to back up the mood of the film amazingly. I fully recommend it.

Read Best Reviews of Starlet (2012) Here

The only character in this movie that is 100% likable is the dog. Which is perfect. That's real life. The others are weak, sad, and bored. Kind of mean. And beautifulDree Hemingway's and Stella Maeve's looks are the 'blink blink it's a movie' factors that makes their characters unauthentic. They seem like real people. Addicted, numb, and desperate for human connection.

The photography and music reminded me of The Virgin Suicides and King of California. As I write that I realize Dree Hemingway physically resembles both Evan Rachel Wood and Kirsten Dunst. The take away she does not have an original face, but she is totally watchable. This is the dreamy, dry, hazy L.A. Good score. Uses one of the repugnant songs ever in the best ways ever. Bravo. "Crazy bitch" may fill me with more furor than any other pop song.

Besedka Johnson as Sadie is heart breaking. She is a strong lady. She demands respect. She doesn't reel from foul language. She has her marbles. She is appropriately suspicious, but eventually grateful for Jane's attentions.

An enjoyable film if you like this sort of thing. To utilize film review clichesslice of life, indie paced, unsentimental, sticks with you. I'm a Northern Californian. I've always had a foreigner's fascination with Los Angeles. I don't spurn and spit at it like my fellow Yay Bareans, but I know it's not for me. This is the sort of film that shows you what it must really be like in L.A./San Fernando Valley. There are real people there too. They live lives. They have cool dogs.

Want Starlet (2012) Discount?

I feel fortunate that a good friend recommended this to me without telling me anything about it. He told me to avoid reading reviews so nothing was spoiled and I would say the same to others. It's best to just watch the story unfold and form your own ideas and feelings about what you see.

I felt like I was watching real people, more than I do when I watch some documentaries. The look, thoughtfulness and realistic characters remind me of some of the best American films that focus on relationships produced in the 70s, like Kramer vs Kramer. Now it's often good independent films like Starlet that seem to step back more and allow us to think and feel things more naturally as we watch.

Save 25% Off

The Cutting Edge (1992)

This is a charming, if somewhat predictable, movie. With wonderful performances by the sexy D.B. Sweeney and the lovely Moira Kelly, two very underrated actors, this movie will keep the viewer entertained. The story revolves around two athletes. One is a top notch, Olympic level, ice hockey player, who sees his potential professional career go down the tubes, when he is injured during the Olympics. The other is the female half of a pairs figure skating team, who choked during the Olympics, ending their quest for the gold.

Both are not doing well after their own personal waterloo. He is now playing with amatuer teams, as his injury precludes him from going pro. She, a total prima donna, is busy, going through one skating partner after another with no success. Her coach, knowing that the ex hockey player has a lot of skating talent, contacts him in hopes that maybe he will be the one that will be able to work with his temperamental Olympic hopeful. He agrees and goes to work on learning the niceties of figure skating. She goes to work on learning to get along with him. Together, they are working towards earning an Olympic Gold medal.

There are some delightfully funny and heartwarming scenes in this film. Probably the funniest is the toe pick scene. When you see the film, you will know what I mean. While there is some hockey and figure skating action in this film, it is really not a movie about either sport. It is essentially a romantic comedy that is delightfully directed by Paul Michael Glaser. All in all, it is a very enjoyable film and well worth watching.

A very temperamental Kate Mosley has dreams of being a skating champion who has scared off many potential partners. Douglas Dorsey has dreams of being a professional hockey player. When an unfortunate accident impairs his vision, and he is no longer able to compete at the professional level, his dream is altered forever. Doug and Kate are paired together toward a new dream.

This is a charming romantic movie. DB Sweeney and Moira Kelly have good on screen chemistry, and the skating is well done.

Buy The Cutting Edge (1992) Now

This is one of my all time favorite movies, and I was pleased as punch to see it come out on DVD. For those of you not familiar with it, the story is of the figure-skating diva that can't find a partner, who suddenly meets her match in Doug Dorsey, a washed up hockey-player brimming with testosterone. They meet, they bicker, they fall in love. Badda-boom, badda-bing. This is more of a 'chick' movie than a guy movie, but it's entertaining for the entire family, IMO.

Two things keep me from giving this DVD the 5 stars it deserves : One is cinematic, and one is something else.

1. The ending abruptly cuts off, leaving you to 'guess' how it ends. Some folks prefer an ending like this--I do not. I want it spelled out for me!

2. There are hardly any 'special features' on this DVD. The only one is the movie trailer. If you're looking to get the DVD for all the special add-ins, skip this one.

But it's still one of my favorites! DB Sweeney really steals the movie away.

Read Best Reviews of The Cutting Edge (1992) Here

A working class Olympic hockey star is looking to turn pro when he gets a body slam that costs him peripheral vision and the chance to play in the big leagues. Enter a frosty, WASPy figure skater from Connecticut who has every thing she wants except a partner. She doesn't like them, or they cannot stand her.

Her desperate Russian coach finds the hockey player who has the strength, stamina and spirit to skate with her, but he takes an instant dislike to her spoiled disposition and condescending temperament. The coach is convinced that both are partners who can bring home the elusive Olympic gold in figure-skating. The sparks fly.

The chemistry between D. B. Sweeney and Moira Kelly is instantaneous. Their evolution to a skating pair is filled with competition between them at every turn. The on-screen tension between the two build as the Nationals and Olympics draw nearer. (It doesn't hurt that Moira Kelly is actually an accomplished skater.)

Sorry! You'll have to see the DVD because my narrative ends here. You will enjoy this drama-comedy of budding romance unless you don't have a romantic lace in your ice skates.

There is no language or skin, but it is a story for mid-teen to adult. This is light fare that is well-acted with a good script. It is thoroughly enjoyable, and worth the purchase.

My recommendations? Don't miss. Buy, don't sell.

Want The Cutting Edge (1992) Discount?

You know when we the consumers run out and Purchase these movies on Blu-Ray and we Expect to receive "Top Notch" visual and audio Quality, if we weren't then we would be purchasing movies out of the DVD sections. Why do these movie production companies continue to put out Garbage video Transfers like this?.

I love The Cutting Edge it's one of my favorite 90's era romantic movies. But if i would have known that the quality on the Blu-Ray was the same as my DVD i would of just Saved My Money. I always say that you can tell when a blu-ray movie isn't going to be top notch quality when the packaging is a little flimsy. The blu-ray didn't even come with any kind of booklet or anything. just a plain blu-ray disc and no extra features. Picture quality is grainy and the audio is the only think that is slightly improved, might not even be noticeable. I Would only Recommend this movie on blu-Ray if you don't already have the DVD Version and even that isn't saying much. BOTTOM LINE.. The blu-ray version is a big let down. Buyer Beware!!.

Save 53% Off

Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (2-Disc Unrated Edition + BD Live) (2007)

Ya'd figure that classic zany comedy was dead. Sure, there have been ambitious stuff, but more often than not, a lot of today's "comedy" movies are either blatent "gross-out" fests written for 12-year-olds, or the tired "let's-make-a-satire-of-the-current-favorite-genre" formula. Truthfully, the last great American comedy for me was "There's Something About Mary." Sure, it was a stupid-humor film, but it had genuine laugh-out-loud surprises and, more importantly, heart. Basically, it was a sweet romantic comedy with slapstick thrown in for good measure.

Judd Apatow, whether he's directing or producing, seems to be the guy who'll revive well-done dumb-guy humor. All by himself, judging by the list of hits he's thrown out. "Walk Hard," unfortunately, was the least commercially success ful of them, and for what reason I don't know. He did satire right, focussing on one character through a much-travelled formula, created a believable (and funny) body of work for the fictionally tributed, got a great director in Jake Kasden, and casted extremely well by putting veteran John C. Reilly in the lead.

This would be the most important thing, as few realize how talented and multifacited Mr. Reilly really is. Sincerity in character? He makes poor Dewey a sweetly believable guy who'd be really entertaining in any story he was plunked in. Creative? John C. can keep up with the rest of the brilliantly funny folks in the film. Most importantly, can he sing? Hell yeah! Reilly toured through Boston a few years back in a musical stage adaptation of the Ernest Borgnine everyman love story, "Marty," and carried a hell of a tune (even before "Chicago"), showing he has the singing chops. In a more sane universe, Reilly would be headlining more major films, rather than being relegated to "character actor" or "second banana" status.

As mentioned before, this is satire done right built around a well-rounded comedy character, rather than a series of sight gags (although the film has those aplenty). Kasden and Apatow took every cliche about the recent musical biopic craze and ran them through the Dewey Cox prism. What made it even more funny was the character and their viewpoints. It looked like every biopic out there, and made most fun about that.

"Walk Hard" deserved more box-office love, but it will be a long-lived successful film because of home video. There are worse fates than that.

(3.5 *'s) Judd Apatow's `Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story' is a familiar project. As the producer of `The Forty Old Virgin, 'Knocked Up,' and 'Superbad,' he takes another irreverent comedy, this time a parody of music biopics of popular music icons. Sometimes savvy, sometimes obvious, the movie is mostly an effective and witty trip through pop music history.

One of the best decisions was to cast John C. Reilly in the title role. Watching the film, I kept thinking Will Ferrell could have been cast as Dewey Cox. As much as I like Ferrell, his overexposure to such familiar loopiness may have made the movie overwrought. With Reilly's fine performance as "Lefty" in 'A Prairie Home Companion,' they made the right choice. There's a certain restraint he brings to the role that's welcome and refreshing.

For those who have seen `Ray,' and, especially `Walk the Line' the referenced parody will be clear, but those who haven't undoubtedly will be in for a fun time, too. It's basically a rags to riches story about a man from the South who gets a recording contract much the way Elvis and Johnny Cash did.

On the down side, tragedy is given a lighter treatment. Anyone who's read Cash's autobiography or seen 'Walk the Line' will recognize when Dewey accidentally cuts his brother in half that it's a reference to Cash's brother who lost his life to an electric saw. Throughout the movie he's haunted that he was the "wrong one" to die. They don't exactly glamorize drug use, though, which shows Dewey always making the wrong informed choice. (Backstage he's tempted by a band mate who says, "You don't want to use this stuff." Dewey always asks, "What does it do?" "It takes away every negative thought..." as if he chides.)

The real pluses come as Dewey goes through his phases of music. He has his early rockabilly years. He rocks during the early sixties, gets cosmic and hippie later, and becomes the familiar casualty of substance abuse and ego (with the usual infidelities) in his life. Some of the best scenes include his meeting with the squabbling Fab Four and an interview where he tries to reach the mainstream with a comeback family TV show. Fumbling with questions, Dewey reveals that he's off PCP and his estranged children will be watching his program. Some family man.

While not a comedy classic, `Walk Hard...' is more often unpredictable than not with a witty script that is delivered with a brisk comedic pace. It had me laughing loud and often, and I'll bet you will, too.

Buy Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (2-Disc Unrated Edition + BD Live) (2007) Now

I have never before been inspired by a satirical, fictional comedy. (Is that half redundant?) But by the end of Walk Hard, I felt fantastic! That was the unexpected curve. The comedy though, is what I was after and I got it by the fistfuls! Sight gags, the absurd, live action caricatures of famous people, plenty of drug humor, etc. There were aspects of Steve Martin being channeled by John C. Reilly. And, I feel you can't really go wrong with John. He's not Academy Award material, he's just a perfect character actor. I enjoyed immensely his will to succeed coupled with his faulty decision-making processes. He was an idiot, but an intensely focused idiot. They basically made fun of every "unknown boy from nowhere makes it big" movie that came before it. And they did it well. The beginning had me wondering if the level of comedy was going to be elemntary school or not. And maybe it was. Who cares? It got funnier to me the longer I watched. And it even had a moral to it.

Read Best Reviews of Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (2-Disc Unrated Edition + BD Live) (2007) Here

Why this film didn't do better at the box office, I'll never know. If you enjoyed Spinal Tap, then you should certainly enjoy this film. You'll enjoy it more if you have a general knowledge of the history of rock 'n roll, since some of the gags run pretty deep. I hardly ever buy videos, preferring to move on to something I haven't seen, but I expect to enjoy this one over and over for years to come. I was shocked that the title song didn't receive an Academy Award nomination for best song.

Want Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (2-Disc Unrated Edition + BD Live) (2007) Discount?

This movie's a classic! It's funny, but not in the current definition of "funny" these days. It's funny like the old Leslie Neilsen / Airplane / Naked Gun movies were. With jokes that are truly humorous without relying on stupid gross-out humour like most movies these days. I rented it because I was in the mood for something ridiculous, and what I got was much more than I expected! Not only is it good for a laugh, but John C. Reilly can really sing! And kudos to the costume designer! The movie spans 60 years, and they nailed the period clothing to a "t".

Very funny, ridiculously smart, well acted, and worth watching.

Save 40% Off

Reds (25th Anniversary Edition) (1981)

Warren Beatty pulls off a difficult task in "Reds." He's got to juggle several epic stories, including the rise of the American left in the early 20th century, the Russian Revolution, and a personal story of two romantics in a relationship charged by passion both emotional and political.

Any of these story threads presents a difficult task for a filmmaker and Beatty weaves his multilayered tale together with skill. He pays close attention to detail, gives us a multitude of historical characters and events, and mixes his story telling with the words of real people. Beatty buttresses his scenes with deceptively simple "talking heads." These "witnesses" provide a real background to the John Reed/Louise Bryant story of "Reds," giving viewers a good grounding in the passions of the era. The attention to little details (Reed bringing Bryant lilies, the constant phrase "There's a taxi waiting," etc.) provide a rich portrait of two volatile human beings.

Beyond the personal, Beatty knows how to handle epic screen drama. The rousing montage that leads up to the overthrow of Russian government is sumptuous and envigorating. Don't be deceived thought; this is not a "pro-Bolshevik" film by any great stretch of the imagination. Reed's dissillusionment with the Soviet system is portrayed in agonizing detail. Emma Goldman's story, a really great history in and of itself, gives another point of view to the difficulty passionate people have when taking on governing authorities and social mores.

The performances are uniformally excellent. Beatty and Keaton are well matched and there's plenty of gems in the supporting roles. Standouts include Jack Nicholson as Eugene O'Neil, Maureen Stapelton as Emma Goldman, Edward Herrmann as Max Eastman, writer Jerzy Kosinski as Soviet bureaucrat Grigory Zinoviev and Paul Sorvino as Louis Fraina.

I love "Reds." It's one of my favorite films. Be forewarned, however, you could be lost and confused by the myrad of events in this film if you don't know much about political history of the radical left in early 20th Century America or the Bolshevik Revolution and its aftermath. On the other hand, if you're intrigued by the film you'll find yourself up to your eyeballs at the library reading about the true events and real people who inspired this film.

For those of us who appreciate movies that both entertain and educate, Warren Beatty's vastly underrated magnum opus "Reds" is a wonderful example of how well the two can be combined. Although it did not succeed at the box office, this magnificent spectacle concerning the involvement of an American socialist reporter in the Bolshevik revolution is a terrific movie, and also features Warren Beatty in the pivotal role of John Reed, an American journalist covering Soviet affairs for a progressive American socialist journal called "The Masses" who found his way into a series of important roles in the Soviet revolution and the regime that followed. Also found here is a especially memorable performance by Diane Keaton as the companion, love interest and protégé of Reed's who also served in a variety of roles in the new communist regime shortly after the revolution.

This movie is largely based on Reed's moving autobiographical portrait of his personal experiences during the October revolution in his best selling book "Ten Days That Shook The World". The movie opens by exploring Reed's relationship with Keaton's early feminist character, and chronicles their growth and evolution toward a socialist perspective and an eventual commitment to political journalism that took them to the streets of Moscow in the days just preceding the October revolution. Also prominently featured in the movie is Jack Nicholson as Reed's intellectual friend, novelist and playwright Eugene O'Neil. This is a quite entertaining, sophisticated, and historically accurate effort to show America's own flirtation with unionism, socialism and communism and the reaction of more conservative forces within the business and civic community. The exploration of lifestyles and constant questioning of tradition and conformity make this a terrific teaching tool by showing how critically we can look at the lessons of history. Enjoy!

Buy Reds (25th Anniversary Edition) (1981) Now

Some films have a reputation for being overpraised, and as a result paradoxically they become underrated. This is one such film. Who cares that we now know communism failed in Russia? REDS is not meant to be a piece of Soviet apologism. It is about two people who take part in exciting and sweeping historical events. I certainly disagree with the politics of John Reed and Louise Bryant, but it doesn't matter. I envy the romanticism of the times they lived in (even if the romanticism isn't authentic), and that they were able to find, as one of the "witnesses" says at the end of the movie, "things worth living and worth dying for." The second half of the movie where we see the price that must be paid for taking part in history provides good dramatic balance to the more sentimental view of revolutionary politics we see in the first half. The cinematography is outstanding and the love theme by Stephen Sondheim is exquisite. As it is a film that should be seen on the big screen, I'm hoping that REDS will be re-released for its 20th anniversary in 2001.

Read Best Reviews of Reds (25th Anniversary Edition) (1981) Here

Highly, highly recommended for those who enjoy lush, historical biopics, "Reds" skillfully and entertainingly combines intelligent, thoughtful political discourse and sweeping romantic drama, resulting in a movie that flies by despite its three hour-plus length.

Keep an eye out for how the mundane constantly clashes with the epic during the course of the movie: John Reed and Louise Bryant indulge in lofty political discourse on events that are changing the world as Reed is comically burning dinner in the kitchen; soap opera-ish affairs are entered into and abandoned as governments topple and new ones take their place; a critical meeting to assure the future of the socialist movement in the United States is missed because of a sick baby that needs tending. This constant and clever juxtaposition of the personal and the epic humanizes the sweeping events on display, reminding us that real people living real lives were at the heart of these world-shaking events, not just academic and political arguments.

To enjoy "Reds", one doesn't have to be a particular proponent of socialism past or present. I'm certainly not. You simply need to be someone who enjoys intelligent, involving movies that illuminate the people and events at the heart of notable periods of history. And "Reds" is certainly such a movie. Of course, it helps that John Reed and Louise Bryant are generally portrayed as sympathetic people whose motivations are admirable even if one doesn't agree with their politics.

This new, 25th Anniversary Edition DVD of "Reds" is well worth the modest price. The crisp yet warm widescreen visuals are almost startlingly clear; the original theatrical intermission break (in a small but nice touch) is preserved at the end of the first disc; and there are very generous extra features that further illuminate the topics covered in the film.

In short, this one's a keeper.

Want Reds (25th Anniversary Edition) (1981) Discount?

I watched "Reds" the other night for the first time. I wondered how I may have perceived it had I seen it when it came out, a decade or so before the fall of the Soviet Union rather a a decade or so after it. I had to make a deal with myself; I was going to watch the movie and appreciate it as a movie rather than debate the merits of glorifying socialism. I must have succeeded in that approach because I gave the movie a 5 star rating. I felt an impressive aspect of "Reds" was the periodic inclusion of on-camera first person recollections. We saw the real witnesses of the persons, times, and events that we were watching. It certainly added credibility to what we were seeing unfold and it also added perspective. "Reds" is first and foremost a love story and the two lovers are (surprize!) Warren Beatty and Diane Keaton. I have to admit that the two of them did very good work. I have to give Beatty a good deal of credit for his role as director for which he, not surprizingly, won an Oscar. I'm sure that his hard work made it difficult to edit the film down to the normal two-hour feature film length. I'll admit that I watched the movie, on tape, over the course of three successive evenings but I don't think that I lost any appreciation of the film. I probably could have told you just what all could have been cut if I had watched it all in one sitting. I'll accept that some movies (and "Dr. Zhivago" comes to mind as a logical comparison) just need more time to tell a more expansive story.

Beatty plays Jack Reed who wrote "Ten Days that Shook the World" which did a lot of shaking of its' own when it came out. In pursuit of a combined socialist/journalist's dream, Reed found himself in Russia on the eve of the October Revolution. The scenes of that and other Russian events are quite impressive in "Reds". Long before we get to that point in time, we see a relationship develop between a class conscious writer and a wannabe class conscious writer. The emergence of love between the fighter of proletarian causes and the fighter of feminist causes makes for a different sort of love story. The expressed opinions don't always match up neatly with the heartfelt opinions. I give Beatty grudging praise for his ability and willingness to bring out this concept in "Reds" as well as his look at an imperfect political solution to a real social problem. While there is plenty of Leftist propaganda to duck, Jack Reed wasn't exactly going to morph into Ronald Reagan by the film's end. Yet Beatty allowed the passion of the Movement to come to life and the seeds of its' own destruction to also come to life in "Reds". The scene towards the end with Maureen Stapleton (another deserving Oscar-winner from "Reds") was brilliantly done with an economy of words that conveyed an abundance of nuance. Through it all is the oft-interrupted romance of Beatty and Keaton who seem to go to extremes in their seperations and reunions. I'm not sure I ever saw a "blockbuster" movie that was ever this passionate. The film's ability to maintain that passion over three houres is its' greatest strength

Licence to Kill (1989)

"Licence To Kill" is one of the most controversial films in the Bond catalog. For many, it is too violent (in a realistic way, without the comedic or fantasy elements), and does not feature a "Bondian" villian or plot. For others, however it is a return to the classic Fleming style, as seen in "From Russia With Love," and "On Her Majesty's Secret Service."

Of all the actors that have played James Bond, Timothy Dalton provided the most accurate interpretation of Ian Fleming's character. That may be a different character than the one that Sean Connery played, and certainly quite different than the one Roger Moore played, but Dalton's performance as Bond in "License To Kill," and "The Living Daylights," is the truest to Fleming's novels.

The Special Edition DVD of "License To Kill" is quite special indeed. A beautiful widescreen picture, crystal clear sound, and a plethora of special features (like the other Bond special editions) including theatrical trailers and documentaries on the making of the movie make it a must have. The film itself also boasts some of the most exciting action sequences and best character development (what a novel concept!) in all of the Bond films, and features some crackling dialog. If you're an action movie junkie, or like an exciting thriller this one is for you.

If you enjoyed the first few James Bond films with Sean Connery (before the franchise turned into a campy parody of itself), then you'll like this one. Although it's not based on any of Ian Fleming's original stories, it captures their feel better than anything since _From Russia With Love_.

Timothy Dalton's steely Bond is arguably the closest to date to Fleming's original vision for the MI6 secret agent (not 'spy', please). He's as tough and lean as Connery ever was, and he brings something of Connery's lupine charm to the role.

The rest of the movie is extremely well done. Robert Davi is one of the best villains since Goldfinger, and surely one of the most realistic in the entire series. Carey Lowell, though mostly effective, is a little underwhelming in the acting department. And the plot -lifted at least partly from Fleming's _Live and Let Die_ (which is the source for the bad thing that happens to Felix Leiter early in the film) -gives Dalton's Bond an excuse to seethe with volcanic fury and go off seeking vengeance.

If I'm not mistaken (and I don't think I am), this is also the last script to which longtime Bond screenwriter Richard Maibaum contributed. (He died not long after this film was produced.)

I like Pierce Brosnan in the role, and I'd like him better if he got better movies to do; _Goldeneye_ has probably been his best so far. But for some reason, the screenwriters don't want to make him gritty enough. (And by the time they tried with Roger Moore -in the excellent _For Your Eyes Only_ -it was far too late.)

I also like _The Living Daylights_. But when I want to watch a non-Connery Bond film, this is the one I pick most often.

Probably all Bond fans out there have already seen it. But if you haven't, you've got a treat ahead of you.

Buy Licence to Kill (1989) Now

'Licence to Kill' marks Timothy Dalton's last appearance as James Bond, and it is a gritty, harder-edged Bond film than any since the halycon days of Sean Connery. Despite Leonard Maltin's comments posted here at Amazon.com, I prefer this film to Dalton's debut, in 'The Living Daylights'. (Rumor has it that the script of the earlier film was written with Pierce Brosnan in mind, as he came very close to playing Bond in the late eighties...it was filled with quips and one-liners, definitely NOT Dalton's forte!)

In this outing, Bond's longtime friend, Felix Leiter (David Hedison, playing the CIA agent a second time), is brutalized by a vicious druglord (Robert Davi), and his new bride is murdered, and Bond has to go AWOL from the British Secret Service to get revenge. This concept turns Bond into a lone wolf, although Q and CIA operative Pam Bouvier (the athletic and sexy Corey Lowell, later on 'Law and Order'), join him in his vendetta.

As in all the best Bond films, the action is fast and loud, the women don't wear much, and there is a riproaring climax (here, in a high-speed big rig chase). By having Bond act alone, the producers were able to keep the budget down, the high-tech gadgetry to a minimum, and the locations to just Miami and Mexico (substituting as a fictional Latin American country.) All this makes for a lean, mean Bond vehicle, well-suited for Dalton's interpretion of Bond as less witty, and more violent.

Why did the film fail at the box office? Sad to say, audiences weren't prepared for a 007 that was closer to Ian Fleming's vision. Also, 'Lethal Weapon 2' came out at about the same time, and Mel Gibson was at the peak of his popularity, which pulled crowds away. Finally, while Dalton was very macho, and excellent in fight scenes, he lacked the charisma and panache of Connery or Moore, and was uncomfortable saying the occasional one-liners.

All this is a shame, because the film is excellent, one of the better Bond outings! It would be six years before a new generation of filmmakers reinvented 007, in 'Goldeneye', with Pierce Brosnan, at last, as Bond.

Discover for yourself the pleasures of 'Licence to Kill', in the wonderful DVD Special Edition, with commentaries by director John Glen, a 'Making Of' documentary, theatrical trailers, and a LOT of other goodies! You WON'T be disappointed!

Read Best Reviews of Licence to Kill (1989) Here

Licence to Kill is a product of its time. This James Bond movie was released on the heels of the original "Die Hard" and it shares not only a similar feel but also literally takes some of the same elements from that movie. Oh, and it was also the "Daniel Craig James Bond movie" before there was a Daniel Craig James Bond.

Released in the late eighties, this Bond flick was an attempt to modify the traditional Bond formula. Its basically a revenge picture as Bond attempts to avenge a drug baron's attack upon Felix Leiter and his newlywed bride. The new element this time was to make the adventure a personal one rather than a mission on behalf of queen and country.

The producers chose a style that embraced a gritty feel before Daniel Craig came along, and they clearly chose Die Hard as a model. Unlike the would-be tyrants of previous Bond flicks, the villain here shares with Die Hard's heavy the ultimate desire merely to obtain a lot of illegally-procured cash. Both movies focus upon the villain's point of view and personal frustrations so much that the audience's sympathies are sometimes shared between both hero and villain.

The setting is a little more commonplace this time. Gone are the previous rocket wrist-bands and Eiffel Tower chases. There are a lot more conventional automatic weapons, and the vehicles this time include small planes, speedboats and tanker trucks rather than Aston Martins outfitted with built-in arsenals.

Instead of just suggesting Die Hard, "Licence" sometimes borrowed the same actors. The drug lord and the CIA agent here are played by fellow FBI agents(!)from the earlier movie. If the soundtrack sounds familiar, it's because composer Michael Kamen brought his minimialist style to both films.

That said, the approach works in spades for Licence to Kill. The stunt-pieces are great, and the pacing is lively. Timothy Dalton introduced a serious Bond before Daniel Craig, and while opinions vary, I think he made a great Bond. Most importantly, the essential Bond elements haven't been discarded--the gadgets and the "Bond girls" are still there--they just aren't the focus this time.

Technically, this is a great Blu-ray. This movie has probably never looked better, even during its initial release. Many of the extras are recycled from previous DVD releases, but they still go into more depth than say, the recent "Quantum of Solace" release.

While Licence to Kill was a financial disappointment when it was released, I think history will be kind to this movie and to Timothy Dalton. It has aged gracefully, and is one of the best in the Bond series.

Want Licence to Kill (1989) Discount?

"Licence to Kill" is the 2nd and final outing of Timothy Dalton as James Bond. It's better than his first turn as Bond "The Living Daylights" and has some great action sequences, beautiful women, and even some drama. In the opening of the film, Bond's friend Felix (David Fedison) is getting married to Della (Priscilla Barnes). Right before the ceremony, Bond and Felix hear that drug lord Franz Sanchez (Robert Davi, an actor you'll recognize from many films. Even though, I can't remember which ones) is nearby and they manage to arrest him; The scene ends with Felix arriving at the chapel, to his overjoyed bride. Problem is, Sanchez has a lot of money and is able to bribe one of the officers to help him in escaping. He exacts his revenge by attacking Felix and Della; With Della dead and Felix in the hospital, Bond resigns from the British Secret Service and goes after Sanchez with a personal vendetta. Aiding him is a beautiful pilot named Pam Bouvier (Carey Lowell) and Sanchez's girlfriend Lupe (Talisa Soto, wife of Benjamin Bratt). A very young Benicio Del Toro turns up as one of Sanchez's henchmen; It was weird seeing Del Toro, because he looks different and his voice is a lot higher compared to his now-raspy voice. A lot of people complain about Dalton's interpretation of Bond, which is a far cry from Connery's (I haven't seen any Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan outings yet, so I have only Connery to compare to). I agree that Connery is the best Bond, but it's not so much in the acting; But the character. Connery's Bond is almost inhuman. He shows almost no real emotion. He loves women, but he's never seen in love with a woman. He's pretty much immortal, always winning in the end. He seems to have no real friends, except Q...But that's just the guy that makes his weapons. In his outings, Dalton makes Bond human. Everything Bond does in this film is for personal satisfaction, he has friends, he shows emotion. A lot of people don't like this, they like Bond to be what they want to be. But, I have to respect Dalton for what he did. If you like the James Bond series, then you'll probably like this film. It's a pretty strong entry in the series.

GRADE: A-

Save 9% Off

Jackass 3.5: The Unrated Movie

There is a ton of hilarious footage in this movie. 3.5 is as good as 3 in my opinion.

I love the crew of jackass! They have a great chemistry together

which makes the stunts go even better. I cant wait for Jackass 4 :D

Buy Jackass 3.5: The Unrated Movie Now

After watching Jackass 3.5 you understand why the Jackass crew shoots so many bits and then cherry picks the best to be in their movies. Jackass 3.5 is a collection of bits that either didn't fit into Jackass 3 or just didn't really come off well. There are some great moments in Jackass 3.5, and the scenes with Steve-O are slightly stronger here than in the original film, but all in all these scenes feel like "also rans".

Jackass 3.5 could have easily been included in a Special Jackass 3 DVD/Blu-Ray release, and on its own it isn't nearly as strong as the other Jackass movies. Still it gives a nice glimpse into the process of what makes Jackass, Jackass and even with the scenes where everything doesn't go right, it's still fun to watch the Jackass crew do their thing.

If you haven't seen Jackass 3, be sure to see it before you see Jackass 3.5, it's a much better movie and you'll get a lot more out of 3.5 if you've seen 3 first.

Otherwise, Jackass 3.5 is a proverbial rental. If you are a Jackass fan you'll enjoy this release, but probably not enough to watch it again and again.

Read Best Reviews of Jackass 3.5: The Unrated Movie Here

With Jackass, most people know what they're getting by now. What I've always loved about this series is how simplistically genius it is. They seem like a bunch of crazy, drunken idiots, but they actually plan and put a lot of work into each and every stunt. What I like about 3.5 is that for the first time, they really show you what's going on behind the scenes. They show you what it's like to be on the set and what goes into the things they do, with in depth interviews, and behind the scenes footage. They also start to go into a different direction, going from the usual stunts and gross outs to pranks and practical jokes, which are utterly hilarious. This is billed as the direct-to-video extra scenes movie, but it's actually a lot more and I really enjoyed this one a lot more than Jackass 3D.

Want Jackass 3.5: The Unrated Movie Discount?

I think the title speaks for itself. That is why I view this movie as the least liked one I have seen. I have not seen Jackass 3d. I thought 3.5 was 3 plus additional footage. Are they totally different?