Gray's Anatomy (The Criterion Collection) (1997)

Incredible writer and monologuist Spalding Gray takes us on an incredible journey, around the world and through his soul. Though based on his his attempts to avoid dangerous eye surgery, the story is really about meeting fascinating characters and Gray's own fascinating neuroses. If the idea of a monologue sounds boring to you -basically Gray sitting and telling you a story -I especially challenge you to try this out.

While dry, Gray's humor keeps you laughing out loud. You'll find it mesmerizing, and at the end of your own journey through the film, changed for the better. Highly recommended.

Spalding Gray's death has left us poorer than when we started. How evident this is after viewing this edgy, moving, often riotous monologue directed by Stephen Soderbergh.

A macular "pucker" leaves Gray virtually blind in one eye. Born into Christian Science, Gray leaves the church when his CS practitioner demands he renounce allopathic medicine to receive help. Gray's breathless journeys through alternative healing remind us that we all face mortality at any cost, and that no religious or philosopical system will spare us the inevitability of suffering or dying.

What I loved most about this film were Gray's frequent outbursts of humor -framed in frustration, delivered in sentences which resonate like poetry in the mind, this guy rages -quite literally -against the dying of the light. And I would add that this is a film best viewed late at night.

While Soderbergh's direction is occasionally heavy-handed and selfconscious, it is still creative and ambitious and will never disqualify this film from classic status.

The movie doesn't benefit from the opening montage of "eye horror stories" delivered by subjects who almost lost their sight, and who occasionally make an unwelcome visit into Gray's monologue. Happily, Gray gets 'round them.

The man had a brilliant, brilliant mind and a great heart. Watch this, and the only thing you risk is awareness of his absence, and it is a sad feeling.

I just loved this movie, or should I say: I loved this mirror.

Buy Gray's Anatomy (The Criterion Collection) (1997) Now

This is a wonderful example of the 'gift of gab' that is, the art of telling a story. Spalding Gray has a story to tell mind you, the plot is not nearly as interesting as, say, a Jedi Knight fighting a battle in a galaxy far, far away. It is not so much what he has to say, but how he says it. If one of your favorite childhood memories includes sitting around a campfire listening to someone spinning a yarn about a headless ghost, then you might enjoy this more adult version of a scary story. Substitute the encounter with a headless horseman with an even more frightening trip to see a doctor to diagnose an incurable medical condition and you may start to understand this movie. It was fascinating listening to his tangential logic, flashbacks, and digressions of a gifted story teller. It is also somewhat of an insight into the mind Spalding Gray, whose favorite story was the life experience he gained by walking around Washington Square Park several times, breathing in all of life's drama.

Read Best Reviews of Gray's Anatomy (The Criterion Collection) (1997) Here

If you enjoyed "Swimming to Cambodia", then you will enjoy this film also. If you haven't scene "Swimming to Cambodia" buy this but watch "Swimming to Cambodia" first.

Want Gray's Anatomy (The Criterion Collection) (1997) Discount?

once you get it, you will never forget it: to wit, how unique and singular it is to be a great storyteller. we discover this by the way this show opens. a slew of people from everyday life tell their stories of how an eye condition altered their lives. i found myself nodding off as i sat through this, admiring the infrared film but finding the rest of it yawn inducing. then i was electrified by spalding gray's coming onscreen. by solely using his monolog skills, he holds me spellbound while he relates his eye injury story. it is a story i will never forget because its telling sears it into my memory.

it was sad to realize anew what a huge talent we lost with his suicide in 2004. ironically, with life later imitating art, spalding gray was in a serious car collision after he filmed this. he could not handle the pain, the constant physical therapy, the constant use of crutchess, etc., this in part led to his suicide. in this film we watch his hysteria over the prospect of a low risk eye surgery for the not painful condition of macular puckering in the eye. he was a complete mess over this eye problem alone but in a very woody allen like neurotic way.

Save 37% Off

Richard III (Criterion Collection) (1955)

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

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

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

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

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

Buy Richard III (Criterion Collection) (1955) Now

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

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

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

The special features are:

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

This is a must for Shakespeare fans.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Save 25% Off

Becket (2008)

"Becket." Now THERE is a marvelous movie... probably one of the finest "biopics" ever written!! It tells the story of the relationship between two men: King Henry II of England, great-grandson to William the Conqueror, and Thomas Becket, a Saxon nobleman, a close friend of King Henry's, and, ultimately, Archbishop of Canterbury.

As our story unfolds, Henry and Becket are inseparable friends. They spend their days feasting at banquets, carousing, wenching, and hunting. Henry (played by Peter O'Toole) appoints Becket (Richard Burton) to the post of Chancellor of England the equivalent of Prime Minister and Treasurer. Becket is a man completely loyal to the King, and a man with a curious sense of honor. "Honor is a private matter within," he tells Henry early in the film. "It's an idea, and every man has his own version of it."

"Becket" is ultimately a story of "the honor of God" versus "I am your king." In an effort to gain the upper hand in the ongoing controversy between the Church and state, Henry names Becket to the post of Archbishop of Canterbury. In Thomas Becket, the King sees a loyal servant who will place the wishes of his monarch before everything else. Unfortunately, the King's hopes for an easy time of it are soon dashed. After becoming the primate of England, Becket rediscovers his personal sense of honor. To Becket, "the honor of God" becomes worthy of defending against all who would attack the Church... even if the attacker is the King. When one of Henry's noblemen kills a priest, Becket orders him haled before an ecclesiastical court. The inevitable showdown between King and Archbishop is at hand.

Despite the King's insistence, he refuses to budge from his position that the church courts have jurisdiction in this and all similar cases. His continuing defiance of the King sends Henry into increasingly virulent paroxysms of rage against his former friend. "I am your king!" he repeatedly tells Becket.

Ultimately, Becket is forced to flee England, but returns after seven years, having agreed to a series of compromises with the King, but not conceding the main points of his argument. The truce is short lived, however. Becket continues to resist Henry's efforts to intrude into Church affairs. Henry, enraged once again, fills the air with oaths against his new-found foe, asking at one point: "Will no-one rid me of this meddlesome priest?" On December 29, 1170, four of his barons assassinate Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, on the altar of Canterbury Cathedral.

"Becket" is based on the stage play of the same name by French playwright Jean Anouilh, and adapted for the screen by Edward Anhalt (who won the 1964 "Best Screenplay" Academy Award for his efforts). It was also nominated for 11 other Oscars, including Best Picture and Best Actor.

This is one of those movies where words can't really convey the depth and quality of the performances turned in by its stars. It's rare to find a film with one performance of such great magnitude; I don't ever recall seeing two such brilliant performances in one movie! For Burton and O'Toole are so very good in their roles as Becket and Henry, that they seem almost to become the very characters they're playing. Their acting is refined, unaffected, completely without ego, almost effortless.

"Becket" is one of those good old-fashioned movies so popular forty years ago... the kind with world-class actors delivering lines from a superb screenplay; with an interesting subject at its heart; sumptuous sets; and colorful costumes. Maybe the film doesn't quite match the tastes of today's moviegoers as well as it did 37 years ago; but, if you're looking for some first-rate entertainment by the best actors in the business, "Becket" is indeed an excellent choice!

This 1964 film deals with the murder of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Becket, after his old drinking buddy, King Henry II, famously asked, "Who will rid me of this turbulent priest!?" Its been a matter of great debate whether Henry actually meant to order the murder of his old friend and, to me at least, this film almost makes the case that Henry's words were just the impulsive, possibly drunken words of a rather immature man thrust, by heredity, into a position of power he was not yet ready for.

One might think that the political murder of a priest in a pre-Reniassance England would make for a rather dry, humorless film. Luckily, Becket proves them wrong. Though director Peter Glenville was not a flashy stylist and occasionally does allow the film to become a bit stagey, he was also a wonderful director of actors and manages to get wonderful lead performances from a young Peter O'Toole (as Henry) and even from the normally diffident Richard Burton (as Becket). When the film begins, it feels very much like a comedy. When we first meet Becket and Henry, they are two young, spoiled friends who spend most of their time drinking and wenching. Though, as expected, O'Toole is hilarious as the fun-loving monarch, even Burton manages a few slyly sardonic line readings. Years later, in an interview with David Letterman, O'Toole would admit that both the lead actors were drunk during the majority of the shooting and basically just having a grand old time of it. Their sense of fun in these early scenes is easily translatable to the audience and its hard not to like these two immoral rogues and, perhaps, to even secretly want to find a time machine and go hang out with them. O'Toole and Burton were friends in real life and the mutual affection the two shared is especially obvious and endearing and serves to make the film's later events all the more tragic.

The film takes a serious turn when the previous Archbishop dies and Henry, seeing a way to make things easier for himself, appoints his old friend Becket to the position. However, once installed, Becket discovers his soul. He becomes a rare example of a man who power does not corrupts but instead serves to purify. As a leader, Becket discovers his lost integrity and tragically, this leads to his own martyrdom and later canonization. Fittingly, this man redeemed by the church (and who would guess that this would be the premise of such a hilarious, entertaining, and downright fun film?) becomes patron saint of the clergy.

That said, this isn't really a film about religion as much as its about friendship and the price one pays for taking a stand. This is one of the best historical films I have ever seen and should be seen by anyone interested in either a good story or just some of the best acting ever put on screen. There's something beautiful about a film that surprises you by defying your expectations and Becket is a great example of one of those films.

Buy Becket (2008) Now

This is a true historical epic, it has everything the viewer could want. Superb acting, suspense, sexcapades, court intrigue,, fine cinematography, a dysfunctional family, pageantry, betrayal, & murder. King Henry the second{Peter O'Toole}, the Norman grandson of William the conqueror is locked in a "church & state battle with his longtime Saxon friend Thomas Becket{Richard Burton}." The turmoil begins after Henry appoints Thomas against his will to the newly vacant position of Archbishop of Canterbury. Soon, a priest is arrested by lord Gilbert for dishonoring a young girl. Becket protests that the church should judge the priest, rather than the state. Meanwhile, the priest is killed trying to escape. Becket excommunicates lord Gilbert, & the battle is set. The egos are absorbed into the church & state quagmire.

I won't reveal anymore of the story, buy it & you will enjoy this period piece. The soul of this tale is the bond of two friends torn apart by their own manipulations & circumstances beyond their control. For me it is a sin against logic that neither Peter O'Toole & Richard Burton ever won the acadamy award. For their performances in this classic alone, the academy should be ashamed!

Read Best Reviews of Becket (2008) Here

"Becket" has been restored (thankfully) and is sked for DVD issue 01/05/2005. This is great!!! The Film Foundation has been in the process of restoring and re-issuing projects. Rec'd confirmation from them that the DVD is, in fact, coming out.

They also attached this information "The Film Foundation provides substantial annual support for preservation and restoration projects at its member archives * the Academy Film Archive, George Eastman House, Library of Congress, Museum of Modern Art, UCLA Film & Television Archive * and affiliated organizations * the National Center for Film and Video Preservation at the AFI and the National Film Preservation Foundation. These institutions have mounted ambitious programs of preservation and restoration and serve as a vital link for public access to our nation's film treasures. The Film Foundation's efforts have resulted in saving over 300 endangered films, including Hollywood features, silent films, independent, documentary and experimental films, as well as newsreels and other historical films whose titles may not be widely known but whose importance to our film heritage is no less significant."

Want Becket (2008) Discount?

I just don't understand why this gem of a movie hasn't yet been released on DVD. I am a teacher of English Literature in a college in Bangalore, India, and when I talk to my students about the European Middle Ages, I strongly recommend this film. I tell them that they cannot get a better introduction to the great issues of that era than what this superb film gives them.

I know of at least thirty people who would love to get a DVD version of this film

Save 77% Off

Shallow Grave (The Criterion Collection) (1994)

Danny Boyle has given us movie fans some amazing films in a variety of genres(Trainspotting, 28 Days Later. His first movie, Shallow Grave, is one of the best directorial debuts ever. A solid, gritty thriller centered around three flatmates and their descent into greed and subsequent savagery.

Shallow Grave is invariably one of the top 10 mystery/thrillers I recommend to newbies of the genre. The large cult following for this film is most definitely warranted, mainly because it doesn't fall victim to studio executive induced foolishness or its bastard requisite happy ending. This is good film making with taut direction derived from an excellent script.

The entire crux of the film is the question: "When confronted with a large sum of money can friendship survive?" Obviously the answer is a resounding "no". Boyle drops his audience into a frightening and exhilirating situation, makes us care for his characters, and then ruthlessly pummels them with brutal circumstance. We can see a little bit of ourselves in all three main characters which definitely increases our empathy and revulsion at the betrayal and bloodshed.

Shallow Grave is a haunting depiction of paranoia, deceit, murder, and madness that gets better with each viewing.

P.S. Danny Boyle revisits similar ground with his new release "Millions", albeit in a more wholesome, family friendly format.

This little Scottish gem is worth watching more than once! I'll not bother recanting what it's about, you can read that above. This is a delightful example of how greed and peer pressure can twist and stain the human soul with ugliness. Most of the movie takes place in the three roommates' flat in Scotland so it has a real claustrophobic feel to it. The plot is simple, watch the three characters crumble as they're affected by their decision to keep the money and dispose of the body. Strongest scene: when David comments about the dinner after having to hack up the dead body "It tastes different." Possibly meaning both the dinner and everything else about his life. This film has a nice ending, not a phoney one just to keep everyone happy. Technically, the digital transfer is mediocre. The sound is quite low. I have to turn my TV up pretty high to hear it, but this could be due to poor production on the set. There are no extras included on this DVD.

Buy Shallow Grave (The Criterion Collection) (1994) Now

Although there is no room on the name plate at the front door to their flat, Juliet Miller (Kerry Fox), David Stephens (Christopher Eccleston), and Alex Law (Ewan McGregor) are interviewing for a fourth, to rent out the red bedroom. However, their way of interrogating prospective flat mates makes it seem that they will never find a fourth wheel. Alex, the reporter, asks most of the insulting questions, the nicest of which is probably asking "When was the last time you heard these exact words: 'You are the sunshine of my life'?" But Juliet, the doctor, asks things like, "This affair you're not having, is it not with a man, or not with a woman?" while David, the accountant, likes to inquire, "How would you react, then, if I told you I was the Antichrist?" There is no way that anybody is going to get a passing grade from all three of this trio.

In fact, Hugo (Keith Allen) talks to only Juliet before he makes it to a dinner with the boys, where Alex wants to know if Hugo can pay for the flat (a large wad of bills suggests that he can) and David just wants to know if Hugo has ever killed a man (Hugo lies on this point). These answers are sufficient for him to move in, although Hugo is clearly a bit older than they are and is not as amused by the trio's wit as they are. However, the next morning Hugo is lying naked and dead in the red bed, the victim of an overdose. Alex immediately starts checking out everything that Hugo left behind, apparently never thinking that the police might want to take a look at things first. Just as Juliet is about to report the corpse, Alex finds the proverbial suitcase filled with cash. Immediately, Juliet and the boys are reviewing the situation.

The key to keeping the money becomes eliminating Hugo's body and the title of the film gives you an indication of how the trio plan to accomplish that particular task, although Alex knows enough about how bodies are identified to suggest a few surgical procedures to go along with the burial. This requires the purchasing of necessary supplies, a trip into the forest, the drawing of a short straw, and then returning to the flat to endure the questions of Detective Inspector McCall (Ken Stott), who seems to think there should be four people living there. However, the trio have another problem, in that all that cash apparently did not really belong to Hugo either, and there are a couple of blokes looking for it, and therefore, for them as well.

The three flat mates are eccentric enough for us to be entertained by the way they treat most of the other human beings that they come into contact with, but when Alex makes a point of going to far with his treatment of poor Cameron (Colin McGredie), one of the failed applicants from the film's opening sequence, and Cameron offers a pointed rejoinder with the toe of his boot, we readily admit Alex deserves it. This becomes an important part of the dynamic for "Shallow Grave," because while we certainly expect the bad guys to get their hands on the three flat mates before the police can put everything together, we do not expect the sharp turn the film takes at that point.

These characters are entertaining, but they are not sympathetic, so in watching how this one plays out we do not really have a rooting interest in which, if any of them, get out of this film alive. Although I know it came out four years later, "A Simple Plan" tells a similar story but with much more sympathetic characters. The question is the same: if a whole lot of money fell into your lap, how far would you go to keep it? Of course such narratives beg the question as to whether you should or not, because the drama, and the attendant horror, comes from how far people will go.

The other thing that "Shallow Grave" reminds me about is the bit from one of Bill Cosby's routine where he is talking about people doing cocaine. Cosby explains that people have told him that cocaine enhances things so that you become more of what you were and his rejoinder is, "But what is you are an a**hole?" That question is a totally legitimate one to ask with regards to this story line because these are not good people, and when they are put in a bad situation that becomes increasingly worse, it is not like there are any angels representing their better natures. This one gets pretty bad and if you want another cinematic reference tossed at you then think of the three way gun fight at the end of "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly."

Just do not be distracted by the sarcastic wit of the principles into thinking that they are good people or that this is a comedy. The "funny" stuff is all relative and just because you laugh at what people say is no reason to make the leap to thinking they are good people. Besides, the director is Danny Boyle, known for both "Trainspotting" and "28 Days Later," so you knew this 1994 was not going to be morally uplifting. This is just another example nice little example of bad people doing bad things to each other.

Read Best Reviews of Shallow Grave (The Criterion Collection) (1994) Here

Why is it that I watch and enjoy so many films in which Ewan McGregor appears? After finishing the substantive part of my day one evening last week, I flipped over to IFC and found `Shallow Grave' (1994) just starting. I stuck with it, and was not disappointed.

A movie fan has to love the risks that the independent filmmakers take. Danny Boyle, the same director of `Trainspotting,' did a very nice job with three rather unknown actors at the time at least in the U.S., Kerry Fox (Juliet), Christopher Eccleston (David), and McGregor (Alex), a quirky and unusual script, a little contemporary film noir, and created an enjoyable little story. Nice work, Danny Boyle.

In synopsis, Juliet, David, and Alex live in a nice four bedroom flat and are conducting a roommate search to pay a fourth of the rent. During a dinner/interview with a prospective tenant, Hugo, played by Keith Allen, the three are impressed, perhaps excessively so, when the potential flat mate brandishes nice wad of pound notes. Very shortly after Hugo moves in, he is not to be seen. Inquisitive Alex (he's a newspaper reporter) leads the charge to break into his room only to find Hugo naked and dead. Then, Alex continues to snoop and finds a substantial cache of money in a suitcase under the bed.

In short, after some very shallow soul-searching, the trio decided to keep the money rather than to report Hugo's death to the authorities. As such, Juliet, David, and Alex David must dispose of the body, Hugo's car, and anything else that could possibly associate the deceased flat mate with the three friends. The disposal proves to be quite a grisly affair, but that is not the least of the trio's problems. Paralleling their own struggles in disposing of Hugo, Boyle introduces us to two very bad men who are also looking for the money. The audience does not know and does not necessarily need to know who these very bad men are, just that they are very bad men and are getting closer and closer to Juliet, David, and Alex.

Ironies abound in `Shallow Grave,' but one of the most fun of those ironies occurs at the point when bodies, yes, bodies are found in a shallow grave, and Alex is assigned by his editor at the newspaper to cover the story. Alex's front-page headline is then succeeded by an intense climax as the three "friends," each apparently on the verge or over the precipice of insanity caused by greed, face each other early one morning and then a surprise ending that includes Alex gruesomely fastened to the floor of the flat.

In a moderate budget, independent film, actors, directors, and producers tend to take more creative risks. As such, I do not believe a Hollywood studio would have ever produced `Shallow Grave'. And, if it had, Hollywood would have turned it into a watered down version of its original intention, comparable to the difference between the independent `Requiem for a Dream' and the Hollywood `Traffic.' Good for lovers of good film.

Want Shallow Grave (The Criterion Collection) (1994) Discount?

First of all, let's just tell the review readers that the low ratings are obviously few and far between for a reason. Take stock in the fact that the majority of ratings are 5 stars.

I own this film on good old VHS tape. Long before Ewan McGregor was a household name. So please, throw away any idea that he makes or breaks this film. It's stunning. The story sucks you in and you are there, alone with just you and your television. It will be easy to block out the outside world and become mesmerized. And horrified and shocked and aghast and bewildered.

I promise this film is amazing. Be careful of reading too many reviews as they'll stupidly give away too much of the film.

Save 50% Off

Sunday Bloody Sunday (The Criterion Collection) (1971)

While I concur with many of the reviews posted here, there is not enough praise bestowed on the sublime Glenda Jackson, who remains the great lost actress of her generation. Though the recipient of two Oscars ("Women In Love", "A Touch of Class") and two other nominations ("Sunday.." and "Hedda"), as well as a criminal snub for the landmark "Stevie", Ms. Jackson seems to be little remembered today. It seems inconceivable now, since in the early Seventies, only Jane Fonda and Vanessa Redgrave could be considered her equals. For me, her Alex in "Sunday, Bloody Sunday" is my favorite of her rich performances. She is conflicted with her obviously unsatisfying affair with her bisexual (and, more importantly, shallow) lover, unfulfilled at her job, and basically adrift, just marking time in her life. The simple, yet powerfully suggestive emotions Jackson offers do much to help us identify strongly with her character. Who hasn't felt that, at times, their life is merely counting days, waiting for weekends which ironically do little to feed our spiritual or emotional needs? And the pattern continues, which to me is what the somewhat cryptic title implies. So much pressure is put on "the weekends" to make us happy that we can easily just wish our lives away, as Alex seems to. Its hard to find the final straw which Alex finds to salvage her life and begin again without this crippling relationship, but Jackson's brilliantly layered performance is a wonder throughout. Mr. Finch received many plaudits and is very respectable, but seems to be playing it safe here. His Dr. Hirsch is supposed to be the emotional, reasonable center of the movie, but Finch is a bit too reserved; the events don't seem to really happen to him at all. He stands curiously to the side, which may have been the author/director/actor's intent, but we don't have enough of the character's back-life for this to register. Murray Head is simply a cipher, which is all that is required, but a pleasant one. And any chance to see the divine Peggy Ashcroft and Bessie Love again is welcome.

When this movie first came out, it had that wonderful aura that many of the pictures of that era did: the essence of the forbidden--the promise that new and undiscovered worlds and situations would be examined that had never been dealt with in film before. I remember the same feeling accompanying "Cries and Whispers", "McCabe and Mrs. Miller", and "Women in Love", movies which have stood the test of time. "Sunday, Bloody Sunday", though not without its flaws, has also held up. Its a perfect time capsule of a certain period of time and change for working-class Londoners still woozy from the Sixties and not anywhere near ready for what would be the Eighties. Its also a remarkable document of a brilliant actress at the height of her estimable powers. Highly recommended.

For over thirty years SUNDAY BLOODY SUNDAY has remained one of my favorite movies. John Schlesinger may be my favorite director. I believe I own all his movies save one. So I probably cannot be objective about either this movie or Mr. Schlesinger's greatness.

I understood how my black students felt when they saw SOUNDER for the first time when I saw this movie on its release in 197l. "At last here is a decent movie about us." Not only was the movie about bisexual and gay relationships, but the characters were richly and complexly developed. In a word, believable. The plot is rather straight-forward-the screen play is by Penelope Gilliatt--Alex played by Glenda Jackson is having an affair with Bob who is played by Murray Head who is having an affair also with Dr. Daniel Hirsch played by Peter Finch. Rod Steiger may have preempted Peter Finch and Murray Head with a kiss on the lips between males in THE SERGEANT, but the kiss between Finch and Head here was certainly well ahead of its time.

The movie is visually very beautiful and well put together. The film opens with a closeup of the hands of Dr. Finch who is examining an older male patient. We see similar scenes throughout the movie of closeups of both Jackson's hands as she makes love to Head and Finch's hands as well. Much is made of answering services and phone messages since Alex and Dr. Hirsch have to share Bob and often have to be satisfied with phone messages rather than him in the flesh. (We can all be thankful this movie was made years before the advent of mobile phones.)

I had never heard before the otherwordly trio from Mozart's COSI FAN TUTTE, this beautiful aria that soars throughout the movie in the way much of Mozart does: just below the surface of joy there is the pain of human suffering, so appropriate for these two individuals who have to share someone they love with someone else.

In 197l Schlesinger was so brave to make this movie, which holds up well after 30 years. His honesty and courage to speak the truth have meant so much to so many. At the end of SUNDAY BLOODY SUNDAY as Peter Finch muses over his less than satisfactory relationship with his friend and discusses whether half a loaf is better than nothing, he says something to the effect that "I miss him." Those of us who loved Schlesinger who just died on this day can say in all sincerity, we will miss this great artist.

Buy Sunday Bloody Sunday (The Criterion Collection) (1971) Now

This tale of an unconventional love triangle looks better and better three decades after its release. John Schlesinger's filming of Penelope Gilliatt's screenplay preserves the brilliant performances of Peter Finch and Glenda Jackson, as a man and a woman reluctantly sharing the affections of a another, younger man, Murray Head (whatever happened to him?). What continues to surprise and delight is, most of all, the quiet acknowledgment that different kinds of love can co-exist, each having its own validity, without angst, guilt or retribution. If anything, general cinema has moved backwards since this film in terms of portraying homosexuality and bisexuality in a mature, non-exploitive manner. Ultimately, it's the acting of Finch and Jackson that makes this film, making one regret more than ever their respective death and retirement--in particular, Finch's moving closing speech, made directly to the camera, remains a masterpiece of understated delivery.

Read Best Reviews of Sunday Bloody Sunday (The Criterion Collection) (1971) Here

This is an excellent film about realistic adult relationships and the compromises we have to make to make relationships work. When the film was released in 1971 however the homosexuality certainly could overshadow the underlying complex but brutally honest story.

I think the best way to review the film is to concentrate on the 3 main characters, all played so very well by a super cast.

Alex, played by Glenda Jackson, is a business woman in her 40's having an affair with a bisexual artist, Bob, who is in his late 20's or early 30's. Bob leaves her at the first hint of conflict or trouble or confrontation to join his Jewish physician lover, Daniel, played by Peter Finch. Daniel asks for relatively little and offers an oasis of thought and tenderness for Bob.

This seems to torture Alex so much that she can't stop from allowing her feelings of rejection and fear of abandonment from driving Bob off the next time they meet. Most telling is her conversation with her mother where she challenges her mother and father's relationship. The father is a cold multi-millionaire that long ago ceased to be involved in a passionate relationship with his wife. Alex's mother confronts her back that she expects to have "it all' in a relationship and defends her marriage with 'you don't think it is anything but you are wrong." Alex is extremely bright and verbal but in many ways a spoiled woman. Yet to be fair, how many people can share a lover? It is possibly one of the most difficult tasks in the world for most and can be so traumatic that the constant worry destroys the relationship.

Bob, the bi-sexual artists, does not have to commit to either Alex or Daniel or to anyone. He is handsome, young, talented, intelligent, and articulate. He is ambitious and sees clearly what he gets from both relationships. He doesn't have to commit so he doesn't. Both lovers, Alex and Daniel, indulge him and adore him. From his perspective he realizes he does not have to choose between them and he enjoys various aspect of both of the relationships. Why should he make a choice? Does he stop seeing Daniel so that Alex will stop obsessing and fretting? I sympathized with Bob. He was indulged and pampered and knew it.

Daniel, the Jewish physician, was superbly played by Peter Finch. This portrayal of a man living multiple identities was extra special. Daniel is the talented and dedicated physican who takes calls from patients night and day. He is wise and learned and compassionate. He listens to opera in a sophisticated garden home serene and reflective. Yet he is fully engaged in the Jewish community in which he was reared. The scenes of his nephew's Bra Mitzvah convey his strong heritage and roots to the Jewish community. Daniel, more so that with Alex or Bob, conveys the concept of living different identities. Daniel recognizes he is part of the Jewish community, part of the medical community and the patients they see, and part of a same-gender loving community which exists more behind doors that in the open in 1971. Whereas Alex remains tortured most of the film, Daniel ends the film with a speech directly to the camera about the limitations of all relationships,the compromises we have to make in all relationships, and the responsibility to extract from each human experience as much joy and meaning as is possible.

We have a choice in life, we can accept or reject compromise. Both paths have rewards and hardships. This is really the theme of the film.

After 34 years, this film has retained its power, since its power resides in depiction of honest lives and honest situations.

Want Sunday Bloody Sunday (The Criterion Collection) (1971) Discount?

This civilized movie, of autumnal sadness, is such an actors' film.

Especially when those actors are Peter Finch and Glenda Jackson.

It is a pleasure to watch them at their craft. John Schlesinger has

directed Penelope Gilliatt's script with an eye for rich detail, and

such seemingly minimal emotions of the leads that comes through

the performances so perfectly, as delicately formed and precise as

snowflakes. They feel deeply, do Daniel (Finch) and Alex

(Jackson). Though they must not let on. It would be bad form to.

That they both love Bob (Murray Head) seems a conundrum. But

Daniel and Alex are of an age when there might be no one else,

save Bob, who is one of those curious, mercurial people who can

go from person to person, without caring one bit, beginning,

during, after. He literally feels nothing, save the rudimentary ( the

word is full of them) but he is perhaps seen by Daniel and Alex as

what they want him to be. Such is love. They recreate him from his

vagueness. And of course they must not be jealous of Bob's other

lovers. Such as Bob always require that, and consider otherwise to

be so bloody selfish.

He doesn't intentionally hurt anyone. He uses people as things, so,

to him, they are replaceable. When he is the replaceable one, if only

they could see it. He is not worth their integrity, and intelligence

and complexity of heart. Yet, when one loves, one cannot think of

him or her without making them, perhaps, mythic. To someone

else, they would be just another person, for others see them as

ordinary. This, the film explores with such finesse and grace.

Daniel has a monologue, told to us personally, the words of which

are beautiful and touching, that just about rips your heart out. Finch

adds to the words, so seemingly somewhat matter of factly saying

them, ( a person has to comport themselves properly after all)

though from deep inside, with such thought and honesty, and

searching still in these later years, and with no apology. You see the

worth and goodness of the man most especially then. You want to

put your arms around Daniel and Alex and hug them, for their love

is doomed, as they know too well. They are having to deal with the

loss, the void, to reconcile themselves to it, even during Bob, and

learning how to get through the day, routinely, like everyone else

pretends to.

"Sunday Bloody Sunday" is a film that one feels honored to see. Its

ad line-"This is a story about three decent people. They will break

your heart." Indeed.

Save 34% Off

OCEAN GIANTS 3D (Blu-ray 3D & 2D Version) REGION FREE

I have just read the product describe and it sounds exciting. I saw a movie about Galapgos's underwater world and I was really shocked how many animals live there. It is incredible! My favourites are the seals they are so kindly and funny!

My dream to travel there once in my life. I anticipate a good mark for it!

Save 10% Off

17 Again (2009)

I'm pretty picky about movies I'll spend money on nowadays. I fell in love with this movie because, in the middle of so much crud coming out of Hollywood, here is a show that actually praises abstinence and encourages families to work out their problems.

The humor is incredibly clever, Zac Efron nailed Matthew Perry's mannerisms and intonations, and the storyline is charming.

I can't even count how many times I've watched this movie since buying it. I highly recommend it. And of course, I found it cheapest here on Amazon.

OK buddies don't laugh! I watched this film because my wife recorded it on our DVR. This film reminded me of so many of those 80's high school comedies with the body switching premise. The film is not very original, but Zac Efron carries the story with some help from a good cast that keep it amusing. The story of a would be basket ball star (Efron) blows his big chance at playing college ball and getting a scholarship to marry his high school sweetheart who he gets pregnant. Fast forward 20 years and you have Matthew Perry who is stuck in a nowhere job and can't seem to find any passion in his life whether it be fixing up the house, being a good dad or not making his wife feel guilty for the choice he made to leave the big game to propose to her.

While the film is oh-so familiar, I thought Efron was engaging and with the help of comedians Jim Gaffigan and Thomas Lennon, the film is an easy watch with some funny moments. Efron shows he could be more than just a pretty face in this good natured teen comedy.

Buy 17 Again (2009) Now

I Got this movie to watch with my wife. I was expecting nothing but the typical teen flick, starring one of Disney's prefabricated Child Stars.

Wow! Zac Efron CAN Act! Who would've thought. This guy could turn into a HUGE star in the next few years and a Highly Respected actor if he makes good career choices. The movie was really good too. I was entertained the whole time and wasn't bored for not even a minute.

This movie reminded me a lot of Back to the Future. It wasn't as good (BTTF is a classic) but it was a pretty good effort and a pleasant surprise.

Read Best Reviews of 17 Again (2009) Here

If you took `Big', threw in a little `Disney's The Kid' and added an emotional heft of `It's a Wonderful Life' and you'd have the magic of '17 Again'. I really can't believe I just said all that, since walking into this movie I expected to find it mundane and worthless. I actually really liked this movie, like a lot.

Sure, it's predictable, but in a charmingly fresh way.

The film tells the story of Mike, a one-time basketball star who gave up his dreams to marry his pregnant girlfriend. Twenty years later and Mike is bitter and dissatisfied with his life, which has weighed heavily on his wife Scarlett, who feels like the target of Mike's unhappiness. The film opens with Mike living at his best friend Ned's house while he awaits his impending divorce. Mike's teenage kids resent him and his wife is aching to love him, but her better judgment won't allow it. When Mike gets a freaky visit from a man no one else can see he is soon in for a strange yet much needed wake up call. After falling off a bridge, Mike finds himself 17 again, only this time he's living out his high school days in the present, with his wife and kids in arms reach. Taking this as an opportunity to fix his life, Mike begins mending relationships, but his current situation certainly makes it a tad difficult.

You don't need me to tell you that everything works out in the end, but the film works a lot of magic getting us there!

Personally, I didn't have much faith in Zac Efron. I was wrong. This kid has loads of charm and real talent that he uses to full effect here. The films more tender scenes are carried with the needed humor yet substantial emotional depth. Who wasn't near tears while Efron unloads in a classroom about the love he felt for his newborn daughter or when he pleaded in the courtroom for his wife to give him another chance? Efron NAILED this performance. He was slick, charming, cool and emotionally relevant. The supporting cast didn't do so bad either. Thomas Lennon (as the nerdy best friend) is ridiculously hilarious here, even when his character is a little too far over the top, and Leslie Mann is not only beautiful, but she is intelligently funny (I just love her work). Michelle Trachtenberg is like my new celebrity crush (man has she grown up) and Sterling Knight balances his awkwardness with layered bravado as Mike's son.

Yes, this story has been told before, but that doesn't mean this one isn't just as good as the others. It's far from what I expected, but that is a very good thing.

Want 17 Again (2009) Discount?

This movie is a delightful romp with a lot to offer. Zac Efron is amazing in his part as Mike, with talent to burn. He's sweet but takes no prisoners when dealing with ruffians, and his moves on the dance floor and his agility with a basketball are equally impressive. He demonstrates his acting chops in this movie as well, going from winsome to tough to romantic and all-around likeable without ruffling a feather.

Thomas Lennon as his quirky Star Wars sidekick is hilarious and adorable. His role is more than a supporting one, as his storyline is given more space than one might expect, but it adds a lot to the movie's humor and keeps it lighter than it would be with the sometimes gritty problems that Mike faces with his children's issues and the difficulties of trying to recapture his wife's love.

Matthew Perry's part is too small to do him justice, but he fulfills it well. The movie focuses mainly on Zac Efron's part in regaining what the adult Mike, played by Perry, cannot get back on his own.

This movie is so enjoyable that you're willing to suspend disbelief when you need to. Mike's wife, for example, seeing him exactly as he looked when he was a teenager, is very slow in picking up on the fact that he IS her husband as a teenager, and she seems blandly accepting of the story concocted by Lennon's character that the young Mike is his son. Of course, the transformation from 30-year-old to 17-year-old Mike is another leap, but the movie is so engaging that you don't mind. Watching Mike get back at the bullies picking on his teen children is satisfying, and his efforts to extricate himself from sticky situations are humorous.

Anyone who ever thinks about those teen years and wishes there were a way to go back and relive them again will enjoy this movie. There's plenty of action, some tender moments, and enough craziness to keep you thoroughly entertained. It gets my vote, and I'll definitely watch it again.

Save 33% Off

Tell No One (2006)

This is a very exciting thriller, in the tradition of American films like The Fugitive, but with a unique edge that makes it distinctively French and deliciously diabolical. It is certainly darker (and funnier) than The Fugitive, but it is no accident that there is an American feel, since it is based on a book by Harlan Coben.

Eight years after his wife's brutal murder, new clues emerge that lead police to once again suspect that Alexander Beck may have killed her. At the same time, he begins to think she may be still alive, and is frantic to find her before he is arrested as a suspect for another related homicide. Director Guillaume Canet keeps you guessing as the plot thickens, revealing bits and pieces of the past as new circumstances help Beck to see that he didn't know his wife as well as he had thought.

The film looks great, with editing and camera work that helps to achieve a perfect balance of subtle tension and intensity. The performances are all very strong -and there is a surprisingly intense performance by a bit player, a determined and remorseless tall and skinny female assassin/torture expert, that still haunts me. In fact, I would go as far as to say that her performance created one of the most frightening villians I've seen on the screen in a long time -even more than the performance of Javier Bardem as Chigurh in No Country for Old Men -because it was just as intense but more plausible. Definitely recommended for lovers of French Cinema, but also for those who think that French films tend to be too cerebral and cannot deliver the thrills. This one hits you in both the brain and the gut.

TELL NO ONE (Ne le dis à personne) succeeds on every level for this viewer. Based on Harlan Coben's novel and adapted for the screen and directed by Guillaume Canet, this is one of those intricately complex French films that is much in the same mode as the 1955 film LES DIABOLIQUES. Nothing is as it appears at first and even when the mystery is explained in what appears to be a systematic, cohesive manner, the 'real story' remains a conundrum. It is a brilliant little film well worth multiple viewings to fully appreciate all of the aspects of the fine acting, cinematography, direction and musical scoring.

In a misty opening we discover Alexandre Beck (François Cluzet) and his beautiful wife Margot (Marie-Josée Croze) only to abruptly be drawn into the murder of Margot and the beating of Alexandre. The incidents are shrouded in mystery and remain so for eight years when suddenly the now pediatrician Alexandre receives an email from the 'deceased' Margot. Alexandre's world is topsy turvy and he begins to share the strange incident with his family his sister Anne (Marina Hines) and her lover Hélène (a radiant Kristin Scott Thomas), his father, Margot's family...and the police who begin to discover evidence that implicates Alexandre as the perpetrator. Alexandre's lawyer (Nathalie Baye) pits evidence against the police investigators while Alexandre's chief ally in his run from the accusers is Bruno (Gilles Lellouche), the father of a hemophiliac patient whom Alexandre has treated and befriended. The chase is on and the clues become increasingly puzzling until at last the truth of the now eight year old murder and all of the implications of that event unfold.

If there are seemingly holes in the story it is because we, the audience, are never quite sure about the twists and turns of the plot. The acting is superb from this cast of some of France's finest artists, and one of the best performances in the film comes from British actress Kristin Scott Thomas, reminding us that she is one of the most talented and beautiful actors on the screen today! This is a tough little film to follow, but the quality of both the story and the production is first rate. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp, October 08

Buy Tell No One (2006) Now

Says Roger Ebert: "Here is how a thriller should be made."

Says Stephen Holden of the New York Times: "I watched it twice. It was even better the second time."

Says me: "I couldn't agree more with them." Tell No One, even without the quotes, is one of the best thrillers I've seen in a long, long time.

Alexander Beck and his wife, Margot, both much in love, have gone for a bit of evening skinny-dipping in the country. There's a minor disagreement and she dives back in from the float and heads to the shore. He hears her cry out and swims as swiftly as he can after her. When he reaches the small dock and starts to pull himself out, he's met by a baseball bat. While he's in a coma for three days his wife is found dead with severe bruising and cuts, the marks of a known serial killer. But who pulled Beck out of the water? Who called for emergency medical help?

Eight years later Dr. Alex Beck, a pediatrician, is told by the police that the remains of two unidentified male bodies have been found in the vicinity of where his wife was murdered. Then he receives an e-mail on his computer. The attachment shows a woman leaving a crowded exit. She pauses and looks at the security camera. The picture is fuzzy. The scene ends. Beck has never remarried and still is haunted by the memory of his wife. He is almost sure this woman is she. The message in the e-mail says, "Tell no one. They're watching."

The director and co-screenwriter Guillaume Canet has taken the novel by Harlan Coben and, working with Coben, has fashioned a film at least as good as the novel. The film has been crafted with care. You'd best pay attention to every moment. Irrelevant items turn out to be relevant. Assumptions based on how a scene opens turn out often to be not what they seem, but just as reasonable. Canet (and Coben) don't shy away from violence -there is a memorable woman you don't ever want to displease -but the violence isn't just for gee whiz show biz purposes. When violence happens, it reminds us to stay alert. Canet takes us all over the place, from Paris slums to society horse events. He has Beck dancing across a highway filled with speeding cars and then hiding out in a dumpster sharing space with garbage and a large rat. The story is just as complicated as Coben's novel (as all his novels are), but -if you've been paying attention -all becomes clear. If the cops are after Beck because they think he may have had something to do with his wife's death, it also may be true that others are after him because they think she might be alive. But why?

Helping immeasurably with the interest and speed of the film are the actors. Francois Cluzet plays Dr. Beck, a capable, resourceful man, but no buff Hollywood hero. Cluzet is not an especially handsome lead actor, and that's all to the good. Surrounding him are such fine French actors as Andre Dussollier as his wife's father, a grieving retired senior cop; Francois Berleand as a sympathetic and smart police officer; Nathalie Baye as a lawyer who knows how to deal with district attorneys; and a fine Jean Rochefort, as well as Kristin Scott Thomas speaking impeccable French as his best friend, a wealthy woman having an affair with his equestrienne sister.

Tell No One is an excellent movie. And I hope you'll pick up of a few of Harlan Coben's mysteries while you're at it. He started out with several books featuring Myron Bolitar (whose best friend, Win Lockwood, is not a person to irritate). Try the first one first, Deal Breaker (Myron Bolitar Mysteries). Coben lately has moved into darker themes, such as Tell No One. His latest is The Woods. Coben knows how to create intricate but logical plots and strong characters. He's a first-class writer. His books are much better than the usual thriller-every-year bestseller that some authors churn out regularly.

Read Best Reviews of Tell No One (2006) Here

TELL NO ONE (Ne le dis à personne) succeeds on every level for this viewer. Based on Harlan Coben's novel and adapted for the screen and directed by Guillaume Canet, this is one of those intricately complex French films that is much in the same mode as the 1955 film LES DIABOLIQUES. Nothing is as it appears at first and even when the mystery is explained in what appears to be a systematic, cohesive manner, the 'real story' remains a conundrum. It is a brilliant little film well worth multiple viewings to fully appreciate all of the aspects of the fine acting, cinematography, direction and musical scoring.

In a misty opening we discover Alexandre Beck (François Cluzet) and his beautiful wife Margot (Marie-Josée Croze) only to abruptly be drawn into the murder of Margot and the beating of Alexandre. The incidents are shrouded in mystery and remain so for eight years when suddenly the now pediatrician Alexandre receives an email from the 'deceased' Margot. Alexandre's world is topsy turvy and he begins to share the strange incident with his family his sister Anne (Marina Hines) and her lover Hélène (a radiant Kristin Scott Thomas), his father, Margot's family...and the police who begin to discover evidence that implicates Alexandre as the perpetrator. Alexandre's lawyer (Nathalie Baye) pits evidence against the police investigators while Alexandre's chief ally in his run from the accusers is Bruno (Gilles Lellouche), the father of a hemophiliac patient whom Alexandre has treated and befriended. The chase is on and the clues become increasingly puzzling until at last the truth of the now eight year old murder and all of the implications of that event unfold.

If there are seemingly holes in the story it is because we, the audience, are never quite sure about the twists and turns of the plot. The acting is superb from this cast of some of France's finest artists, and one of the best performances in the film comes from British actress Kristin Scott Thomas, reminding us that she is one of the most talented and beautiful actors on the screen today! This is a tough little film to follow, but the quality of both the story and the production is first rate. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp, March 09

Want Tell No One (2006) Discount?

TELL NO ONE (Ne le dis à personne) succeeds on every level for this viewer. Based on Harlan Coben's novel and adapted for the screen and directed by Guillaume Canet, this is one of those intricately complex French films that is much in the same mode as the 1955 film LES DIABOLIQUE. Nothing is as it appears at first and even when the mystery is explained in what appears to be a systematic, cohesive manner, the 'real story' remains a conundrum. It is a brilliant little film well worth multiple viewings to fully appreciate all of the aspects of the fine acting, cinematography, direction and musical scoring.

In a misty opening we discover Alexandre Beck (François Cluzet) and his beautiful wife Margot (Marie-Josée Croze) only to abruptly be drawn into the murder of Margot and the beating of Alexandre. The incidents are shrouded in mystery and remain so for eight years when suddenly the now pediatrician Alexandre receives an email from the 'deceased' Margot. Alexandre's world is topsy turvy and he begins to share the strange incident with his family his sister Anne (Marina Hines) and her lover Hélène (a radiant Kristin Scott Thomas), his father, Margot's family...and the police who begin to discover evidence that implicates Alexandre as the perpetrator. Alexandre's lawyer (Nathalie Baye) pits evidence against the police investigators while Alexandre's chief ally in his run from the accusers is Bruno (Gilles Lellouche), the father of a hemophiliac patient whom Alexandre has treated and befriended. The chase is on and the clues become increasingly puzzling until at last the truth of the now eight year old murder and all of the implications of that event unfold.

If there are seemingly holes in the story it is because we, the audience, are never quite sure about the twists and turns of the plot. The acting is superb from this cast of some of France's finest artists, and one of the best performances in the film comes from British actress Kristin Scott Thomas, reminding us that she is one of the most talented and beautiful actors on the screen today! This is a tough little film to follow, but the quality of both the story and the production is first rate. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp, July 08

Save 25% Off

The Twelve Kingdoms: A Great Distance in the Wind, the Sky at Dawn (2011)

This is an amazing anime that I would recommend to anyone.

Amazon has fast shipping, they shipped my copy on 12/15/2011 and it arrived on 12/17/2011.

After watching my copy I found that, like the first and second sets, the picture and sound quality (I watched this blu-ray release in Japanese DTS-HD 5.1 with English subtitles) of this blu-ray set is great!

This set contains episodes 34-45 on 3 discs (there are 45 episodes total in this series, so this is the final set in the series) and staff interviews.

This is the third box set for The Twelve Kingdoms, and by now you're fully engulfed into the story and get to see some action. Some of the story remains very lethargic, but I still loved the series; most of the time I like to have a varying soundtrack, but it seemed right to have the theme song playing throughout the anime as it had been. No matter what scene they put with it, it just seem to fit.

Just get the anime and watch it all the way through, you won't regreat it at all.

Buy The Twelve Kingdoms: A Great Distance in the Wind, the Sky at Dawn (2011) Now

This story is not original novel but that is Rival or surpass!!

I had enjoy that Blue-ray disk also picture is beautyful!!

Read Best Reviews of The Twelve Kingdoms: A Great Distance in the Wind, the Sky at Dawn (2011) Here

Dan in Real Life (2007)

I blame it solely on that horribly cheesy poster art portraying Steve Carell's head laying on a stack of flapjacks, but I wrote off `Dan in Real Life' well before actually seeing it despite the good reviews and word of mouth from friends. It was supposed to be really good, but in my head all I saw was cheesy ridiculousness pretending to be sincere. I'm really glad that I finally gave in and watched this film this past weekend.

What a treasure.

I know this may seem like an odd comparison, and I will say off the bat that the film I'm about to compare it to does have some heavier themes, but this reminded me a lot of last years independent surprise `Rachel Getting Married'. In fact, I actually think that overall, `Dan in Real Life' is the better of the two films, or at least the most complete and comfortable of the two (when have I ever shunned away from discomfort in a cinematic offering?). I had a few issues with `Rachel's construction, but here I was completely soaking up every frame. It was funny, touching, charming, emotionally resonate and beautifully structured.

In quoting the film itself, and my review's title; "Plan to be surprised".

Steve plays Dan, an advice columnist who has lost his wife to an illness and is rearing his three young daughters with difficulty. His eldest daughter just wants to be given some freedoms, his middle daughter just wants to be allowed to express her newfound love and his youngest daughter just wants a little attention. Dan, depressed yet never to the dramatically overstated and clichéd effect that many actors would have played it, is just not capable of giving them what they need. When they make a trip to visit family, Dan meets the beautiful Marie and sparks fly, but she is involved and so they part only to uncover that they will be spending a lot of time together as Marie is dating Dan's younger brother Mitch. Trying to hide their growing affection for one another, Dan and Marie try and play cool, but it soon becomes more than either of them can handle.

The film is so much more than a glorified rom-com, as it seemed to have been marketed as. I really wish that this would have gotten the push it deserved, and that it had been campaigned as what it really is; a heartfelt and honest portrait of middle-aged growth and development. There is a sincerity about the way Dan comes to terms with his own person, trying to understand who he is as a man, as a father, as a widower. Carell is outstanding here (something I never imagined that I would say). Juliette Binoche is marvelous, as usual, giving her delicate performance a layer of spunk and wit that makes her delicious in every sense of the word. I even enjoyed Dane Cook's performance, and I find him repulsive. He was genuine and charming and natural.

I just love the piano-side sing-along (piggyface), for it was scenes like that that gave the film this lovely sense of naturalness.

Between the stellar cast and the wonderfully constructed scripting (nothing is ever too clichéd and even the romance is developed with smarts as apposed to the usual laziness) that contains some comical yet appropriate dialog ("MURDERER OF LOVE!"), `Dan in Real Life' is the real deal. I am just in such a state of pleasant and very welcomed shock right now.

Now, let's talk about fixing that ridiculous cover-art.

A tired formula gets a shot in the arm by affecting performances in this quaint little film that will touch you.

I have grown to really appreciate the acting talent of Steve Carell who really can carry a film. Carell darn near stole the show in Bruce Almighty to the point where the funniest segments were cut from the theatrical release because he upstaged Carrey so much, but those scenes where fortunately made available on the DVD release. Carell was again the saving grace of Evan Almighty and The 40-Year-Old Virgin in which both most likely would have died unnoticed had it not been for his sincere performances. This comedian definitely knows how to act. Carell reminds me of the legendary Dick Van Dyke when he had serious roles or moments and Bob Newhart's dry comedic delivery. It all just seems so effortless on Carell's part.

In another affecting performance we have Carell as a widower raising three daughters alone and giving his tidbits of wisdom on doing so in a local column titled "Dan in Real Life." Even though his wife has died four years ago, he has yet to really move beyond that in the way of a relationship. He has focused all his attention of his children and while that is admirable, a parent is still allowed to look out for himself too. He has not and the annual fall trip to his parents' cabin plays out all too realistically with everyone pushing him to find someone and he does.

He bumps into a lovely woman in town that he's immediately drawn to. She is played by the ever radiant Oscar winning actress Juliette Binoche, the only reason to see The English Patient and one who makes turning 43 seem really cool and desirable. In the hands of any other actress this role would have been blown out of portion, but in the subtle hands of Binoche, it is a delicate and balanced performance. Unfortunately, this terrific woman who seems perfect for him is, in reality, his brother's latest flame that he's brought down to the family cabin to meet everyone for the first time because "this one is different."

Sadly, the effects of this are handled much like a TV-movie or a good episode of that old series "Love Boat", or any other sitcom for that matter. What makes this film ultimately rise above that is admirable work done by the leads. These are seriously understated performances that are quite touching, believable and memorable in spite of a seriously flawed script at times.

Some of the humor in this film is both lame and predictable, but the execution is always dead on. Again, the performances are the key to this tired formula of the awkward romance. I guess this film is a good example of style over substance. Will this save this movie for everyone, no, but I think most might like this film. I doubt many will love it or even remember it much after seeing it, but it's a nice experience in spite of it's obvious weaknesses.

Buy Dan in Real Life (2007) Now

Anyone who actually believes that love is a many splendored may not get their money's worth from "Dan in Real Life." Here's a film that shows just how unexpected, irregular, and confusing love can be, both in terms of family and romantic interests. There's intelligence to this story that's equally humorous and heartbreaking, proving once and for all that love is difficult to receive and even more difficult maintain. At times, it's also difficult to acknowledge, especially if it's being kept a secret. The greatest difficulty of all is letting go of love, to recognize that the past is the past and to know when to move on. All this is explored in "Dan in Real Life," a smart, witty, and touching romantic comedy that doesn't lose itself to an overabundance of clichés. The formulaic elements are there, but they're presented in a new way, and they're used in a story that can actually support them. They're not used simply because we expect them to be.

The plot focuses on Dan Burns (Steve Carell), a widowed advice columnist living in New Jersey with his three daughters. They all drive to Rhode Island for an annual family reunion, and its there that Dan meets Marie (Juliette Binoche), a good-natured woman who has traveled the world and seen many sights. Their romance comes to a halt when Dan discovers that Marie is dating his brother, Mitch (Dane Cook). Dan spends the rest of the film struggling with his feelings, unwilling to let Marie go yet unable to be honest with his family, who he can't seem to connect with.

As simple as this plot sounds, a number of fascinating, thought provoking elements liven things up. One of the most interesting is the relationship between Dan and his daughters. The two oldest are typical in that they hate Dan: seventeen-year-old Jane (Alison Pill) is desperate to see the world, and a great way to start would be to finally learn how to drive; fifteen-year-old Cara (Brittany Robertson) believes that she's deeply in love with a boy from school, and she openly despises her father for not letting that love develop. At one point, she screams that he's a murderer of love. Dan tries to rationalize the situation--Cara has only known the boy for three days, and it's impossible to know whether or not you're in love so quickly. Eventually, Dan begins to analyze his love for Marie, who he had only met three days earlier. His youngest daughter, Lilly (Marlene Lawston), is the least hostile, despite not understanding why her father behaves the way he does. As his love for Marie deepens, he loses track of Lilly, and he ultimately hurts her feelings by neglecting to read a special book she made for him.

Another important element is the relationship between Dan and his immediate family; because he makes himself so distant, they look at him more with concern than with love. Some feel that he needs to finally let go of his dead wife--his parents (John Mahoney and Dianne Wiest) set him on a blind date with an old family acquaintance (Emily Blunt), hoping that he'll finally have some fun. This suits his brother, Clay (Norbert Leo Butz), just fine, since he feels that Dan should "uncork" himself. The pressure they're putting on Dan is unmistakable, as is the fact that their actions are well intentioned but completely unnecessary. This is probably why he attempts to engage his nieces and nephews, even when they make it clear that they don't want to be engaged.

But the relationship between Dan and Marie is the most important element. It all boils down to the fact that two love struck people are under the same roof, unable to show their feelings for each other. How long can this go on? Will anyone notice? Will either of them be able to come clean? These are the questions we find ourselves asking as the film progresses, not only because the story is entertaining, but also because we eventually realize that Dan is not following the advice in his own written columns. Dan himself realizes this when his articles are considered for syndication in a major newspaper--he has become a hypocrite, someone so blindsided by love that he didn't think about who might get hurt by it.

Is it normal for love to be this emotionally exhausting? I don't think I'm the right person to answer that question, which is probably just as well; a recommendation for "Dan in Real Life" doesn't depend so much on what I think, but on the mindset you bring to the theater. This classic Boy Meet Girl fable is told in a non-traditional way, relying more on genuine emotional development than on a formulaic structure. Although it allows for the film's one weakness--an abrupt ending--the emotional development still does wonders for the story, preventing it from becoming a bland, meaningless romantic comedy. It helps that all of the characters are believable, especially Dan; as he comes to terms with the ups and downs of life, our own humanity is reaffirmed. This alone makes "Dan in Real Life" a heartfelt, funny, and thoroughly enjoyable film.

Read Best Reviews of Dan in Real Life (2007) Here

When Steve Carell and Dane Cook were given top billing in "Dan In Real Life," I expected a great or mediocre comedy filled with laughs and humor. Congratulations again goes to the marketing that makes a film appear different than what it actually is. This is the case with "Dan In Real Life," a film that will make you laugh with the characters, but also make you bury your face into your arms at the awkward situations dealing with love.

Dan (Steve Carell) is a widower, whose job is writing for an advice column in the paper and raising his three girls. As much as he's good at helping people, Dan can't seem to connect with his daughters. He decides to take the family to his parents' lodge for the weekend and while there he meets Marie (Juliette Binoche) in town and they immediately make a connection, only to separate soon after. Coming back to the lodge, he finds out that his brother, Mitch (Dane Cook) is dating Marie and Dan has to endure the weekend, tormented with the love he has for Marie and his daughters' dislike of him.

First things first, "Dan In Real Life" is not a comedy. It does have touches of humor and slapstick throughout, but it's much more dramatic. The title character is depressed and trying to make life work for him and his family. This is the film's downfall, because at times, it doesn't know if it wants to be either a comedy or a straight drama. It lands in the middle of the spectrum and this hurts it slightly. Luckily, the acting is very good and keeps the film from being less than mediocre.

Steve Carell is one of my favorite actors (huge fan of "The Office") and he didn't let me down here. From what I saw, he was in every single scene and he truly made them better. At one point, you'll be laughing at the absurdity of his situation, when you'll be sympathizing for his character the next (the "Let My Love Open the Door" scene). Carell makes Dan extremely likeable and a character to root for. Dane Cook gets a bad rap for his acting and although some of his movies aren't great, he does fine here as Dan's brother. Cook downplays it and his love for Marie is believable. He needs more roles like this. As the love interest, Juliette Binoche is great and has good chemistry with both Carell and Cook. All the acting was fine and was the best part of the film.

What really hurt the film was Dan's daughters and the ending. Although the actresses playing them did a good job, their characters were so poorly written. Instead of being loving, they became annoying and grating. Dan is trying his best to help their situation, but they make it harder for him. Finally, the ending was too "sweet" for my taste. It seemed like it came too abruptly and the end credits montage had my eyes rolling. If they took that out, then maybe it would have fared better.

Overall, "Dan In Real Life" surprised me in that it wasn't a consistently funny comedy, but a heartfelt drama. Unfortunately, it had a hard time juggling both genres. Thankfully, good acting helped the film along and made it better than it should have been.

Want Dan in Real Life (2007) Discount?

This, along with a couple other movies now (only a couple though), is the revival of good script writing and good screenplays. This movie has zero special effects, but yet is such a good, good movie. I was very impressed. Carell can play a more serious role. This is where it's at. Dane Cook too did well out of his typical comedy role. I wish everyone would give this a chance. It's great.....More movies should be made like this. It's simple and great all in at once.

Save 33% Off

Phantoms / Darkness / Venom (2012)

All three are a cut above 'B' movies, some more than others. Phantoms is an adaptation of a very good Dean Koontz novel with an 'A' cast including Ben Affleck and the legendary Peter O'toole. If you've read the book then it will mean much more to you than having to stand on it's own two legs. The screenplay relies heavily upon the reader knowing the novel and that works against it as a stand alone film. If you haven't read it you will have the impression that something is slightly askew and you're not being told everything and that Peter O'toole is slumming...but still you'll find excellent production values with a bang up ending and more than competent turns by every actor involved. For the price it's worth the collection by itself to get the blu-ray transfer of this film(which looks and sounds very good indeed). If by chance you have read the book then this movie is kick ass!!!

Venom is an atmospheric little teen horror flick with the likes of Jonathan Jackson and Agnes Bruckner involved in Voodoo curses in the Lousiana bayous. It's tight and nerve wracking and the kids milk all the poison out of the plot they can. It works and actually of the three films is the most coherent by itself. If you're a fan of Voodoo flicks and teen slasher horror flicks in general and not, I repeat, NOT a member of AAA, then you'll love this foray into deep dark goings on. (you'll have to see to get that little attempt at humor).

Finally there is Darkness starring a great cast in a Spanish international production of a ultimately muddled yet eerily disturbing mash up of current horror trends. Having the cast really saves this film but the Director is to be commended for an attempt that just falls a hair short. Not because it isn't totally tense and frightening but because there isn't anything new here you haven't seen before. However it held my interest until the very end. Anna Paquin (True Blood's Sookie Stackhouse) plays the teen thrust into the new surroundings who begins to suspect evil is afoot but it is her brother Paul (Stephan Enquist in his very first role with no previous experience at age 9) who sets the tone for the first half of this family returning to its rotten roots tale of demonic something or other (literally since I could never quite figure out what the spell being cast is to accomplish) and he does an absolutely outstanding job of acting. The great Italian actor Giancarlo Giannini plays the Grandfather to great effect and the parents (Lena Olin and Iain Glen) give concise acting lessons in cause and effect of evil's influence along with Fele Martinez as Anna's boyfriend and Fermi Reixach as the Architect. Wonderfully filmed and truly frightening at times (especially when the children are just standing around in the darkness)still it loses it's focus at the end and takes the easy way out. Up til then it's modern Gothic at its best.

Gore is mostly absent from these horror films (well perhaps a teeny tiny bit in Phantoms and quite a bit in Venom now that I think about it) and Darkness and Phantoms rely more on monsters and mayhem for their thrills. So as I said...none of these movies is a 'B' film and only fall a hair short of being outstanding 'A' horror films. The blu-ray transfers are clean and crisp in picture and audio (albiet no frills included) and at this price for all three that's a bargain even the Devil couldn't pass up!

I have to admit I got the dvd version of Venom and Darkness on some movie horror collections... and the Blu Ray versions are way better to behold. Making this a darn good buy since it has 3 of them on it. Worth getting for the price.

Buy Phantoms / Darkness / Venom (2012) Now

I mainly ordered this blu-ray for the movie, "Phantoms", an excellent movie based on a novel by Dean Koontz, which was the book that got me hooked on the author. "Venom" was also very good, but "Darkness" was not quite as good as I expected, though not bad enough to make me wish I had not bought the blu-ray. I would have paid this price for just "Phantoms", but was lucky enough to get a total of 3 movies for the price of one.

I'd recommend this one to anyone who likes Dean Koontz, even if you don't care of the other two, this one's definitely worth the price.

Read Best Reviews of Phantoms / Darkness / Venom (2012) Here

No real mystery here a bang for your buck and a couple of hours of distartion. Phantoms as a bit more on edge with a sinister plot with the typical government "I'm here to help" but a great late evening or rainy day movie set.

Want Phantoms / Darkness / Venom (2012) Discount?

Awesome movie finally in HD. Great sci fi / horror movie followed by an awesome cast defiantly a must see movie.

Save 60% Off