BATMAN RETURNS (2001)

Batman Returns is very much a Tim Burton film. It is a stranger and darker film than Batman, netherless it is a striking film on several levels.

Michael Keaton returns as the stoic and haunted Dark Knight. Danny DeVito is Oswald Cobblepot aka The Penguin. In the comic book he's a short rotund man who has an affinity for birds and umbrellas. The character is reinvented here. Born grotesquely disfigured, as an infant, he's cast into the river where he's brought up in a criminal circus gang that lives underground in an abandoned Zoo. Michelle Pfeffer is Selina Kyle aka Catwoman, a beautiful yet mousy secretary who's been pushed too far (of a window) and is out for some serious payback.

These three disturbed characters make this Batman film more adult oriented than the first one. DeVito's Penguin is a tragic figure but is very evil and is looking to strike back at Gotham City any way he can. The grotesque make-up is impressive and DeVito delivers a powerful performance. Michelle Pfeffer is haunting as the mousy secretary who is pushed over the edge and finds herself battling with her new alter ego Catwoman. A nice chemistry is struck between Keaton & Pfeffer as the conflicted couple. Christopher Walken is on hand as the manipulative and power hungry businessman Max Shreck. Michael Gough returns as Alfred the butler as well.

The stunning production design by Bo Welch extends the look from the previous film and Danny Elfman's score is a bit more subdued but retains the perfect atmosphere. The story is solid but the plotline regarding the circus gang is thin.

Batman Returns isn't a film for small kids either. Between the overall look of the characters and some racy dialogue, this is a Batman film for more of a mature audience. If you're a fan of the first film, you'll enjoy this Batman film that has a few new twists to it.

The Dark Knight Bruce Wayne/Batman makes a roaring return in the second outing in the legendary Batman trilogy in a darker & much colder undertone with the mysterious hero now up against two menacing villains. One is a corrupt company CEO named Max Schrek (Christopher Walken) and the other is a deformed murderer named Oswald Cobblepot aka Penguin. A third rival character in this movie is difficult to categorize as a villain or a hero. That is the twisted seductive Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer). Although I don't categorize her as a dangerous murderess, it's very difficult to really say if she's truly a villainess but it's easy to say that she isn't exactly the light at the end of the tunnel in terms of heroism but on the other hand, she's an extremely complex character whose eccentric personality renders one unable to help but really pay a lot of attention to her.

The movie begins in the cold snowy & remote stretches of a haunted mansion somewhere I'm guessing in upper New York state where a couple are the parents of a young but very odd child. The oddness of the child becomes highly evident after he pulls a cat into his cage and presumably killing it. Unable to handle the psychological burden of raising him, the Cobblepots toss him in his crib into the river and flee into the unknown. Many years later on, Cobblepot also known as the Penguin, runs in the election for the next mayor of Gotham City. The citizens though are unaware that he's actually plotting against the population and is in fact plotting to take over the city and kidnap the city's children. Meanwhile, The Penguin attracts the attention of a corrupt corporate CEO named Max Schrek (Christopher Walken), who wants to team up with him against `both' Bruce Wayne, and Batman, considering how much "they" oppose his plans for a toxic waste power plant. Schrek on the other hand also has to deal with a more vicious foe, and that is Catwoman, formerly Selina Kyle, a former employee who he had abused and tried to kill, and she is now out for revenge against him and also for competition against Batman. Now, with three major foes butting heads against him, Batman now has a dauntingly dangerous mission to stop the three from causing havoc and destruction across Gotham City and protect the citizens.

All of the cast in this movie are superb beyond any words that I can muster up. Michael Keaton IS Bruce Wayne/Batman. Neither George Clooney, nor Val Kilmer (No offense to them. They did well too) could compete against Keaton in the role as the dark Knight Batman. Danny DeVito brings a truly chilling acting role that is worthy of remembrance with the deformed Penguin. Michelle Pfeiffer brings the odd and often extremely complex character Catwoman to life. Christopher Walken is totally awesome playing the corrupt CEO of the Schrek Corporation. Michael Gough is absolutely brilliant as Bruce Wayne's/Batman's caretaker and aide, Alfred and is the only one who I felt kept all of the talent of his acting intact throughout the entire movie series. Combine the brilliant cast with a dark and truly foreboding atmosphere, and you have what I considered Tim Burton's crowning achievement at this point in his career (Before he outdid himself with "The Nightmare Before Christmas")

I can easily remember how this movie seemed to shape this period in my life around late 1992 and early 1993 and now in its 11th year of existence, "Batman Returns" has lost none of it's power and continues to be a thought-provoking masterpiece. Tim Burton did stunningly well on the first Batman movie from 1989, but he blew me away with "Batman Returns". Although it may sound like "Returns" is better than the first one, it's actually a tight toss-up between the two movies. The first one has a more fun atmosphere combined with a dramatic overtone to it. The second one, has a much darker, much colder, and more bleak atmosphere. The two perfectly complement each other so well that one's movie collection would be incomplete without them. Although I thought "Batman Forever" was a great follow-up, the more flashy direction that the movie saga went into would sadly go in a nosedive, sacrificing the drama, thoughtful plot, and intelligent dialogue, for excessive hodgepodges of colors and excessive flamboyance, ultimately killing the movie series with the campy, god-awful P.O.S. that was "Batman And Robin". Even to this day, I still cannot believe that the Batman series went from the dark, brooding, drama of "Batman" and "Batman Returns", and even the fun of "Batman Forever", down to just lowlife cinematic sewage that was "Batman & Robin". I just hope that Batman will recover soon and someday in the future, bring back the dark undertones that defined this incredible movie. Perhaps it was the stupidity of the entertainment industry at the time that they were disturbed at the `failure' of "Batman Returns" with "only" 280M dollars at the box office. I mean come on! 280M is HUGE! That's far fram a failure. It was when they turned Gotham City into a giant circus that caused the franchise to fail later on. It might have also been the stupidity of a large part of the audience that caused the franchise to die off later on after this movie. Of course for me, I was loving this movie when I was just ten years old when it came out, and loved far more than I `enjoyed' "Batman & Robin" when I was 14 when that came out. Even with all this I'm writing with this review, there's so much more from this movie that I can be able to explain with this review. The series would take a nosedive into campy oblivion later on in time but for me, give me the dark, dramatic, thought-provoking, and depth of "Batman Returns" anytime over the MGM grand flashy colors of "Batman & Robin".

Buy BATMAN RETURNS (2001) Now

Though not recommended for viewing by children under 10, "Batman Returns" is a definite improvement over the 1989 blockbuster. It's obvious that director Tim Burton had more creative freedom this time around. The result is a genuine vision behind the camera rather than filmmaking-by-committee. Admittedly, the 1992 sequel is a dark, strikingly mature fantasy-adventure with three iconic psychopaths Batman, Catwoman and the Penguin sharing screen time. However, it is the disturbing characterizations that make "Batman Returns" a standout among mainstream comic-book adaptations. The production design and special effects should have garnered Oscars, while the performances of Michael Keaton, Michelle Pfeiffer, Danny DeVito and Christopher Walken mesh perfectly with the expressionist surroundings. One wishes that Burton and Keaton had reunited for a third Dark Knight saga. Instead, Warner Bros. handed over the reins to schlockmeister Joel Schumacher, who drove the series into the ground with "Batman Forever" (1995) and "Batman and Robin" (1997). No wonder Keaton hung up his cowl.

Read Best Reviews of BATMAN RETURNS (2001) Here

Oh, this movie is so sad! It really is! This is a fantastic movie simply because it isn't afraid to be all of the other things that the original "Batman" was, also: Funny, exciting, thrilling, haunting, dark, romantic, and endlessly clever. It also features three terrific performances from the three leads; Michael Keaton as the Dark Knight (Bruce Wayne), Michelle Pfeiffer looking hot as ever as the sleek and smooth Catwoman (Selena Kyle), and Danny Devito as the diabolically demonic Penguin (Oswald Cobblepot). And we can never forget Christopher Walken, playing Max Schreck (yeah, just like the guy who played Nosferatu), who is quite the fiend.

The film opens with a rather heartbreaking scene that sets the tone for the entire movie, which takes the lightheartedness of the Joker character in the original and tosses it right out the window. Instead, we have the emotionally scarred darkness of the Penguin, who was literally sent up the river like Baby Moses in a covered wicker baby basket on Christmas Eve simply because he wasn't a normal child born with five fingers instead of the shiny flippers he has extending from his wrists. Despite his ghastly, unsightly appearence and mangled people skills, we sympathize with the Penguin's plight simply because we would never wish what happened to him on our worst enemy. Sure, being sent up the river worked out fine for Moses, but Penguin is no Moses, and he is not on a mission from God. He's on a mission for a simple reason: Revenge. Revenge of biblical proportions by kidnapping every first born child in Gotham City, in honor of his own castaway status on Christmas Eve, more than 30 years prior. Meanwhile, we have the newly resurrected-from-cat-saliva Selena Kyle, who decides to try on a skintight vinyl suit with a whip draped around her feminine feline torso, desperate to avenge her "death" at the hands of her boss, Schreck. And amongst it all, Bruce Wayne is in love with Selena Kyle and trying to shut down the blatantly illegal operations of Schreck, trying to connect him to the Penguin, who he theorizes runs the Red Triangle Gang that terrorizes the streets. His hands are quite full as Batman, too: He is trying to stop Catwoman, is unaware of Selena's murder at the hands of Schreck, he knows that Penguin is up to something but can't prove it, and he is being framed. It's an amazingly confusing plot to explain, but it all works seamlessly through the carefully constructed pace of the film, for which I credit Tim Burton, whose direction is flawless, as usual. He keeps the characters interesting while making sure the background is just as visually stunning as Pfeiffer in that catsuit.

"Batman Returns" may take a few viewings to totally appreciate it, but you're astounded a little more each time. It's one of the best comic book movies ever made.

Want BATMAN RETURNS (2001) Discount?

(4.5/5 stars) In some ways this movie is more entertaining than the first "Batman" from 1989, though the extent of your admiration might depend on how well Tim Burton's style suits you. For me, this one is the best of the 80's-90's Batman movies. This time, the Caped Crusader is up against evil magnate Max Shreck (the always peculiar Christopher Walken), the Penguin (Danny DeVito) and Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer). Michael Keaton reprises the role of Bruce Wayne / Batman, looking a little less fit than the first time around. Even though I am not a fan of Michelle Pfeiffer, I must admit she turns in a very good performance as Selina Kyle / Catwoman. It helps that time is spent developing her character, though she is believable as the meek, passive secretary turned confident, vengeful vigilante. The Christmas setting adds a nice touch to the film's atmosphere, with the snow providing a false veneer of tranquility and peace. There are many memorable scenes in the film, though my favorite is the scene with Bruce Wayne and Selina Kyle dancing, not aware at first of each other's identity. That scene is very well done and confirmed for me that Pfeiffer was the correct choice for that role. Gone from the first movie are the poorly chosen Prince songs and the annoyingly comical Robert Wuhl, though remaining are the impressive visuals, exciting action, cool gadgets and decent score. The only questionable element for me was the climax at the ending, which features penguins with missiles strapped to their backs. The scene takes too long to develop and doesn't pay off, even though I appreciate the truly bizarre nature of the concept. The final scene with Bruce Wayne in his car is a close second place for best scene in the movie. Great stuff.

Frida (2002)

FRIDA, with Salma Hayek in the title role, is a vibrant celebration of the life of Mexican artist Frida Kahlo (1907-1954), and an unsparing look at her tumultuous, passionate marriage to the Mexican muralist Diego Rivera (Alfred Molina). Another major thread is the involvement of both with the Communist Party. In the latter half of the film, Geoffrey Rush makes an appearance as the exiled Leon Trotsky running from Stalin's death squads.

Hayek's performance is the finest I've seen by an actress so far in 2002. An Oscar nomination is surely in the cards. Though I understand that FRIDA uncovers nothing new about the life of Kahlo not already known by devotees of her work, the film was a total revelation for me who knew nothing about the artist. And Costuming and Make-up built on Hayek's natural appearance to create the spitting image of the real Frida (whose photo I've just seen on the Web).

Visually, the film is a riot of color. I especially liked those scenes where the viewers' eyes are drawn to a brightly costumed Frida set against surroundings colored with contrasting sepia and/or pastel tones.

My only picky-picky complaint about FRIDA is its treatment of Kahlo's physical condition after the horrific 1925 bus accident that left her with multiple fractures of her pelvis, spine, ribs and leg, and which necessitated over 30 follow-up operations in her lifetime. The visual force of her paintings is generated both by her complex emotional life as well as the terrible physical pain she constantly suffered. Yet in the film, between that time she learns to walk again without a crutch and much later when she climbs an Inca pyramid with Trotsky, there's absolutely no hint in Hayek's portrayal that the artist was in any way physically debilitated beyond an inability to bear children. Where was the stiffness of movement, or the inevitable grimaces of pain? At one point, Kahlo is shown dancing with the fluidity of perfect health. As one afflicted with yet only mild arthritis in the lower back, I found this aspect of Salma's characterization perhaps unreal. However, this is a trivial hiccup in an otherwise superb performance.

I have seen Frida five times at the cinemas, and got the DVD as a gift. I must say that this is by far the most visually stunning, inspirational, and emotionally impacting film I have ever seen. Before this movie came out, I went the Vancouver Art Gallery to see some of Frida Kahlo's paintings and saw the documentary of her life. I was very fascinated by several of paintings, but I didn't get to see The Two Fridas or the paintinngs with the monkeys. I was moved to tears by the documentary of her life, and I instantly became a fan. I then bought the novel based on her life, and read it before the movie came out. I was dying to see the movie.

This beautiful biopic is directed by the Julie Taymor, whose film Titus was an equally visual feast. It's a dream come true for the Oscar nominated Salma Hayek, who had spent more that seven years trying to get this movie made. It was a good thing that Madonna and Jennifer Lopez didn't get to do it, because they wouldn't be suitable to play Frida. Salma Hayek gave the performance of her career, and she actually hadn't done anything great before this movie, except for In The Times Of The Butterflies, which also costarred Mia Maestro who played her sister in both movies. Even though Salma lost the award to the overrated Nicole Kidman(The Hours), Frida still won two out of the six nominations. The music composed by Elliot Goldenthal trully capture the spirit of Frida and Mexico. Some of the songs are sung by Lila Downs, and Chavela Vargas. Burn It Blue heard at the end of the film is so beatiful. I even bought the soundtrack. Salma Hayek had more than fifty costumes here, designed by Julie Weiss on a shoestring budget. She made Hayek looked stunningly beautiful and striking, especially the photo shoot for the Paris Vogue cover, and the scene when she steps into her painting The Two Fridas.

This movie chronicles the life and times of Frida and Diego Rivera(played by the underrated Alfred Molina), a womanizing fellow artist, mentor, and husband. Frida had endured a great deal of physical, emotional, and spiritual pain, and she survived, because she was strong and self-absorbing, and she transcend her life's most unforgetable moments onto the cavas in the form of surrealism that's autobiographical. From the bus accident that left her crippled for life to her stormy marriage to Rivera, to miscarriage, to international stardom, to heartaches of failed marriage and distant from her parents, to betrayed by her sister....and then there's the self-destructive behaviours(alcohol addiction and promiscuous sex with men and women). Life without Diego was meaningless to her at times. She intensionally had an affair with Leon Trotsky(a Russian Communist in exile played Geoffrey Rush) to provoke or repay Diego for his infidelity. She still loved him even when they were separated for a period of time, leaving her financially and physically devastated, that's when she painted her best work including The Two Fridas, which was one of the high points in the film. The reconcilation and remarriage of Frida and Diego was a heartfelt experience.

The supporting cast are all superb. Alfred Molina was overlooked by the Oscar, he should've been nominated for best supporting actor, even though he doesn't look a whole lot like the actual Diego Rivera. I thought Valeria Golino was very good too. She played Diego's ex-wife, and she stole scene in this movie. Mia Maestro was great as Christina Kahlo, she was seduced by Diego to bed when she posed for his paintings. The affair broke Frida's heart. I also enjoyed Patricia Reyes Spindola's portrayal of Mrs. Kahlo. She was always negative about the choices Frida made in love and career. As for the big-star cameros which including Antonio Banderas(David Siqueiros), Ashley Judd(Tina Modotti), and Salma's ex-boyfriend Edward Norton(Nelson Rockefeller) who co-wrote the screenplay, I loved Judd's performance the most. Her sexy "lesbian" dance number with Salma Hayek was quite a treat.

Salma Hayek gave a mesmerizing and multi-layered performance, and she was in every scene. She trully transformed herself in all aspects of character and showed the world that she's not just a bombshell, but a great actress to be taken seriously. I cried during several scenes including the scene when she got dumped by her first boyfriend(Alejandro/Diego Luna). I was also moved a great deal by the miscarriage, and the scene when she was devastated and started to cut her hair and got very drunk. The most powerful scene was when she was drinking and crying while listening to an old lady(Chavela Vargas) sang a ballad to her, and she went home and stepped into her painting(The Two Fridas).The music, cinematography, acting, art direction, editing, and direction all worked together to achieve a very memorable experience. The special features has some very good materials included, and I really enjoyed the interviews on Julie Taymor, Salma Hayek, and the singers and composers.

I loved this movie and worship Frida. I admired her life's work as an artist, and her endurance of pain and struggles, and ultimately her relentless passion for love and creativity. I also collected the soundtrack, the Frida screenplay with photos of many of the scenes from the film, the postcard book, and a wall fabric drape painted with Frida and the Monkeys.

This movie is definitely a must-see for artist, art lover, fashion lover, music and cultural fans, and of course all Salma Hayek fans too!

Buy Frida (2002) Now

This is the best artist biopic I have seen, and it's a remarkable achievement for Salma Hayek, and director Julie Taymor.

Based ( with certain fictionalizations) on the excellent Hayden Herrera biography, the re-creation of Mexico in the first half of the 20th century is a marvel.

The cast is wonderful. Hayek is perfect as the petite Frida, and Alfred Molina so believable as Rivera. There are small parts filled in by Edward Norton, Ashley Judd, and Antonio Banderas, and with Geoffrey Rush as Trotsky.

I especially like the acclaimed Welsh actor, Roger Rees, as Guillermo, Frida's father, and beautiful Valeria Golino, as Rivera's ex-wife.

The soundtrack by Elliot Goldenthal (Taymor's husband) is terrific, full of traditional Mexican songs that add so much to this film.

The magnificent Lila Downs sings several songs (she is briefly seen in 3 of them), and among them is a signature song for her, "La Llorona"...a second version of this song is sung by the legendary Costa Rican star of years gone by, Chavela Vargas, and another treat is the voice of Caetano Veloso in the final end title song.

Perhaps my favorite part of this film are the "living paintings". Innovative and spectacular, I think Frida would have loved this added dimension to her work. The film ends with the final words from her diary: "I hope the exit is joyful--and I hope never to come back--Frida".

Read Best Reviews of Frida (2002) Here

Wow art within art within art a grand love story, a political commentary, a love letter to an artist, and homage to her vision Julie Taymor and Selma Hayek have done Frida proud in this film. Be sure and get the book about the making of the movie [aisn: 1557045402] to accompany the DVD.

The cinematography is stunning. The performances are flawless. The way the live action is interwoven with adaptations of Kahlo's paintings is inspired. If you've ever been to Mexico, this will have you aching to go back you can taste the fruit and feel the sun and the colors. I wish I could give it more than 5 stars this is the one to get for any lover of art, woman of vision, or for a person who struggles to find meaning in pain or disability.

Want Frida (2002) Discount?

Before watching this movie I had no idea who Frida was. I knew that the film was directed by Julie Taymor (Titus), which meant that it would have a striking visual style. I knew that the movie starred Salma Hayek and that she had wanted to play this role for years. I knew that it had been nominated for 6 Academy Awards including a Best Actress nomination for Hayek. But I did not know anything about the subject of the film.

Frida is a biopic focusing on the life of Mexican artist Frida Kahlo (Salma Hayek). As much as the movie focuses on the life of Frida, it seemed that the main thrust of picture was on Frida's relationship with her husband, painter Diego Rivera (Alfred Molina). The film does cover Frida's life from her childhood right up to her death. We begin the movie when Frida is a young woman aspiring to be a painter. Her father is highly supportive of her dreams. However, she is riding on a trolley one day when it gets into an accident. She has to be in a body cast for some time and it was in doubt whether she would ever walk again. She recovers, but she lives a life of pain. Frida meets the womanizing painter, Diego Rivera and they get married. This does not mean that he changes his ways and naturally this causes problems in their marriage. They remain committed to each other even when they are each sleeping with other people. Over the course of the movie we see Frida painting, but it seems that Frida the artist gets pushed to the side and we see Frida the woman/wife. I don't know enough about Frida Kahlo to know if this is a flaw in the movie or not, but it is just the way the movie is.

The acting in this movie is superb. Nothing feels wrong or forced. But, surpassing even the excellent acting is the visual presentation of Frida. Her artwork appears throughout the movie, but not simply as paintings hanging on the wall. Kahlo's artwork appears first as a painting, but that painting transforms into the scene itself. This also works the opposite way in that a scene will end up as a painting and the transitions between the two are so smooth it is very impressive.

I was very impressed with Frida. I didn't care for Julie Taymos's other film (Titus), so I didn't know what to expect. Everyone (Hayek, Taymor) exceeded my expectations for the movie. This was a very good movie.

Save 25% Off

West Side Story: 50th Anniversary Edition Box Set (1961)

Wow. What a great DVD.

The one hour documentary featuring interviews with some of the cast, Robert Wise, Harold Prince, Sondheim, and some key crew members is completely engrossing. Home movie footage showing the filming of the movie is included. Examples of the techniques that the movie makers used to film a musical are fascinating. I was amazed that the knife scene, for example, is COMPLETELY counted out and the actor/dancers' movements were choreographed down to the second (breath, two, three, four; stab, two three; look, two, three, four). Incredible! Rita Morena is particularly informative regarding the dubbing of her song "A Boy Like That". The Robbins/Wise codirecting of the film is explained. And some of Natalie Wood's original vocals are included. The documentary is invaluable for fans of the film.

As for the film itself, it looks and sounds incredible on my widescreen HDTV. The anamorphic transfer is very good.

The DVD is packaged very well. The book which accompanies the set is very cool, with a great introduction by screenwriter Ernest Lehman (who is one of my movie heros).

I'm very impressed with this special edition of WEST SIDE STORY. The film is a classic, and deserves such treatment.

"West Side Story" is proof that the sum of its parts can not only be greater than the whole, but possibly be the greatest!

Little known writer in Elizabethian England pens a drama about two star-crossed lovers. Flash ahead to the turbulent streets of New York in the late 1950s and early 60s. Turn feuding families to rival gangs. Add music, choreography, make it vital. Then find a brilliant director who knows what to show, and watch as it takes home every Oscar it can.

We know the story of this film but what's important for you to know about here are the extras you get in this package that make it worth your while: The first disc is the film, preserved perfectly. And the second disc has your special features.

First, you get a great documentary on the making of the film. Titled "West Side Memories," Principals like Sondheim, Moreno, Chakiris, Beymer and more sit before the cameras and explain the process of preparing and executing what could be the finest example of the Hollywood Musical, ever. It's a piece that's could have been a stand alone DVD, it's so rich with insights.

You also get an interesting "Storyboard to Film" montage, where you see the artist's renderings of the scenes, and how those shots looked when they appeared in the film. You get to study these storyboards more carefully in several galleries on the disc. Lots of other goodies, like the theatrical trailers and photos galore... everything from Jerome Robbins's cattle call for dancers to location shots during production!

And if that wasn't enough, there's a massive book that comes with the set, that includes the complete script of the film, the original lobby brouchure that theater patrons who attended the film received, which has more photos and info, and the newspaper clippings lauding the film as it took its place in movie musical legend.

It's simply a valentine to a remarkable film, and a fantastic package, all the way around.

Highly recommended.

Buy West Side Story: 50th Anniversary Edition Box Set (1961) Now

When "West Side Story" hit the Broadway stage it must have shocked theater critics. A balletic musical about street gangs and murder, with such an emotional swell built in, that even the most hardened cynics must have left the show dewey-eyed and humming the Leonard Berstein score. The film created nothing less than an international craze and garnered an unprecidented 10 Oscars the most of any musical.

PLOT: In a nut shell, this is Romeo and Juliet in the ghetto. Natilie Wood (dubbed by Marni Nixon) is Maria; poor, Puertorican and in love with Richard Beymer (Tony). But her brother, Bernardo (George Chakaris) and his girlfriend, Anita (Rita Moreno) don't approve. If you know your Shakespeare, you know how this one ends. The difference here are the songs, so electric and outstanding that they easily steal the show. Try listening to "America" or "I Feel Pretty" without tapping your toes or "One Hand, One Heart" without getting goose-bumps. It's impossible.

MGM gives us some nice packaging and some extras but let's state the obvious first: this transfer is identical to the one previously issued on DVD. Having said that, the transfer is quite good, with a rich bold color scheme and fair solid blacks. But there are cases where edge enhancement is present and quite obtrusive. There's also a lot of pixelization in the backgrounds.

Certain scenes appear slightly out of focus, while others are so sharp that even with your televsion sharpness turned to zero, the image is rather hard to look at on the screen.

The soundtrack is very strident. Songs are presented at an explosive listening level that really rocks the house. But other bits of dialogue are soft or muffled. Some of the songs have a grating high pitch to them that really strains the ear. A moderate listening level is recommended to fully appreciate this audio.

Now for the extras for starters we get a very handsome book that contains the entire script as well as personal reflections from the producers and cast and newspaper clippings of the initial reviews. The print quality of the book is okay, but the photo image quality herein is simply unacceptable, with smeared images of original stills and others that have faded colors.

Since this is a two-disc set, the movie is on disc one, with the option to listen and view with or without the intermission music a very nice touch. Disc 2 contains a documentary "West Side Memories" that is somewhat disappointing in that not all the cast members have their say.

Missing from the proceedings are George Chakaris (Bernardo) who is still alive and should have been included. Yes, Natalie Wood is no longer with us but I find it hard to believe that she never gave any sound bytes to the press ever, with regard to her participation on the film. Marni Nixon, who dubbed for Natalie is also not present to lend her expertise and talk about the art of dubbing, which she did plenty of during Hollywood's golden age. There's also no Ernest Lehman odd, considering how active he's been on other special edition DVD's.

This documentary is self-congratulatory and pretty much plays it safe. The premiere and the film's enduring popularity are glossed over.

On disc 2 we get the isolated intermission music presented a second time for what reason, I'm not sure presumably to fill disc space. There's also a montage of stills set to music and no less than five theatrical trailers all of them looking pretty dull and worn out. Lastly, we get a shameless add from MGM, promoting its other DVD releases. That's pretty much it. A real waste of a second disc if you ask me. Yes, the documentary is fairly comprehensive, but it could have fit on side two of a flipper disc. Yes, the book is a nice companion piece but it's not printed with high quality in mind. The handsome packaging on the exterior hints to more hidden treasures than are actually found inside.

BOTTOM LINE: A genuine work of art. The transfer is nice, just not pristine. The extras are okay, but don't really live up to the excitement one has before taking the plastic wrapper off.

Read Best Reviews of West Side Story: 50th Anniversary Edition Box Set (1961) Here

There are known issues on this blu ray release. The studio says it will fix the problems ONLY in future manufacturing. Don't buy this one right away. It's a great film and it's opening moments were accidentally mutilated by the blu ray mfr. I am surprised a mass distributor like Amazon is moving forward and shipping this bad pressing.

Want West Side Story: 50th Anniversary Edition Box Set (1961) Discount?

West Side Story

Score: 86/100

In 1961, West Side Story, this endearing classic, garnered a total of ten academy awards, which is one of the most plausible amounts ever. The film is now terribly ignored by audiences, but for me, West Side Story set a standard that remains, most likely, unsurpassed in movie musicals. It's that good.

West Side Story is a musical adaptation of Romeo and Juliet set in New York City, where rival street gangs the American Jets and the Puerto Rican Sharks battle for territory and respect. Is the love affair between former Jets leader Tony (Richard Beymer), and Maria (Natalie Wood), sister to Sharks' leader Bernardo, doomed to failure? Well, you're doomed until you find out, so grab this movie as soon as you.

West Side Story is a truly electrifying piece of cinema, it sets ageless tragedy on the slums of New York in the 1950's and does it maturely and with stunning style. The violence and some unnecessary language may slightly falter it, but Leonard Bernstein and Stephen Sondheim's unforgettable score, which includes such famous songs as Maria, America and Tonight, and Jerome Robbins' exuberant chereography makes up for whatever may put the film down. Performances are no problem for these now-crinkly actors; Natalie Wood captures Maria with such heartbreaking richness that makes her performance ignored beauty, while Richard Beymer is excellently controlled in his performance as the confused but honest Tony. Oscar-winners Rita Moreno and George Chakiris both make sure this film is satisfying in supporting performances as well.

West Side Story is a lovely film that remains a feast for the eye, the ear and, ultimately, the heart.

Save 45% Off

Kick-Ass Blu-ray/DVD Combo Pack w/ Digital Copy (Bilingual) (2010)

What a wacky movie this is. When I first saw the previews, I thought this Kick-Ass was going to be aimed at kids and teens. Boy was I way off, because it earns it's R rating many times over. I really had no intention of seeing this film until I saw the very positive reviews flowing in from the critics. Not that I always agree with them, but in this case I would like to thank them for getting my butt down to the local theater today.

Parts of the movie reminded me of Watchmen. You have everyday people who are sick of bad things happening to good people, decide to put on costumes, have funny hero names, and then beat and cut apart the bad guys in a not so nice way. I actually thought it was rather tame in the gore department, compared to what I read about beforehand, but the violence and language is way too strong for kids.

The acting is good from everyone. I liked newcomer Aaron Johnson as Kick-Ass himself. Nicolas Cage turns in one of his better performaces in a long time, though I think he was great in an over-the-top kind of way in The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans. Christopher Mintz-Plasse is still doing his McLovin thing in every movie since Superbad, but it worked again. Mark Strong is kind of one note as the villain, like in Sherlock Holmes, but I think he's a little better in this role. The real star of the show is little 11-year-old, Chloe Moretz, as Hit-Girl. She is clearly the most memorable thing in a movie with a bunch of stuff worth remembering. As the daughter of Cage's Big Daddy hero, she spews out bad language, slices and shoots baddies by the dozens, and loves her daddy. I want one of my own.

Kick-Ass is serious in tone most of the time, but there are some killer comedy bits and lines that had the whole theater erupting with laughter. The music is well placed in key scenes and the director/writer, Matthew Vaughn, did a fine job in creating a comic book film that should please both fans and non-fans of the genre alike.

Even though it looks like Kick-Ass will come in #1 this weekend, it still feels more like a cult film to me. I can easily see this movie being talked about decades from now, much like Army of Darkness, but without the campiness factor. What a breath of fresh air in a genre that has just as many misses as it does hits.

Just like the rest of you, I went into the theater knowing not a whole lot about this movie. I thought it would be lame, cheesy, corny, *insert adjective here*. But, I was DEAD wrong to say the least. Kick-Ass combines action, comedy, and emotion, all at the right times. The movie flows well mainly because the cast jives so well together. I have yet to come out of a movie theater so pumped and wanting more than after I came out of Kick-ass

Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass)I didn't realize he was a British actor until I heard a voice clip from an interview. You sure can't tell from the movie. He plays a great nerdy type kid. But what separates him from actors like Michael Cera is that he actually grew some balls and decided to stand up to crime. He does a great job as the lead actor in the first half of the movie, but quickly gets overshadowed by young dynamo, Chloe Moretz

Nicholas Cage (Big Daddy)In my eyes, he redeemed himself for movies like Ghost Rider and Knowing. He was amazing. His character was totally believable and I sure enjoyed his Adam West mannerisms. He also did his fair share of ass kicking. His relationship with his daughter, Hit-Girl, brought hilarity and the emotion that I mentioned earlier to this movie.

Lyndsey Fonseca (Katie Deauxma)Hadn't seen her in a movie before. She is very beautiful and will be looking forward to seeing her in the sequel.

Chris Mintz-Plasse (Red Mist)As much as I don't want to say it, Chris is out growing his McLovin' character. He, like Kick-Ass, plays a slightly awkward superhero with no powers. He fills his part well and has plenty of laugh out loud lines.

And, the best for last:

Chloe Moretz (Hit-Girl)I honestly don't even know where to start with this girl. I would say she gives the performance of her life, but she was only 11 at the time of filming. She underwent 6 months of combat, acrobatic, and weapons training for her role as Hit-Girl in this movie. It paid off big time. Chloe does all her own stunts (minus 2) in the movie, which is insane. She is foul mouthed and bloodthirsty, but also has her kid moments. I don't understand the controversy with her character. She is very mature and thus should be able to do more mature roles. If you're not planning on seeing this movie, rethink, mainly because of this girl right here. She is incredible and will no doubt be the new Angelina Jolie when her time comes.

Overall, great movie. Great cast, great fight choreography, great soundtrack, and a great setup for a sequel! (Which has been announced)

See this movie, and then tell all your friends! It's totally worth the 2 hours of your time.

Buy Kick-Ass Blu-ray/DVD Combo Pack w/ Digital Copy (Bilingual) (2010) Now

The film is based on a comic book by the same name. The rights to the story were sold before the book was even published (it debuted only eight weeks before the film):

A teenage boy decides to take a stand for justice. He dons a green scuba costume and names himself Kick-Ass. However, not having any actual superpowers, this hero's good intentions quickly land him in an ICU. Eventually though, Kick-Ass crosses paths with a couple of far more effective (a.k.a. deadly) heroes: Big Daddy, a former cop falsely convicted of drug trafficking, and Hit-Girl, his eleven year old daughter. Big Daddy has spent the past six years training his little girl in all forms of mortal combat, hoping she would help him revenge her mother's death and her father's fall from grace, orchestrated by a local Mafia Boss. Enter blood, gore, and plenty of belly laughs...

Let me get straight to the point: yes, the film was funny and highly entertaining. However, initially I felt uneasy laughing at an eleven year old girl determinedly slaughtering a roomful of men, even if they were rotten to the core and disserving of every bullet and of every knife wound. But then, I remembered what I was like at that age: it was the early 80's. My favourite toys were a silver colt revolver and a sword. Depending on my mood, I would pretend to be a cowboy taking on a bunch of wild Indians, or a Jedi disarming (literally) Darth Vader and his evil cohorts. So, if any of you want to believe that little girls' minds are all about sugar and spice, well... good luck with that (by the way, I managed to grow into adulthood WITHOUT slipping into drugs and/or alcohol, and no, I was not a teenage mother). And so, that quick recollection gave me the permission to look at the film as an absurd exercise in fantasy and allowed me to enjoy every minute of it. Yes, the film was well written, directed and edited, but the special mention must go to the actress who portrayed Hit-Girl. Chloe Moretz was indeed eleven at the time of filming, but had the presence of a seasoned performer. I am looking forward to watching her future projects. There is already talk of a sequel. I'd pay to see it!

Laugh and enjoy!

Read Best Reviews of Kick-Ass Blu-ray/DVD Combo Pack w/ Digital Copy (Bilingual) (2010) Here

To anyone who hasn't seen the movie but is considering it, you should realize up front that this movie is NOT for the kiddies, as evidenced by the "R" rating. That said, most of the bad reviews here seem to be from either people who had problems with the disc itself (i.e. people who don't understand the concept of a review), or people who let their kids watch the movie. These people made a stupid decision involving the mental well-being of their children based on the fact that they've seen "R-Rated" movies in the past that they don't mind their kids watching. This is not one of those movies!

Ranting aside, this was a pretty awesome movie. If you like action movies, check it out. It's a little darker, a little more violent, and a lot more vulgar than you might expect, but that's part of the movie's brilliance. Hit Girl is one of the coolest characters to grace the big screen in years, the MistMobile is the hottest Mustang manufactured post-70's, and the narrative draws you right into a feeling of camaraderie with the characters almost immediately.

Check it out, this movie rocks!

Want Kick-Ass Blu-ray/DVD Combo Pack w/ Digital Copy (Bilingual) (2010) Discount?

First, let me say this movie isn't for the weak hearted. If you don't like violence, this movie isn't for you. I never read the comics or knew anything about it, so when I first watched the movie I was a bit surprised by the violence and blood in it. However, this movie is great from start to finish. Tons of actions mixed in with some laugh out loud moments makes this one of the best movies of 2010.

As many other reviewers discussed, Hit Girl is the obvious star of the movie as she steals every scene she is in. Chloe Moretz (Hit Girl) gives one of the best "child" performances you will ever see. All other actors/actresses hold their own in this movie, especially Nic Cage. I'm not a Nic Cage hater, but I never thought I would say he was absolutely brilliant in any movie. He plays the role of Big Daddy perfectly and shows emotions that you usually don't see from him in other movies.

Possible spoiler...

One scene that I have to talk about is the "unmasking" scene with Kick Ass. The direction, action and emotion of this scene is unreal. The Director nailed this moment in the movie with impressive visual camera work and non-stop action. Really impressive, and is something that you have to see.

Definitely recommend this and you don't have to be a comic book fan to enjoy it.

Dead Poets Society (1989)

"I learned this, at least, by my experiment; that if one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours." (Henry David Thoreau, "Walden.")

Hands up folks, how many of us discovered Thoreau after having watched this movie? *Really* discovered I mean, regardless whether you had known he'd existed before. How many believe they know what Thoreau was talking about in that passage about "sucking the marrow out of life" cited in the movie, even if you didn't spend the next 2+ years of your life living in a self-constructed cabin on a pond in the woods? How many bought a copy of Whitman's poems ... whatever collection? (And maybe even read more than "Oh Captain! My Captain!"?) How many went on to read Emerson? Frost? Or John Keats, on whose personality Robin Williams's John Keating is probably losely based? Judging by the vast majority of the reviews on this site alone, you just can't fail to notice that this movie has a powerful appeal like few others; "inspirational" is probably the most frequently used word in the opinions represented here. And justifiedly so, despite the fact that charismatic Neil Perry (Robert Sean Leonard), one of the movie's main characters, tragically falters in the pursuit of his dreams, in the wake of apparent triumph. Because although Neil's story is one of failure, ultimately this movie is a celebration of the triumph of free will, independent thinking and the growth of personality; embodied in its closing scene.

Of course, lofty goals such as these are not easily achieved. Todd Anderson (Ethan Hawke) in particular, the last scene's triumphant hero, is literally pushed to the edge of reason before he learns to overcome his inhibitions. And Thoreau said in "Walden:" "If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; That is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them." Anyone who takes this movie's message to heart (and Thoreau's, and Whitman's, and Emerson's, Frost's and Keats's) knows that success too easily won is often no success at all, and most of our truly important accomplishments are based on focus, tenacity and hard work as much as on anything else. And prudence, too ... dashing Charlie Dalton (Gale Hansen) pays a high price for his spur-of-the-moment challenges of authority; although of course you just gotta love him for refusing to sign Keating's indictment. "Carpe diem" live life to its fullest, but always know what you are doing, too.

You won't enjoy this movie if you are afraid of letting your mind and your feelings run free. Shot on the magnificent location of Delaware's St. Andrews Academy, "Dead Poets' Society" is visually stunning, particularly in its depiction of the amazingly beautiful scenery (where the progression of the seasons mirrors the progression of the movie's story line), and it is as emotionally engaging as it invites you to mentally reexamine your position in life. Robin Williams delivers another Academy Award-worthy performance (he was nominated but unfortunately didn't win). Of course, Robin Williams will to a certain extent always be Robin Williams ... "Aladdin's" Genie, "Good Morning Vietnam's" Adrian Cronauer and "Good Will Hunting's" Professor McGuire (the 1997 role which would finally earn him his long overdue Oscar) all shimmer through in his portrayal of John Keating; and if you've ever seen him give an interview you know that the man can go from hilarious and irreverent to deeply reflective in a split second even when it's not a movie camera that's rolling. Yet, the black sheep among Welton Academy's teachers assumes as distinct and memorable a personality as any other one of Williams's film characters.

Of its many Academy Award nominations (in addition to Robin Williams's nomination for best leading actor, the movie was also nominated in the best picture, best director [Peter Weir] and best original screenplay categories), "Dead Poets' Society" ultimately only won the Oscar for Tom Schulman's script. But more importantly, it has long since won it's viewers' lasting appreciation, and for a reason. As the Poet said: "Camerado! This is no book; Who touches this, touches a man" (Walt Whitman, "So Long!"), this is no movie; who watches this, watches himself!

Also recommended:

Good Will Hunting (Miramax Collector's Series)

A Midsummer Night's Dream (The New Folger Library Shakespeare)

Henry David Thoreau : Collected Essays and Poems (Library of America)

Whitman: Poetry and Prose (Library of America College Editions)

Robert Frost: Collected Poems, Prose, and Plays (Library of America)

John Keats: The Complete Poems (Penguin Classics)

Be careful about the label 'Special Edition' if you are still waiting, like me, for the fabulous Director's cut that was released on laser disk but not on DVD. It contains essential extra footage added by Peter Weir that fleshes out the motivations behind many of the characters and answers some questions that the theatrical cut raises. The Director's cut is 142 minutes so this DVD is just a re-release of the original theatrical version.

Buy Dead Poets Society (1989) Now

I just received the "Special Edition" and was disappointed. The reviewer who advised caution was correct-this is just the same version with a few "bonus" features. The "Deleted Scenes" or "Raw" footage contains only the couple of minutes of Keating meeting the boys at the cave after Neil's performance. The version shown on USA (I haven't seen the Laser Disk Director's Cut) containing the extra footage of Knox's dinner at Danbury's and meeting Ginny Danbury, the scene rehearsing near the lake, the boys being assigned their extracurricular activities are all missing. The original script called for Knox and Chris to kiss near the frozen waterfall after the Keating-led meeting. That's not here, either. Too bad those scenes really tie up the story much better.

Read Best Reviews of Dead Poets Society (1989) Here

No matter how many times I watch a particular movie, certain ones have a way of moving me. Dead Poets Society was one of them. It was the most influential film I had ever watched, and the only one that I could relate to directly and indirectly.

Robin Williams plays the English teacher, John Keating, who brings enthusiasm to the classroom of young scholars whose only sense of fun is spending time together in their study groups. But his method of teaching was rather unconventional. Keating did not conduct an in your face way of teaching, and nor did he spoon feed the boys in his class. Keating suggests to the students that in any formal environment, there is the strict expectation that one follows the straight and narrow, and free thinking is the antagonist where there should not exist any curves or turns. He simply opens the minds of the students who only thought that going to prep school was the easiest way to get to Harvard. And in essence, the main gist of the film has to do with, no matter what direction in life one takes, poetry is the path to expression.

This movie was high with emotions and of course relationships. I particularly thought Ethan Hawke's performance was very convincing. If you've ever been a situation like Hawke's character, you would know what I mean; watch the movie and you'll understand. Also, the relationship between Robert Sean Leonard's character and his father was very realistic of a person who's dying to break free from parental influence.

As in any movie depicting honor and respect (School Ties and Scent of a Woman), someone suffers the consequences, but no one is left standing alone. In the case of Dead Poets Society, the circle of friendship that existed between the students became a hard lesson. The film makes a good of emphasizing that those whom you thought were invincible, turned out to be less of your expectations, and the movie was good at presenting that scenario.

If you like a movie that doesn't preach to you, but nourishes your mind with words to ponder, or words of encouragement, I recommend Dead Poets Society.

Want Dead Poets Society (1989) Discount?

I Love DPS. It's my favorite film, and, I think, one of the best made in my lifetime (30 years). During my own boarding school days, it was life-altering. So, I got the new Special Edition, assuming it would be the director's cut. I remember once seeing it on television, about 20 mins longer. Not so. They included one cut scene (in the bonus stuff) which was supposed to be intercut with the suicide scene (and mercifully, wasn't).

The interviews with the actors were odd. Ethan Hawke was a tad flaky -he called Robert Sean Leonard "Terry" (his character's name in the Hawke-directed Chelsea Walls) He also was mysteriously unclear on where they were staying during filming -"We were staying at a Radisson -or maybe it wasn't, but something like that -in Dover. No, New Castle. No, it definitely wasn't New Castle. Dover? I don't know where it was." (It was New Castle, according to the credits. But why wasn't this monolouge of uncertainity cut out?) RSL didn't have much to say for himself, considering the importance of his role. They talked to Dylan Kussman (Cameron), Allelon Ruggiero (Meeks), Kurtwood Smith (Mr. Perry), Norman Lloyd (Mr. Nolan), who was very Mr. Nolan-ish ("They wanted ME to audition! I had been on St. Elsewhere! _I_ wasn't going to audition!") and oddly, Melora Walters (One-Line Townie Girl, Gloria), who was rather annoying. Obviously, Robin Williams was conspicuously absent, and I would have liked to see Gale Hansen (Charlie) and Josh Charles (Knox). The only interesting information was that RSL and Ethan wrote the desk set scene themselves, because what the script called for wasn't working.

Then I watched the feature with commentary by Peter Weir (who was interesting), the cinematographer, and the screenwriter who was quite irritating. In the original script Keating was supposed to have cancer, and die at the end. He kept referring to him as being sick/dying, without explaining that was an earlier version of the script. Also, although he said Neil was based on his best friend, and Welton was what his school (private, but a day school) wanted to be, he neglected to say that Keating was based on an English teacher (Samuel Pickering, now a professor at University of Connecticut) he had at school. Perplexing.

All in all, if you have the regular DVD, don't bother buying the special edition. So disappointing. Also, I had the distinct impression from the film commentary that it was meant for the 10-yr anniversary. Wonder what the hold-up was? The bonus material here wants to fly like a desk set and instead falls with a resounding thud.

Save 25% Off

Groundhog Day / So I Married an Axe Murderer (Two-Pack)

Certainly nothing new here but I decided it was time to have a copy of both movies in my collection

Groundhog Day

Is just such a delightfull movie with some of Bill Murray's best work & some great death's I've seen it about 8 times so figured may as well get a copy & saw this double feature our on Blu Ray watching it for the 9th time still brings the odd predictable chuckle so reckon it will be watched again at some point

So I Married an Axe Murderer

I had the good fortune of spending 6 months touring the USA & Europe a while back when this movie just came out

Altogether we had 8 youngish Aussie's on that trip & at some point the boys bought a copy of Axe Murderer by the end of the tour everyone could recite every line from this movie so having not seen it for over 10 years I plucked up the courage to watch it again & it still has that Mike Myers humour pouring out a great movie that just reminded me of great times

Save 22% 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

Indiana Jones The Complete Adventures (Limited Edition Collectors Set) Blu-ray (2012)

This is about the best and coolest blu ray set I have ever seen. Here's why:

Pros

1. All movies are all on blu ray, certified with the best quality assurance

2. The movies are clearer than I can remember them. I've seen the VHS editions a lot of times.

3. The sound is top notch. A lot of the time I had to turn the volume down

4. The approx. 6 hours of bonus features are priceless. They have all the bonus features from the DVD editions plus brand new ones that cover the production of all four movies

5. The trinkets if you can't see from the pictures include:

A. Condensed version of The Lost Journal of Indiana Jones

B. Five production pictures

C. A book of matches from Club Obi Wan

D. Film cell from Indy's encounter with the cobra

E. Two tickets to the Zepplin from Last Crusade

F. Ticket to the Pan Am Clipper in Raiders

G. Grail rubbing

6. For you purists out there, there are NO changes what so ever

Cons

1. None.

Thank you! I had been wanting a good collection of Blu-Rays with all four movies and I finally got it!

Buy Indiana Jones The Complete Adventures (Limited Edition Collectors Set) Blu-ray (2012) Now

Django Unchained (Two-Disc Combo Pack: Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2011)

I really liked Django Unchained, or as I like to call it: The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence right through the eyeball and then the bullet continued through about 7 other torsos, shot out from a guy's belly button bringing a plume of intestines with it, ricocheted off someone's jugular vein, then snapped the cord holding up a chandelier causing said chandelier to plummet like a lead balloon, crushing the skulls of various evil varmints and polecats and then plunging into an occupied outhouse where the dynamite was also stored, causing the outhouse to explode in a crimson rain of blood, guts and offal.

But I guess all that wouldn't fit on the poster.

Django has everything you'd want in a movie, action, humor, suspense, drama, and even some romance, all washed down with gallons of blood. Did I mention some beautiful western vistas? it's got those too. And there are plenty of refernces to some of the geat westerns of the past, some of them only visual so pay attention. There is the trade mark Tarantino dialogue as well.

I'm sure other reviewers will talk about racial-political implications and social commentary and such. I'm not that smart. I just thought this was a fast paced and satisfying film for movie fans from beginning to end. Leonardo Di Caprio makes for a great villain, keeping himself just this side of over-the-top. Jamie Fox played Django as quiet waters that ran deep but Christopher Walz steals the show, although Samuel L. Jackson almost beat him to it.

Yes it's violent and bloody, and yes, the "n" word is used liberally throughout the movie, but it's a Tarantino film taking place in pre-Civil War South for pete's sake. What would you expect?

All three leading actors were amazing. Fox & Waltz were insanely good. Beautifly shot and a compelling story that I was never quite sure how all would be resolved (other than knowing a bunch a folks were gonna die).

In honor of Roger Ebert, I give it two thumbs up. R.I.P. Mr. Ebert.

Buy Django Unchained (Two-Disc Combo Pack: Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2011) Now

As an avid fan of Quentin Tarantino, there's a level of quality that I expect from each film that he makes. I expect to connect with his characters, but not necessarily like any of them. I expect to see a film that satisfies the film geek in me. More than anything, I expect to see a film that entertains throughout the prerequisite bloated running time.

"Django Unchained" is nearly three hours long. But it never feels that long, it entertains and surprises every step along the way. When I first checked my watch, we were already two hours into the film. All of Tarantino's films are usually about this long. Tarantino has been having fun with fictionalizing historical periods lately. This started with 2009's "Inglourious Basterds", which was easily one of the best films of that year. My eighty-something year old grandmother, who lived through the time that the film depicted World War II said that if events actually happened as they did in that film, that we would be living in a better world today. I think that's a pretty high compliment, especially since my grandmother is not Tarantino's target audience. He was able to design a great story not an idealistic view of that time period, but still a pretty fascinating one.

"Django" is about slavery...a taboo subject in any film, a strangely popular one, recently, as the same time period is explored in "Lincoln". It's about Django (Jamie Foxx), a slave who is bought and then freed by Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz, one-upping himself from the fantastic performance he gave in "Basterds"), a dentist turned bounty hunter. White supremacist slave owner Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio) bought and enslaved his wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), and Django and Schultz are out to correct the grave injustice done to both of them, and this doesn't mean just capturing and killing Candie, but many others who are responsible for the trauma experienced by Broomhilda.

Christoph Waltz has got to be one of the finest living actors in Hollywood. He's incredibly charismatic, but he cares about his character, first and foremost. As the prime antagonist in "Basterds", he was positively horrifying. In this film, he's the hero, but at the same time, he's anything but that. He brings humor and depth to a character that wouldn't have worked this well otherwise. Jamie Foxx does a good job as well, but I don't necessarily see him winning anything this Oscar season.

I'm half-tempted to call "Django" Quentin Tarantino's superhero movie. Django is by no means that, he's an oppressed figure with no real "super powers", however he's a kick-ass guy who the audience roots for from the very beginning. He even has his own theme song! We don't know how he appears to be more literate than other slaves, and he is somehow always able to outsmart those around him.

"Django" shows Tarantino having slightly more respect for genre than he ever has. It's a western revenge epic, first and foremost. It's also kind of a comedy, with some of the most clever dialogue I've heard in a film in 2012. It's also a romance, displaying the forbidden love between Django and his wife. But it's first and foremost a western, and Tarantino sticks to that.

This film isn't perfect, however. One thing I expect from Tarantino is well-developed strong female characters. We don't have that in "Django". I was hoping that Kerry Washington, who is also badass protagonist Olivia Pope in ABC's "Scandal", would be smart and strong-willed enough to get herself out of the problems which are out of her hands. I was hoping for Tarantino to give her some snappy dialogue, to show that her character is, like Django, superior to all of the other slaves around her. She isn't. She just kind of stands there and whimpers. She's helpless, and I wasn't expecting that from Tarantino, who has written some of the best female protagonists in film.

Other than this, "Django Unchained" is a masterful film. It takes alot for a nearly three hour long film to be engaging the entire way through, and it is. It's wickedly funny, and at the same time, extremely dramatic. With its graphic violence and filthy mouth, it isn't for the faint of heart. All of the actors here, especially DiCaprio, seem to be having tons of fun here, and it shows. Tarantino loves to fictionalize history, and if such films are as good as "Django Unchained", I think he should keep doing it. It's a vision of history that only Tarantino can bring us.

Grade: A-

Read Best Reviews of Django Unchained (Two-Disc Combo Pack: Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2011) Here

I went into this movie with no expectations. I love a good western style film and Django delivered. There was cheesy 60s/70s music, and violence galore, gun slinging, trash talking, crooked sheriffs, nasty slavers, the works. The overuse of the "N" word was shocking to some, but in that time period it was common, so the usage is historically correct. Tarantino didn't skimp on the violence from the original. In fact, in true 'Kill Bill' style, the blood bath flows like wine at a dinner party. The characters and actors are superb. Sam Jackson is amazing, and Leonardo is a convincing slaver. If you are squeamish and don't want to see a glimpse of how life really was for slaves back then, then don't watch. Though I suggest that anyone who still thinks there are still slave like conditions this day in America should suffer through it.

It is refreshing to see that part of history depicted raw and realistic, untainted with political correctness.

This is how we learn.

While still in theaters, it is available in DVD and Blue Ray at Amazon. Django Unchained [Blu-ray] The minute it is available for download to my Kindle Fire I will add it to my collection.

This remake from the 60s is gritty and violent. 4 stars and recommended. MR

Want Django Unchained (Two-Disc Combo Pack: Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy + UltraViolet) (2011) Discount?

Django Unchained started out great and ended up okay, but somewhere in the middle, it fell a little too in love with itself and the pacing slowed to a crawl. Django is freed and then starts to work with a German bounty hunter, who is a wonderful character. When they go to Candie Land, a plantation where Django's wife is being kept, that's where the movie just fell apart for me. Leo DiCaprio is Candie, and he turns in a good performance, but there's a lot of repetitive dialogue and plodding revelations. Django allows a slave to be torn apart by dogs, which made him an unsympathetic character, whereas before that moment, he was pretty cool. Yes, there's a lot of blood lots of juicy gun fights. Some of it is way over the top, but that's what you expect out of a Tarantino film, so I have no objection to that. The movie is very long and would have been much better about half an hour shorter, but if felt as if Tarantino lost his way and was trying hard to insert tension in the middle, and for me, it just didn't work.

Save 45% Off

Billy Jack (1971)

I have always been puzzled by the hostile reaction of critics to Billy Jack. The puzzling aspect is not the negativity itself, but rather the almost blanket misrepresentation or to be charitable misunderstanding, of what the movie is about. Thus potential buyers are disserviced by the prevailing conventional wisdom i.e. "Billy Jack preaches peace while practising violence"; "Billy Jack wants to have its cake and eat it with regard to pacifism"; "the film is hypocritical" etc. In reality, the character of Billy Jack NEVER preaches peace. The only hint of this being true comes when he REJECTS Delores Taylor's view that violence in the face of violent bigotry won't solve anything. Given his instincts as a Shoshone warrior and a Green Beret trained (ironically by the US government) for war against the extent of brutality of the bigots he faces, there is clearly no room for touchy-feely encounter sessions. These morons are not merely exercising speech, thought or association, but systematic physical violence on the defenceless. So Billy Jack's struggle to reconcile his violent rage with the principles of the Freedom School is a lost cause from the outset(which Billy himself admits when referring to his efforts to embrace the pacifist influence of the Freedom School he says to a racist bully, "I try, I really try ... but when I see this girl of such a beautiful spirit suffer this indignity ... I just go BERSERK! ") To critics safely weaned on the quiet, unthreatening dignity of Sidney Poitier, the Billy Jack character threatened equivalent response to oppression that cared neither for the approval, feelings or physical well-being of knowing oppressors. Revolutionary indeed! And while Virgil Tibbs would soak it up, confident his own intellectual superiority will bring justice in the end, Billy Jack will not give an inch of ground to people who had already stolen enough. Result: the bigots NEVER mess with HIM in the first instance always someone weaker. Yet, it is precisely here that the movie parts company with the character in terms of point-of-view. For while Billy is clear in cause and action, the movie is purposefully less so. In the end, Billy's actions result in his arrest. Whether the actual benefits of his actions (guarantee of the Freedom School's existence; annual gubernatorial progress review of Indian affairs etc.) have been worth the cost or have, in reality, made any real difference to the overall mileu of oppression is left debatable. NOT because the movie "has its cake and eats it", but because there are no glib, easy answers by which to provide neat resolutions. Should Billy be praised, condemned or something in-between? The movie honestly doesn't know and sensibly leaves this to the viewer to decide. Coming from a society where the issue of defensive violence in the face of apartheid brutality was always an ongoing anxiety, the movie's delineation of contradictory but related progressive tendencies did not ring false at all. In fact, its pioneering depiction (try and dispute that!) of race conflict from the point of view of the oppressed was deemed so incendiary by the apartheid government that it was banned (along with Soldier Blue and Jesus Christ Superstar). Yet, even here South of the equator, Billy Jack was a movie phenomenon in the 1970s, as we attended secret underground viewings with our parents one eye on the lookout for security police raids. Check out the initial, aloof response of US critics at the time and you'll also see life imitating art in ironic ways as critics retreated into their smug class and race cocoons in an effort to bury Billy Jack. Yet today, given its box office numbers and its massive international impact, Billy Jack ranks as the best example of the intermittent disjuncture between film critics and the movie-going public. Billy Jack may seem naive now and the experimental theatre scenes now suggest Zanuck may have been right (for the wrong reasons) to want them excluded but its nobility is untainted. Forget the sour mumblings of mainstream critics (the same people who proclaimed True Lies "a quality movie")and make this great movie a part of your collection. As a straight action movie, you'd be hard-pressed to find better contemporaries (yes, Billy Jack may have dated somewhat but has anyone checked out Bullitt or The French Connection recently?). As an action movie with some things on its mind other than fast cars, big explosions and blonde babes, I defy anyone to find me an equal. In any case, the title song ("One Tin Soldier") by Coven is in and of itself worth the unbelievable DVD purchase price. From its spectacular Mustang-rustling opening sequence to Billy's final surrender, Billy Jack remains one of the best examples of independent movie-making at its most threatening to the Establishment. Today, only John Sayles and Ken Loach can still lay claim to that honor. I had been looking for copies of Billy Jack and Born Losers (the orginal Billy Jack movie) for almost 15 years before discovering it for sale on this site. Since receiving my shipment, I have watched them repeatedly and not been disappointed. Neither will you.

Some people just don't get it. Tom Laughlin wrote the script, directed, starred, and controlled distribution for Billy Jack because no major studio wanted to support a film that exposed bigotry and prejudice in Amercian society. Laughlin staged a one man stand against the commercial capitalists who controlled the movie industry and won. Laughlin's unprecendented move to control the film's distribution rights opened the door for future independent film making to reach mass audiences. Laughlin's struggle against studio powers mirrored Billy Jack's inner angst towards violence, peace, and civil libertites. Sure the film's message of a counterculture existing in a deeply rooted, cynical, white Southern/Western community seems overbearingly blatant, but the film still stands firm as a testimony of one man challenging the morals and values that define his world. Who cares if the Indian attire used in the spirtual dance did not comform to the actual Indian dress used in such a ceremony? There have been many big budget Hollywood extravaganzas that neglected to follow proper uniform codes. Check out Tora Tora Tora and many of the medals, stripes, and,insignias used on the military uniforms are incorrect. The fight scenecs in Billy Jack, which Laughlin also coreographed, are exceptional. No film has been able to capture the realistic grace, power, and balance of martial arts evident in Billy Jack. Until Billy Jack no Hollywood film dealt with the inconsistences and racism towards Native Amercian Indians that exists in our country. If Billy Jack's message was too strong and straightforward for the Amercian public to swallow, then these critics should stay home and watch the old cowboy and Indian movies that feature the All-American hero John Wayne. I'll take Billy Jack, I mean Tom Laughlin anyday.

Buy Billy Jack (1971) Now

Any film whose main thread is that it takes an extremely violent advocate of non-violence to truly protect the non-violent, immediately has my full attention and respect. If I could have only been around in the early seventies to watch hordes of stringy-haired American middle to upper class youth cheer, in all seriousness, a denim-clad white guy kicking the living hell out of (and in some cases even kill) anyone who doesn't practice the appropriate level of peace and understanding, I would have truly been in heaven. This movie and it's enduring popularity have confirmed what I have always suspected: disagree with a pacifist and they would like nothing more than to place your head on a pike.

If a person could have jammed anymore sixties clichés into an hour and a half, I'd like to watch their movie, too. Leading the pack would be the connection to "Indians", followed by ear-ringing singalongs at the school.....being bitten by rattlesnakes in a "purification process"....guerilla theater.......expressing yourself......"squares"......and on and on.

Jean is the lady that runs the school and, despite a notable lack of physical contact, is Billy Jack's lady. She is the good cop to his bad and spends a great deal of time doing one of two things: trying to talk Billy Jack out of collapsing your windpipe OR sneering with satisfaction once he actually does it. Jean's philosophy is plain and straightforward: there isn't a problem in the world that couldn't be solved in a peaceful manner if people would just love one another....and if that doesn't work, I'll un-cage Billy Jack and set him out to snapping your limbs like twigs. She also has the most unusual set of sideburns I've ever seen in my life.

There's not been a movie made that I'd rather watch than this one. Buy it. Quickly.

Read Best Reviews of Billy Jack (1971) Here

You don't get/watch this movie for the production values. You don't get this movie for the 70's nostalgia or the flower-power hippie esque themes.

You get this movie because of a very simple thing. Sometimes a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do. This movie is about having the courage to do what's right no matter the cost.

Billy Jack is the archetype of the great protector who turns to violence because sometimes it's the only way. And this movie is the 300 of the seventies.

Ironic how true it all rings when we look at the battles Tom Laughlin had with hollywood and with the government when it came to making and screening the Billy Jack Movies.

Want Billy Jack (1971) Discount?

The one star reviews cutting down at the knees the inconsistent behavior of praising peace at a cost of viloence, are naive and short sighted. THAT IS THE POINT! Helllooooo! Has anyone looked, read ," American Democracy" or looked at the White man's plight preaching peace, serenity at the cost of lives , religion and nonetary gain. Even in this era, sad to say have not changed at all.

This movie was very brave, unique, and risky. Shame on the narrow minded individuals that cannot see the message for the perceived blatent hypocrisy. That was the point.

This movie should be viewed by all that have a passion to reach out to the victims of the world, the minorites and those that have been unfairly treated.

Dan Williams, author of, " Above His Shoulders."

Save 31% Off

In a Glass Cage (1987)

In A Glass Cage is a piece of work that should not be overlooked. When I saw the film Apt Pupil, I thought it was a decent film with some superb acting, but sadly I felt Hollywood had watered the movie down when it came to portraying the Nazi mentality, decadence, cycle of abuse, and cruelty. After viewing In A Glass Cage, I had finally seen what the other film could have become if it were not for Hollywood politics, and since then I have kept an ever closer eye on foreign cinema.

In A Glass Cage is a both a tale of mental decay and revenge. This story revolves around a German family that has relocated to isolation in Spain after the fall of the 3rd Reich, and a young man(Angelo), who as a child was abused by the patriarch of the family, Klaus; a former SS officer. Angelo has tracked Klaus down, and catches him committing another brutal act against a youth. Klaus' brutal act sends Klaus over the mental edge, and in a fit of despair, he makes a failed suicide bid, confining him to an Iron Lung with glass windows(the Glass Cage). Angelo, having gathered some sensitive journals depicting Klaus' crimes, uses this and his past with Klaus to coerce Klaus into allowing Angelo into the household to "care" for the paralyzed and helpless Klaus.

Angelo quickly begins corrupting the family, gaining the daughter's affections and simultaneously gaining the abhorance of the family matriarch, while keeping Klaus on edge by making him relive the atrocities he has tried to escape. At first Angelo does this through reading the journals of atrocities to Klaus, and eventually Angelo descends deeper into madness, and begins committing atrocities of his own. Starting with the matriarch of the house, Angelo begins to kill, and he quickly moves on to children like is described in the journals he reads. The torture of Klaus who both adores and despises himself for the very things he is now forced to watch has come full circle. His wife is dead, his daughter is controlled by Angelo, and he is forced to relive himself.

This is where the uncompromising nature of the piece really takes hold. Children are put to death in this film, and the viewer is not spared the agony of this with implications, or off-camera violence. This happens in your face, even in the very first scene with Klaus and the youth. It places a bitter slice of Nazi cruelty right in your mouth for you to taste. Eventually this cruelty is aimed at Klaus himself, and with the eerie aid of the daughter, the mental schism becomes complete, with Angelo assuming the role of Klaus in the glass cage.

I found this film to be more of a dramatic shocker than an art-house film, but the story is solid and the acting is top notch, especially when approaching the subject matter. In a Glass Cage does not shock simply to degrade the viewer, rather presents the violencce in a "this is how it went down" fashion. Nothing is glamorized and no character is particularly likeable, they simply do as they are programmed to do for better or worse, which is right on point in the context of Naziism.

If the visually-presented subject of Nazi cruelty regarding homosexuality, petiphilia, and grotesque murder of children would get you to leave a room, then this film is not for you. But for those of you seeking uncompromising cinema....

I saw this movie at a midnight screening in New York City about ten years ago expecting a movie loaded with blood and dismemberments. Instead, I got a movie lacking in gore, but high on psychological horror.

The movie is about Klaus, a Nazi war criminal and child molester exiled in Spain with his family, who ends up confined to an iron lung (a huge metal and glass breathing aparatus, the "glass cage" of the title). One day, a young man named Angelo shows up at his home demanding a private meeting with him. Against his wife's wishes, Klaus agrees to see Angelo, who walks out of the meeting with a new position as Klaus's live-in caretaker. He soon takes over the household and reveals his true reason for being there: Angelo had been one of Klaus's victims as a child, but rather than returning to exact revenge, he wants to learn from Klaus and reenact his atrocities.

The movie doesn't have any explicit gore, but it doesn't flinch at other disturbing visuals either. While most films that feature child murders only allude to them and have the crimes occur offscreen, director Agustín Villaronga doesn't hesitate to show a little boy's throat being sliced. More disturbing than any of the child murders, though, is how Angelo gains complete control of the household, including the full trust of Klaus's young daughter. It's the thought of evil having such seductive power that will haunt you long after the credits roll.

This movie is clearly not for everybody, and fans of mainstream cinema will likely brand this exploitation, but for those with a strong stomach and a taste for something different, this horror classic, long overdue on DVD, will be a real treat.

Buy In a Glass Cage (1987) Now

IN A GLASS CAGE is an obscure and rather hard to stomach Spanish (kind of) arthouse horror movie. It has a rather bad reputation for being one of the most disturbing movies ever committed to celluloid and when I did some online research prior to placing my order on amazon's website I found lots of stories of whole audience walk-outs durings screenings of the film.

While I personally think that the film does not exactly live up to his bad reputation and feel that the shock value is a bit overrated (admittedly this could be due to my familarity with the plot prior to watching it) make no mistake about it: Most people will find story and events in this movie completely revolting and disgusting. I kidd you not.

IN A GLASS CAGE's story concerns Klaus, a paedophile and former Nazi concentration camp doctor who had conducted horrifying experiments on children during the war. Confined helplessly to an iron lung (the glass cage of the title) after a failed suicide attempt, he lives with his wife Griselda and daughter Rena very isolated in exile in Spain. One day, a young man blackmails Klaus in order to be hired as a nurse. It is obvious that the intruder does not simply wants a job and Klaus' past is linked to this young man...What unfolds is an horrifying tale about the attraction of evil and a cycle of ever repeating abuse and terror.

While the film is not overly graphic in its murder scenes, the film is often quite hard to watch, most notably when Angelo stabs a young boy with a gasolene filled syringe in the heart. However what is far more shocking is the sickness of the movie's theme of child abuse. It has to be said however that IN A GLASS CAGE is not a nasty horror film, exploiting a serious issue for questionable entertainment value. It is in fact quite intellectual demanding and you have a lot to think about after the end of the film (the cycle of ever repeating abuse and terror, the political subtext).

It is also very well made, boasting an impressive cinematography with images that linger long in the mind of the viewer. Kudos to the excellent actors for their powerhouse performances in very difficult and challenging roles.

As said before this is an demanding movie which will most likely upset and deeply shock most audiences. If in doubt, do not watch.

However I was not overly impressed with the DVD. Picture quality is acceptable, however far from outstanding.

Annoyingly there is little in the way of extras, just some well written liner notes (well written, but somehow pointless, since only stating the obvious) and a highly interesting but too brief interview with director Agustin VILLARONGA.

Thankfully the optional English subtitles are easy on the eyes.

Read Best Reviews of In a Glass Cage (1987) Here

Banned in Australia for almost 28 years despite several attempts (even recently) to get it classified. It was available on video back in the mid eighties when I first obtained a copy from overseas and later as a dvd special edition several years ago . The film is extremely strong in its' depiction of child abuse after the second world war and will make most viewers feel sick during the abuse. It is probably the most disturbing film ever made and it has not lost its impact after such a long time. Most films lose their impact after a few years but such is the powerful screenplay and imcredible directing ,IN A GLASS CAGE not only pushes the bounderies in cinema but exceeds it like no other film I have ever seen.If you thought that SALO120 DAYS OF SODOM was a shocker when first released then wait until you see GLASS CAGE.It is a must for every film student and lover of European cinema.No mature adult should be denied the opportunity to see this very powerful film .The film in no way approves of child abuse and it is very anti child abuse but it does indeed shock the unshockable.

A MASTERPIECE.

Want In a Glass Cage (1987) Discount?

The box for this DVD caught my eye immediately. I must confess I've always had a morbid interest in Nazi atrocity movies, although while watching them I usually find myself filled with disgust, and absolutely enraged that the participants of Hitler's war on decency were able to get as far as they did, and that so many of them got away with it. This film is described as a horror story and, on that level, it certainly delivers.

The narrative concerns a former Nazi named Klaus who took advantage of his position to indulge himself in the sadistic torture and sexual abuse of young boys. He continues his horrible blood-spree after the war, but in a fit of remorse, attempts suicide and winds up an invalid, confined to an iron lung (exactly how this happens was very unclear in the actual film I rely on the accuracy of a review I read for this piece of plotline). His resentful wife and his small, shy daughter care for him, but long for a nurse to provide some relief. Enter a young man named Angelo who (we learn much later, but suspect from the moment of his introduction) was one of Klaus' few victims to survive meeting him. In a bizarre twist, the young man not only wants to perversely torture his tormentor in revenge, he also seeks to carry out similar crimes, acting out certain details in Klaus' diary exactly. Apparently Angelo's mind has been warped by his encounter with Klaus, and although he is horrified by the details, he is perversely excited by death, and seeks release by performing acts of cruelty in the presence of the man who treated him so badly so long ago. The result is a somewhat hard to follow but always absorbing shock-fest, which succeeds for its gory excesses if nothing else. It has more than its share of difficult-to-watch horror scenes, and one perfectly unforgettable scene in which Angelo murders Klaus' wife, and then ingeniously uses her corpse to exact a horrifying revenge. The contemplation of this scene alone chilled me to the bone and ruined my sleep for more than one night.

One aspect of it bothered me even more. This is NOT a gay film; I certainly don't view Klaus -who is married and has a daughter as anything but a sadistic heterosexual child molester, who happens to favor little boys as his victims. Yet it is aggressively being marketed as a "gay film" and I, for one, resent the fact that some people seem to see it that way merely because the sadistic child molester victimizes boys. The young actor who plays Angelo is quite handsome, but his actions are far too cruel, sadistic and depraved for anyone but a full-blown masochist to find him erotically stimulating.

If you want a fully realized and graphically bloody horror film, you will enjoy this picture very much. However, if you find this shocker even slightly erotic, I suggest you check out a good therapist on the way home.

Save 51% Off