Showing posts with label where to buy blu ray movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label where to buy blu ray movies. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Perfect Understanding (1933)

Perfect UnderstandingAs a classic film enthusiast, I was somewhat surprised that I'd never even heard of the 1933 Ealing Studio release "Perfect Understanding." Not only does it carry the Ealing brand, it boasts a screenplay by the great Michael Powell and lead performances from Laurence Olivier and Gloria Swanson. Heck, that's all I need to know! Sign me up. Billed as a romantic comedy, I'm not sure the movie entirely succeeds under this description. With aspects that veer from slapstick to complete melodrama, the tone of "Perfect Understanding" veers all over the place. An unconventional domestic drama centered around infidelity (both imagined and real), there are some aspects of the movie that play deadly serious. These moments are (for my taste) the strongest in the film. When it plays for a lighter appeal, the manic energy can feel somewhat overdone and chaotic. At times, it seems as if two different movies are competing against one another. But despite these reservations, it's still a easy recommendation for fans of Olivier and Swanson! They make the picture worth a look!

Swanson and Olivier play a young society couple who don't want to fall into the same trap as their other married friends. They want a marriage in which they can retain their independence without all the baggage of traditional domesticity. It's a fine arrangement (a perfect understanding, if you will) in theory, but somewhat harder in practice. After a blissful honeymoon, the couple separate at the end of their vacation. With Olivier enjoying the festivities of Cannes, his old circle of friends and a former flame end up sharing time with the new groom. Can he withstand the temptation of another woman? Coincidentally, Swanson also has another suitor on the home front. When the couple reunite, how much honesty can their relationship bear? Between real offenses and certain misconceptions, this marital experiment seems doomed to failure. Can love prevail? Should it?

I really liked Swanson and Olivier together. Swanson was trying to establish herself in the talkies after being a silent screen star and she even produced this movie (the only film she ever made in Britain). Olivier was a stage star (a trained Shakespearean actor) newly into a film career. They have an easy chemistry and charm to spare. If you know them primarily from their later works, this more lightweight piece is an interesting counterpoint. Olivier, in particular, is downright dashing! I don't think "Perfect Understanding" is an essential classic, by any means, but it is definitely worth a look. The early scenes are especially jumbled with dozens of characters and relationships thrown at you rather haphazardly. Things start to settle, however, once we leave this extended opening. Again, I probably wouldn't classify this as romantic comedy (although some might). To me, it's more of a relationship drama with some lighter moments. KGHarris, 5/13.

I love classic films. Especially old black `n whites. I couldn't say why exactly. I think it's that they're a bit more primal about how they had to approach the filmmaking process. They didn't have all of the tricks and twists of special effects and fancy-pants editing, so they were largely confined to using dialogue that great, great form of communication to convey so very much of the story. Without good, snappy dialogue, those movies of old were destined to one day end up on the trash heap. Consequently, I think they produced better screenwriters folks who had a learned ear for what sounded right, what conveyed the proper sentiment, what captured a precise emotion for their audiences. Still, it's a shame that more of these `classics' don't get the treatment PERFECT UNDERSTANDING has; it's an impressive discovery, and I can only hope there's more to come from the folks behind the Cohen Film Collection.

(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and characters. If you're the kind of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I'd encourage you to skip down to the last two paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you're accepting of a few modest hints at `things to come,' then read on ...)

Judy Rogers (played by the forever lovely Gloria Swanson) and Nicholas Randall (a young and thin Laurence Olivier) are socialites in love. However, they see couples all around them mired in one unhappy marriage after another. Hoping to `buck the trend,' Judy and Nick decide the best they can do to preserve their own relationship magic is to draft a "marriage agreement," one which promises they will never argue, they will always treat one another as lovers, and they will always respect one another's private happiness. What appears to be a perfect understanding only leads to the discover of one imperfection after another as Nick succumbs to the charms of a former lover (Nora Swinburne) and Judy almost falls into the arms of another (John Halliday). Can they find happiness again or are they now destined for divorce?

Wow. Talk about a real eye-opener! PERFECT UNDERSTANDING was way ahead of its time. In fact, the agreement fashioned by the two lovebirds in the opening could almost be likened to an `open marriage' by contemporary standards. In fact, his own personal guilt forces Nick to confess, and Judy appears perfectly willing to forgive him; that is until she divulges her marital woes to her old friend, Ivan. To make matters worse, Judy realizes she's pregnant while it's clear to her that the child belongs to her one and only true love, Nick's suspicions only serve to push the two of them further and further apart. What's amazing is how open and nonchalant the script by Michael Powell treats all of this, almost as if this were the status quo in marital relationships of the time. I daresay it wasn't this was 1933, after all though Hollywood socialites and debutantes were always `ahead of the curve' when it comes to social mores. That much hasn't changed.

The film is smartly directed from staging to cinematography by Cyril Gardner. Gardner made impressive use of some vast interior sets, and he moved the plot along briskly by making extensive use of some rather elaborate video montages to establish the passage of time as well as the build-up of marital tension. Also, it's exciting to see Olivier so fresh and new in his career (promotional materials provided to me with the release point out he was only but a few years along in film); and, even at this ripe age, he was a master at the witty banter establishing the high points of his love with Judy (Swanson). The two of them handle both ends of the scale with great skill the first half is punctuated by their constant repartee while the latter half is richly nuanced with desperate, longing expressions of their mutual torture.

Billed largely as a "comedy of manners," UNDERSTANDING may not be PERFECT, but it's pretty darn close, and it's pretty darn impressive.

PERFECT UNDERSTANDING was produced by Gloria Swanson British Productions (the only film she made in Britain). DVD distribution is being handled through Cohen Media Group. As for the technical specifications, the film looks and sounds very solid be aware this is a (standard) two-track audio, and there's some marked gaps in quality in the first fifteen minutes or so, but it clears up as the film progresses. The Blu-ray release is blessed with two selected shorts from the era (two Mack Sennett shorts "Husband's Reunion" and "Dream Stuff").

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. Given the era, it's certainly an exercise in some curious morality. PERFECT UNDERSTANDING is a wonderful find from Cohen this is its Blu-ray and DVD debut. It's been longingly restored for this release, and who wouldn't want to experience this Gloria Swanson/Laurence Olivier rom-com now that it's available? The script captures the marked trend of the time to propel the narrative through the use of clever dialogue and it's brilliantly delivered by two masters of the craft. I'll admit it dragged a bit for me in the last fifteen minutes that's when the marriage is coming apart but rest assured there will be a happy ending for those who work for it most ... just like in life!

In the interests of fairness, I'm pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Cohen Media Group provided me with an advance DVD copy of PERFECT UNDERSTANDING by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review.

Buy Perfect Understanding (1933) Now

This is a great little travelogue of a film, with great shots of various European locations, back before both WW2 bombing and later, globalization, had tampered with the scenery.There couldn't have been much international tourism in 1933, so these characters are indeed priveleged. Olivier seems very good here, not insufferably intense and hard to believe as he became after he returned to England in the 40's (though this is apparently an English film, with Gloria Swanson as a producer and other American actors it doesn'seem so.)

Read Best Reviews of Perfect Understanding (1933) Here

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

The Man Who Would Be King (2011)

The Man Who Would Be KingHe began with 'The Maltese Falcon' which one must admit is not too bad for a first film, don't you think?

Then for years he wanted to bring this adventure story by Kipling to the screen. How many years? Well, originally he had Bogie and Gable in mind for the leads, you do the math.

Fortunately for us, he eventually got the green light for his project.

He then found Peachy and Danny in Michael Caine and Sean Connery, movie stars who are also great actors-of which there ain't many, folks---and who are perfectly cast in the roles.

Moreover, Caine and Connery had been friends for a long time and this undoubtedly helped bring to life the camaraderie between the misfit heroes.

It is the late 19th century and Danny and Peachy, formerly sergeants in Her Majesty's Army, find themselves stranded and penniless in India. Their ungrateful country has no further use for them, although their officers once called them heroes "We fought our way up the pass yard by bloody yard."

Now, bureocrats are running the show "with long skinny noses for looking down on you" and Danny and Peachy are considered 'undesirables'.

So they are faced with three choices: Go back to England and take jobs as a porters or something equally lower class and menial, stay in India and continue to live more or less as petty criminals, or. . .

Well, let's not give the plot away. Suffice it to say that when a reasonable Kipling (wonderfully played by Christopher Plummer) tries to dissuade them from their insane scheme, on the grounds that the odds against them are truly suicidal, Peachy dismisses his concerns with "Well, if a Greek can do it, two Englishman certainly can !"

--The Greek in question being Alexander the Great--

And yes, women as well as men will enjoy this great film. It's a not a "buddy movie", it's a classic.

Thank you, John Huston.

This was one of my favorites, and a "must have" in my DVD library. The story is still great,and the dialog between "Peachy" and "Daniel" is still among my favorites still.

But the DVD was dissappointing. The movie is split on two sides, and has to be flipped to view the remainder of the film.The DVD only has Dolby 1.0 Sound (Digital but MONO)and apparently very weak in the mix. Overall a better picture than my old worn VHS, but very weak audio overall.

The menu's and commentary are hard to read, and there were points in the movie where the transfer to DVD looked "jumpy".

More than disappointing presentation overall.

This deserves a "director's cut", or an audio remix to serve those of us who will cherish whatever copy we have, forever.

Buy The Man Who Would Be King (2011) Now

This film has met all the prerequistes necessary for producing a profound and rewarding entertainment experience. One of the greatest directors of all-time (John Huston), an all-star cast: Sean Connery, Michael Caine, Christopher Plummer and Saeed jaffrey, and an incredibly original storyline incorporating ancient Masonic mysteries, exotic locations and crisp, witty dialogue. This is a story I wish I had written! Even more delightful, it meets all expectations!

Rudyard Kipling (Plummer) finds an unexpected guest awaiting his presence in his darkened study one night. Without proper introductions the hooded intruder begins to share with Kipling a fantastic tale of adventure and discovery from a faraway land that many thought only existed in myth and legend. The study of the famous writer soon disappears as we are taken along with the mysterious narrator on a fantastic journey to a foreign land.

We are now introduced to Daniel Dravot (Connery) and Peachy Carnehan (Caine), two ex-British soldiers and Masonic brothers turn fortune hunters. Seeking fame and fortune they are about to undertake the adventure of a lifetime. Their destination, the Far East in search of the legendary lost treasure of Alexander the Great.

And what an adventure it is! As Daniel and Peachy work their way across the vast Indian landscape towards the remote region of Kafiristan they encounter the usual severe natural hardships and hostile inhabitants as you might expect. However it's the discovery of an archaic religious cult that happens to share many of the same symbols and beliefs found in their own Masonic brotherhood that really makes them begin to wonder. As they unravel the secret origin of this esoteric connection they are faced with the truth behind a two thousand year old secret concerning Alexander the Great and his mythical lost treasure.

Great film from '75. It may seem a little dated to young viewers, but give it a chance and you won't regret it! Great supporting performance from Saeed Jaffrey ( one of the greatest character actors of all time) the who plays their native guide Billy Fish, along with a brief and rare appearance by the lovely Shakira Caine as Roxanne.

Read Best Reviews of The Man Who Would Be King (2011) Here

This movie is an unsurpassed, old-fashioned adventure tale about friendship, and tragic, over-reaching ambition. As an adventure, it far exceeds the wildly more popular but childish Indiana Jones series.

This movie follows the adventure of Daniel Dravot and Peachy Carnahan, two rakish ne'er-do-wells in the British Army in India. They leave the service, and, alone, they pack guns and supplies and head north to Kafiristan, a distant and mysterious land they've only heard tales about, to become Kings, and plunder the kingdom.

When they arrive, they pit warring communities against each other. During battle, Connery's character is mistaken for a god when he is shot (in his leather bandolier), and doesn't bleed. As a result, he is made King. He is brought to the Holy City, where the holy men mistake him for "Son of Sekander," that is, the Son of Alexander The Great. They prostrate themselves before him, and give him access to Alexander's treasure, which they have guarded for centuries.

Instead of taking the money and running, however, Connery gets big-headed, gets to liking the role of King, and wants to stay and administer his kingdom, which he does, and does well, it seems.

As you would expect, that's not the end of the story...but I don't want to give any more away.

This movie is also humorous. It certainly isn't a comedy, but the heroes joke with one another, and the humor arises from their relationship, their fondness for one another, not from improbably comic situations.

This is a grand movie that treats grand themes, and it is worth seeing over and over again. I can't recommend it enough.

Want The Man Who Would Be King (2011) Discount?

This is an exceptional treat with two great actors in Connery and Caine and a great director in Huston, who seems to have been born to make just such a film. Based on a short story by Rudyard Kipling (who is played exceptionally by Christopher Plummer in the film), The Man Who Would Be King tells the story of two former British soldiers in India who devise a scheme to go to neighboring Kafiristan, set themselves up as royalty and then loot the country for all they can carry back home. After running into bandits on the way, enduring freezing temperatures and with a little unintended help from an avalanche, the two meet Billy Fish who gets them set up where they would like to be in Kafiristan. Eventually, and you can see how and why for yourself, Connery comes to be regarded by the locals as a god. This will have its advantages for Connery and Caine, but in the end will be their downfall (no pun intended for those who have already seen the film).

... I saw nothing of poor quality myself. The picture seemed crisp and sound quality was acceptable as well. Here's the negative: unless anything has changed with the manufacturing of the disc itself, one has to flip the disc over about halfway through the film. That's right. A *and* B sides. While I would prefer that the film be continuous all the way through, the fact that it isn't is not enough to give the DVD a negative review.

Also, there are some good extras here. There's a lot of "on location" and extra info about things that went on during the making of the film as well as a "making of" featurette (only about ten or fifteen minutes long). The featurette is nothing exceptional but it does show you what Connery landed on and how the entire cast and crew agonized over the bridge scene at the end of the film. It's also fun to see Connery sitting around in a camouflage hat on the set with the blood on his face that was so important to the story at the end of the film. You also get theatrical trailers for eight of Huston's films. Overall, if you want to see a sweeping film that has Connery and Caine playing roles they were born to play, pick this one up.

Save 49% Off

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Down by Law (The Criterion Collection) (1986)

Down by LawThis "Down By Law" DVD is a perfect example of why I love the Criterion Collection's catalog. First off, the film looks and sounds fantastic. If you are familiar with this film, you are aware of Lurie's incredible soundtrack. The DVD does not disappoint. Visually, it is stunning. If this DVD package only delivered these elements, I would be happy. But, this DVD is filled to the gills with extras. Not only are there extras, but a double disk of extras! Remember, this is "Down By Law", not LOTR, Star Wars I, etc. This is a borderline cult/ art house film with a small, but strong fan base. Never, never, never would another company pour as much love and energy for the DVD of a film of this type. Take for example "Stranger than Paradise:" no face lift and no extras. "Down By Law" DVD notables: the entire Cannes press conference, Lurie interview for French TV in 1986 plus his 2002 commentary on his interview, extensive audio tracks of Jim Jarmusch discussing the film and answering fans QA (sent from the Criterion web site Was Tom Waits really drunk? What does 'Down By Law' mean?), Robby Muller interview, Tom Waits video directed by Jarmusch with commentary, etc. etc, etc.

If you are a fan, there is no reason to miss this one. If you are curious about Jim Jarmusch as a director, this is the DVD to start on. A flawless package.

I can't say enough good things about the "Down By Law" Criterion DVD! The high-definition digital film transfer is wonderful and it really shows off Robby Muller's breathtaking b/w camera work. The DVD has 2 discs and the packaging is well done. The first disc contains the film itself and the second disc is packed full of goodies such as the insightful "Thoughts & Reflections" from director Jim Jarmusch, a "2002 Video Interview" with director of photography Robby Muller, "1986 Cannes Film Festival Press Conference" with Jarmusch and cast members John Lurie, Roberto Benigni & Nicoletta Braschi that is fun to watch, a great "1986 Interview" with John Lurie + his hilarious commentary on the interview, a bunch of film "Outtakes" which feature some great never before seen bits (especially with Lurie!) a terrific Tom Waits music video for "It's All Right With Me" also directed by Jarmusch and 3 wonderful recorded phone conversations from 2002 that Jarmusch had with Waits, Benigni and Lurie about making "Down By Law", etc.

The extras on the DVD give an intimate view of this very personal film and are amazing to watch and listen to. It's so complete that I can't imagine what else could be added to the Criterion release to make it more perfect. Many years from now when Jarmusch and the cast have left this sad and beautiful world, this gem will no doubt be a priceless look at one of the best American films ever made by one of America's best directors. Fantastic! One of the best films Criterion has released.

Buy Down by Law (The Criterion Collection) (1986) Now

I haven't seen all of Jarmusch's films, but I've seen plenty (Ghost Dog, Mystery Train, Stranger than Paradise, Dead Man) to know this is probably gonna go down as my favorite of them all. Jarmusch and photographer Mueller do a brilliant job setting everything up. Its style is as classic and effective as the film noirs of the 1950s, including the seedy characters, the dialogue, and the moody jazz courtesy of John Lurie, one of the film's stars. Story wise, we're dealing with two lowlifes, a pimp and a recently fired DJ, who don't know each other, who are each set up and sent to prison for crimes they didn't commit. They are thrown in a cell together, and eventually an Italian who accidentally killed a man after cheating at a game of cards (hit him with an 8-ball--CLASSIC!) and find a way to escape. John Lurie is the pimp, Tom Waits is the DJ, and Robert Benigni makes his American film debut as Bob, the Italian. (Ironically, he is the kindest, funniest, most jovial of the trio, yet he is the only one who actually is guilty of the crime he's in for).

I've read the other reviews, and I'm dissapointed in why some people don't like the film. First off, I believe that Criterion has once again given us a top of the line DVD transfer. The extras are great for folks that are into the "hows" and "whys" of a film, as I am, and the transfer itself is clear and beautiful to watch.

The acting may not be the best (Lurie was adequite), the dialogue and storyline are right out of the 50s, and help the mood of the entire thing. The characters are introduced perfectly so that we don't really need to know why they're being set-up. Our imagination can do the walking for us there. We know they're both kind of shady guys, and there are any number of reasons why someone would wanna see them put away, or use them so that someone else doesn't get caught.

And as far as the reviewer wondering why we don't see the dogs, only hear them; don't see the escape, only the afterwards; and don't see the prison, only their cell, the answer is simple: its an indie film made before indie's were all the rage. Jarmusch could only afford so much, and I find that he did an incredible job giving us all the necessary information without having to show us everything that was going on. The only thing I might raise an eyebrow to is Bob and Nicoletta (Benigni's real life wife) falling in love in under an hour or two. But hey, sometimes, if its worth it, you gotta suspend reality. The chemistry between the two characters is enough for me to believe they're in love, so who am I to argue!

All in all, this is one of my favorite movies to watch. Criterion did a great job with this DVD, and at the very least, its a fun flick in the noir tradition, with a bit of a smart-ass underworld, beatnick edge to it.

...but that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

Read Best Reviews of Down by Law (The Criterion Collection) (1986) Here

This unique and original film is a personal masterpiece, a real sleeper. I'd recommed it to anyone interested in non-formula American cinema in general, and fans of the macabre. It ranks up there with some of the better black and white movies of recent times, in the mold of Woody Allen's "Manhattan".

What made this film great for me, was that the director masterly chose to leave out extraneous footage and instead keep our focus on character development much the way Jean Luc Goddard does. Indeed Goddard's stamp is felt everywhere in this picture, which is why I liked it so much. This is America's answer to neorealism and done very well. The fact that we don't really see exactly how the main characters escape from prison, nor do we see how Zack rescues Bob from his fear of swimming add (rather than detract from) the plot, and give us more time with the personal nature of the characters, their "everyday chit-chat", etc, is what gives this film its charm. I won't give away the ending, but even that is told in an unorthodox manner, which is a breath of fresh air from formula Holywood films.

The acting is surprisingly naturalistic and believable, and Tom Waits gives an especially brilliant performance here. Roberto Bernini is hilarious as the sort of comic sidekick to the two streetwise contenders of the trio this is a truly original chemistry of character mixes, and the film could have taken the more traditional path of "straight-guy/goofy-guy" as in Laurel & Hardy or Abbot & Costello, but instead wisely opts to break new ground by having two "straight" characters that battle it out for leadership.

The "We All Scream for Ice Cream" segment is one of the funniest bits I've seen in a film in years and should be one of those rare legendary film icons by this point.

The DVD transfer is wonderful a crisp, clean print that looks great onscreen. Criterion have done yet another great job here.

This is a gem of a movie and I highly recommed it!

Want Down by Law (The Criterion Collection) (1986) Discount?

Zack (Tom Waits) has just been fired from his job as a DJ and he is thrown out by his girlfriend. Jack (John Lurie) is offered another prostitute under his wings as a pimp by a competitor who wants to make amends. The circumstances lead to both men being framed and they end up sharing a cell in prison. Both men are bitter over their situation and they can hardly stand each others company. One day the peculiar Roberto (Roberto Benigni) is put in the same cell with Jack and Zack. This is the beginning of a new friendship between the three men where Roberto is the glue that holds the friendship together. Down by Law is an intelligent and cynical film that is presented in an anxious societal situation, which provides amusement for the audience.

Save 50% Off

Friday, June 13, 2014

The Collection (2012)

The CollectionThis is a horror sequel where you don't have to see the first to follow along, but it does bring back the main hero and villain from the previous movie. The cult following of the original made this film possible, so give it a look. A thief breaks in a house and ends up trying to save the family being tortured by another unwanted vistor that beat him to scene. But wait, this killer has set up believable traps all over the house. The sequel expands the scope to an old hotel and has 10 times the body count. The first is dark and isolated, much like Alien. And like Aliens, the sequel is more in your face and action oriented. There are still a few really good scares and plenty of gore, with a villain that is truly chilling in appearance and the way he kills. Think Jigsaw and his traps, but he also does some of his killings himself with his arsenal of knives. My theater was actually half full (I thought I'd be alone) and people clapped when it was over.

I liked the first movie but this gave me more bang for my buck...With poor box office sales I guess there will be no Collection/or 3. I really wish horror fans would have supported this film. Its a lot better the a lot on the market. Paranormal Activity makes money and this one doesn't makes no sense to me.

Buy The Collection (2012) Now

I loved the original, but this sequel is even better. Impressive special effects, solid performances, and a slick pace. Highly recommended for fans of The Collector!

Read Best Reviews of The Collection (2012) Here

Very well done, nice plot well written. All in all a good horror movie better than most of the stuff coming out of hollywood lately.

Want The Collection (2012) Discount?

The collection is full of suspenseful and action packed sequences that left me on the edge of my seat, a definite must see movie.

Save 20% Off

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Night of the Living Dead (1990) (1990)

Night of the Living DeadSo you're George Romero, writer and director of one of the most influential horror movies ever, Night of the Living Dead (1968), and it's some twenty odd years later and you're executive producing a remake of said movie. Who do you get to direct? How about special effects master Tom Savini, the man responsible for the horrifying effects in Dawn of the Dead (1978) and Day of the Dead (1985)? Seems a pretty good choice to me...

Night of the Living Dead (1990) stars Tony Todd and Patricia Tallman as Ben and Barbara, respectively, two individuals who seek refuge in a farmhouse as a legion of hungry corpses descend upon them and soon find the house not so much a haven as a claustrophobic nightmare. They also discover they aren't the only ones in the house, as there are five people locked in the basement. Emerging from their hidey-hole are Harry and Helen Cooper, a married couple, and Tom and Judy Rose, a younger couple, Tom's uncle being the owner of the house. Also in the basement is the Cooper's daughter, Sarah, who has become ill after being bitten by one of the undead (guess where that's going). A diverse group, for sure, and one that finds itself at odds in if it's better to fortify the house or retreat to the fairly secure basement. Harry thinks it's best to go into the basement and bar the door, but Ben would rather board up all the doors and windows, using the basement as a last option, as there is only one way in and out and he doesn't want to trap himself down there unless he absolutely has to...Harry, who is quite vocal throughout, thinks this plan foolish and says once he goes into the basement and bars the door, he won't open it for anything, regardless. As tensions flare, night falls, and the dead begin arriving in greater numbers, I guess sensing the warm, living flesh they so crave to be inside the house. As the situation grows worse, an escape plan is formulated, but the plan soon falls apart, and it's back to the house. Who lives? Who dies? Is rescue in the wings, or should they just put their heads between their legs and kiss their hinders good-bye?

It's always a sketchy affair remaking a film, especially one that's deemed a classic and definitive representation of its' genre. Look what happened in 1998 when director Gus Van Sant released a remake of Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho. A total and tremendous flop...Yes, I am sure there was a awful lot of apprehension to redoing a movie that really didn't need to be redone, but the end result turned out an interesting update, remaining true to the original while adding a few surprises along the way. Tony Todd is excellent as Ben, and is definitely the strongest characterization in the film, bringing a lot of what Duane Jones did in the original, while adding personal nuances to make the character his own. Patricia Tallman's character of Barbara starts out the same as the original played by Judith O'Dea, but goes through some serious changes by the end, allowing for the a modernization of the character to fit more along the lines of the strong female lead, as seen in the Alien films with Ripley, played by Sigourney Weaver. Was this for the better? I am still undecided, but it certainly made interesting viewing. The character I found most annoying was that of Harry Cooper, played by Tom Towles. His portrayal was overblown to the point of being silly, with his constant yelling, screaming, and berating of other characters. The Harry Cooper in the original was a jerk, for sure, but at least you got the feeling it was a jerkiness borne of overriding desire to protect his family, even if his plans were at odds with the rest of the group, allowing for viewers to develop some empathy for the character. Here, the character is played as a bonehead to the nth degree, and it only served to, in my opinion, disrupt the flow of the film. The biggest difference between the original an the remake is obviously the color factor, but one will also notice that the undead are much more detailed than in the original, due to a much larger production budget. You can tell a great amount of effort was taken in this area, enhancing on the original film. The film wasn't quite as gory as I thought it was going to be, but that's pretty well explained in a making of featurette. Seems in order to avoid an X rating, these scenes were either removed or toned down. Savini didn't seem too upset about it, as he felt, and I agree, that sometimes what you don't see is just as effective as what you do see.

The disc has the wide screen presentation on one side and the full screen on the other, and includes some good special features like trailers, production notes, commentary by Savini, and a 25 minute making of featurette called `The Dead Walk' that highlights a lot of interesting facts about the movie, along with comparisons to the original. Also in this featurette are some of the scenes that were deleted to get an R rating, along with alternate, more visceral scenes that were toned down in the release. If you liked the original, chances are you'll get a kick out of this film, as I wasn't disappointed, and I usually despise remakes.

Cookieman108

Tired of the poor remakes released today that completely butcher the originals by comparison? Tired of some unknown director putting his own personal twisted and butchering a classic film, throwing too many new elements into it? Were you angered by the remake for the Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Well then you will love this remake from 1990 of Night of the Living Dead!

With only one major change and several minor ones, this movie pretty much follows the original exactly. Why was this movie done so well? It was directed by none other than Tom Savini! For those of you who don't know, Tom Savini is a legend in the special effects/gore/makeup department. He's worked with George Romero before in Dawn of the Dead. Tom Savini is a man who knows how to do things right and knows how things should be done. This remake is an example of it.

While I don't consider it to be better than the original, its still is very entertaining and it never angered me. It contains more gore but I was somewhat disappointed. I felt that there wasn't enough gore, but that's probably because my favorite zombie film Dead Alive has spoiled me. Anyways, the one major change is that Barbara quickly turns to a traumatized expendable into a heroine wielding a shotgun. It works rather well.

If you enjoy the original and have seen all four of Romero's Dead films (or at least the original), then go ahead and buy this because the price is only Seven Bucks!!! I doubt that a special edition will be released anytime soon because it's a remake, but its definitely worth the price which almost make s me want to give this five stars. Holly Wood needs to compare the originals with the remakes so they can then realize either the right way to remake a movie or to just leave them alone all together. Alright enough with this review; just go out and buy or rent it, you won't be disappointed. Hoped this helped.

Buy Night of the Living Dead (1990) (1990) Now

Roger Ebert once told me that the secret to making a good thriller is to make sure that it can't age. The best thrillers never get old, and never lose their edge. Movies like "Halloween," "The Silence of the Lambs," "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer," and of course "Night of the Living Dead" have never lost their death grip on the collective jugular of movie goers. Back in 1990, George Romero wanted to remake his 1968 cult classic with brand new make-up effects from the man who assisted him on his previous zombie pictures, Tom Savini, in the director's chair. Age has been kind to the original version of this film, and I anticipate the same will be true with its surprisingly effective and well-acted remake.

I was really impressed with Tom Savini's (The King of Splatter) work on the "Dawn" and "Day of the Dead" films, along with his work on "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" and "Friday the 13th (and Part 4)," so when I saw his name stenciled after the words "Directed by" on the video box, I immediately rented it. The most obvious changes in the film lie within the newer, state of the art make-up effects, which range from a man broken in half from a car collision to a man walking around with the Y-incision from his autospy displayed to the world at large. There are other little differences in the film, which mostly reside in the performances (bravo to Tony Todd), the demeanors of the characters (Patricia Tallman's character is much tougher than the timid, frightened woman her predecessor played), and an all-new ending. The film still incorporates the trademark Romero satire, but it's much subtler and more understood than it was in "Dawn of the Dead." The characters in the remake are more engaging than in the original, and I think the new make-up helps the film work well on the horror level. Sure, it doesn't have the grainy, documentary feel that the original had, but the movie still works. I like it a lot.

Read Best Reviews of Night of the Living Dead (1990) (1990) Here

No one was more excited than me when I heard that this movie would finally be released on Blu-Ray. "The Night of the Living Dead 1990" is a minor classic, very worthy of cult status and deserving of all of the accolades fans have heaped upon the film since it was released. However, during the twenty plus years since the release of the film never did I hear anyone say "Gosh, I really love this movie, but why couldn't it be much darker and be much more blue in color?"

Whether or not you wanted it, that is exactly what happened.

What used to be an enjoyable, watchable movie has become a dark, murky, hard-to-see blue mess, a travesty of a high defintion transfer foisted on an unsuspecting public by someone that obviously is not a fan of the movie. Is this a case of someone looking for a solution to a problem that didn't exist ("Gee, who wants to watch a movie where there is enough light to see everything and there are all of these other distracting colors aside from blue!") and thought that their solution would be appreciated by fans of the movie, or is it a situation where someone, somewhere, simply did not have a clue to what they were doing? Seriously, this should have been the easiest thing in the world to do, and they messed it up. Here is what should have happened:

Step One: Transfer the print of the film to High Definition.

Step Two: Resist the temptation to tint the movie blue and darken it so much that many scenes are virtually unwatchable.

Step Three: Release the movie on Blu-Ray to an adoring public.

Seriously, where was the benefit in releasing this movie on Blu Ray in this shoddy state? Who did they think they would please? If you are a fan of a movie, any movie, and you want to see it in High Definition, you just want to see the same movie you love and have always loved without any changes except for the fact that the picture is now in High Definition. I don't want to see the movie trampled and changed in ways that make it hate it, and hate the people that altered it and the company that released it. Why some filmakers and companies insist in "improving" their films for home video release is beyond me, but in this case it really goes too far. Thankfully I still have my DVD, and suggest anyone interested in this film buy it in that format, and avoid the Blu Ray at any cost; the pain is just not worth it.

For some reason now I hate the color blue.

Want Night of the Living Dead (1990) (1990) Discount?

I've seen all three versions of Night Of The Living Dead; the 1968 original (in glorious black & white and beautiful color), the epic 1990 remake (this one), and the nonsensical 2006 version (avaialbe in 2D and headache causing 3D). The 1990 Night Of The Living Dead is the best (or is at least equal to its 1968 counterpart). While the 1968 version has its merits, this version has those and more. One improvement is Barbra (portrayed by the lovely Patrica Tallman) actually does something more in this film after the opening, in this one she takes Ben's advice and rises to the occassion. Ben (Tony Todd) is as heroic as he was in the original, if not a bit more and his rage seethes just as much with loud mouth Harry Cooper. This time instead of just being suspenseful, it actually has a feel of raw horror to it. My only complaints are that it wasn't directed by George A. Romero (though Savini does an excellent job) and then with the DVD, the deleted scenes are not it, it just seems like a tease in the featurette to show two of them and not include the rest. If you want to see a great film buy or rent Night Of The Living Dead (1990), but make plans to view the sequels of the original and the original itself.

Monday, March 24, 2014

Black Orpheus (The Criterion Collection)

Black OrpheusDo they clean the streets in Rio De Janeiro? Well, of course they do. When this carnival is over.

And if you watch this movie you will see that they do it very near the end of the last reel, as in the morning when the truck comes round spraying water, just one of a thousand little details that director Marcel Camus got right, and one of the most insignificant. But it is from a multiplicity of detail that an edifice of cinematic genius is constructed.

The true brilliance of Black Orpheus lies in the people who live on the side of the cliffs overlooking the harbor at Rio. It is their energy that prevails. Then there is the color, the costumes, the pounding rhythms, the spectacular vitality of life that is depicted as a carnival of dance and song in which we are driven along as on a wave. And yet there is the constant reality of death. And it strikes in ways we cannot comprehend, fatalistically, and we are helpless to do anything about it. And then Orpheus sings, a new Orpheus perhaps, and the sun rises again, and a little girl in white, looking like Eurydice in miniature, begins to dance as the little boy Orpheus plays his guitar, telling us that time has come round again.

Well, that's the plot as adapted by screen writer Jacques Voit from the play by Vinicius d Moraes as divined from the Greek mythology. Supporting this arresting conception is the music by Antonio Carlos Jobim and Luis Bonfa. I recall the former as the composer of bossanova who gave us "The Girl from Ipanema" and made the samba international. Starring in the title role as the streetcar conductor who is loved by all is Breno Melo, who might be seen as the natural man and native of paradise. The very pretty Marpessa Dawn plays Eurydice, an innocent from the country who falls in love with Orpheus and his song. Lourdes de Oliveira plays his intended, Mira who is hot blooded, vital and beautifully ordinary. But the actress I recall most vividly from the time I first saw this in the sixties was Léa Garcia who played Serafina. Her exuberance and comedic flair struck me as something completely different from anybody I had ever seen before. And then there are the boys who follow Orpheus around and emulate his every move. With their torn shirts and unflagging optimism, they represent the new day that will dawn.

If you haven't seen this strange and beautiful film, you are in for a singular experience. There is nothing else like it that I know of. And it is as fresh today as when it was made almost half a century ago.

--Dennis Littrell, author of "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!"

A lot of people were surprised when this won for Best Foreign Language Film at the 1959 Academy Awards. It hadn't been widely seen, except for winning at Cannes, it was a French director with a Portuguese-language film, with a black cast. (I've been to Rio and there's no racism, though some class-ism and other political nonsense). I saw this film in the 60's and loved it for its sincerity and profound lesson. I was in high school, and didn't really know much about the Orpheus legend. I was taken in by the narrative presented by Marcel Camus, and never forgot it. I subsequently visited Rio, and watching this film is most interesting, because it's about real people (not what the tourists see), but the exquisite photography not only shows vast vistas of Copacabana and Ipanema Beaches, but vivid colors, as well as how seriously the Cariocas regard "Carnaval". Bruno Mello (Orpheus) was a handsome soccer star, and a fine actor. Marpessa Dawn, as Eurydice, is really excellent (according to liner notes, she was from Pittsburgh). A real natural. An interesting thing to notice is that, even when looking though an open door, there are great shots of the beaches, Rio's finest feature. I also attended a Macumba ceremony while there, and the one depicted in the film let me know that mine wasn't a fake. Then there's the brilliant score by Jobim and Bonfa, which, by now, has become standard/classic. The music truly carries the film, the acting is first-rate, and the use of color by cinematographers Louis Stein & Rene Persin is breath-taking. This is indeed a great film with humor, a few scares, great love story, and just about everything anyone would want. The music alone will entertain; everything else is like a fine sauce over an excellent entree.

Buy Black Orpheus (The Criterion Collection) Now

A wonder-filled whirl of color and sound, this movie will provide a boost for the hopeless romantic. The never-ending love story of Orpheus and Eurydice is regenerated in "modern" Rio during Carnival. Beautifully photographed with an excellent sound track, this movie is a must-see for any serious film connoisseur.

Links to the original Greek tragedy will test your knowledge of mythology and the trip to "Hades" with its voodoo incantations will stick in your mind like a fever-induced dream. The beauty and rhythm of this film will make you think of your first true love, and, if you're one of the lucky ones out there, make you glad you never let that person go.

I first saw Black Orpheus in New Orleans. One of my life's fondest memories is viewing this film at a local repertory theater. Whenever there were carnival street scenes, balcony-bound moviegoers would let loose with Mardi Gras beads and doubloons, adding to the carnival atmosphere.

Also, although I have a copy of the subtitled Orpheu Negro, which I would never part with, I have seen a dubbed version, only once and then on television. I would very much like to acquire a dubbed copy. Can anyone out there help? I remember there being much more to the story line revealed with the dubbed version. (For example, when at the pawn shop, as patrons are passing the guitar down to Orpheus, they are saying, "This is for Orpheus. This is for Orpheus." This phrase is transposed from person to person into "This is Orpheus. Here's Orpheus.", giving the guitar mystical properties and seeming to make it the embodiment of the spirit of Orpheus. Inscribed on the guitar are the words "Orpheus is my master."

I would give this film my highest recommendation and would encourage anyone to view it at least one a year.

rmelhorn@aol.com

Read Best Reviews of Black Orpheus (The Criterion Collection) Here

The classic film that brought Brazil's bossa nova music to the world outside, this was a wry modernist update of the classical Greek myth of Orpheus and Euridyce, the starcrossed lovers whose passion could not be denied, even by all the powers of Hell. The film is adapted from a bold stage play written by Brazilian poet Vinicius De Moraes, who enlisted a then-unknown Antonio Carlos Jobim to compose the classic bossa tunes that stud the films soundtrack. In this version, Hell is a blend of the futurist modernism that created Brasilia, the sterile and unappealing new capital of Brazil, and the heedless bacchanalia of Carnaval; Vinicius's vision of the lower rings of Hades as a bureaucrat's office is a stroke of pure genius. I first saw this film when I was in high school; viewing it again as an adult steeped in Brazilian popular culture, I certainly got a lot more out of it. Although some Brazilians (prominently, Caetano Veloso) chafe at the fact that this version was directed by a European, director Marcel Camus, I think it's still safe to say that it is a brilliantly made film. Heavy on the textual symbolism and, yes, a bit voyeuristic in its depictation of the happy natives dancing to their catchy samba rhythms, but brilliant nonetheless. It also captures a moment in time -Brazil's transition into a modern nation, and the heady days before the 1964 coup -in a way that is precious and ineffable.

Want Black Orpheus (The Criterion Collection) Discount?

This movie explodes onto the screen in a riot of color, music, dancing and drama so intense that it blows our minds. It's a retelling of the ancient Greek myth of Orpheus and Eurydice, brilliantly transplanted to the favelas of Rio de Janeiro during Carnival week. The pulsing samba rhythm throughout the movie is so hypnotic that more than once I had to get up and dance while I was watching it at home. And what else could be more hypnotic than Brazil during Carnaval?

"Black Orpheus" brings us a marvelous cast of black actors lead by Breno Mello in the title role and Marpessa Dawn as Eurydice; she is fleeing Death in the form of a sinister stalker and takes refuge with her cousin Serafina, winningly played by Léa Garcia. But Orpheus has a fiancée in the persona of Mira, a sexy bombshell played by Lourdes de Oliveira, who doesn't appreciate Orpheus falling in love with the beautiful and desperate Eurydice. Mira and her friends are the Furies relentlessly hounding Orpheus in the middle of Carnaval, while he tries to protect Eurydice who is being relentlessly stalked by Death. But Death and the Furies are too strong for both of them, and Orpheus can only be reunited with Eurydice in another world.

The marvelous setting in the hills above Rio, the vibrant cinematography, and above all, the brilliant samba music by Luis Bonfa and António Carlos Jobim, all come together to work on our senses until we are totally caught up in the film. This movie is not so much for watching as for experiencing. And even after all the tragedy, we leave the film on a positive note watching the exuberant dancing by three very young children, who remind us that in the midst of death we remain gloriously alive.

Judy Lind

Save 50% Off

Saturday, February 22, 2014

The Men (1950)

The MenFred Zinnemann finally came up with a script that Marlon Brando liked enough to leave the stage and head for Hollywood. And the rest is history. That script turned out to be The Men. Brando is Bud, a parapoliegic shot in WWII and recovering in a veterans hospital. Unfortunatly there is no hope for Bud ever walking again, a fact he refuses to except. This movie is an interesting character study. Brando shows here why he would become the most influential actor of the last half century. He briliantly depicts a man at tremendous odds with himself. The supporting cast of characters, Teresa Wright(Bud's love interest), the doctors, and the men in the hospital, are well cast. Fans of character driven dramas and Brando fans should get a kick out of this film.

This is where it all started...Marlon Brando's one-of-a-kind film legacy...

Marlon's performance in "The Men" demonstrates his natural talent a talent that is now the legacy of the greatest actor of all time. His remarkable performance in "The Men" drew me in immediately. I could not take my eyes off of him. His demeanor, his facial expressions, and the way he spoke reminded me somewhat of his screen test for "Rebel Without A Cause." He is sweet, tender, ambivalent, unassuming, and somewhat emotionally injured much as I believe he was in his life off of the screen as well. There is nobody I have seen on stage or screen who can achieve such a delicate and perfect balance of emotion or elicit the kinds of emotions he does in others through his performances as Marlon did in the roles he has played on stage and screen.

I have 36 Marlon Brando films in my collection, many of which I have watched several times. But, I have never been able to bring myself to watch "The Men" until very recently. I am a nurse and I have seen first hand that which Marlon's character, "Bud," faced after becoming a paraplegic as the result of an injury. In my work, it has weighed on me at times that, although I possess some medical expertise and although I can contribute to helping a person back to optimal health following a tragedy, I am still not able to wave a magic wand and turn his reality into a dream from which he will awaken.

I knew what "The Men" was about and with having become very familiar with Marlon Brando's realistic and poignant portrayals of people on film such as his portrayal in this film, I expected that my insides would be torn asunder. And, they were. Marlon portrayed it as it truly was and is. In the beginning, "Bud" is afraid to live while also being afraid to die. Later in the film, this sentiment is echoed by Jack Webb's character when he recites a piece of Hamlet's soliloquy from "To Be Or Not To Be"..."To die, to sleep...to sleep, perchance to dream...aye, there's the rub...for in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil must give us pause" the contemplation of suicide, but, at the same time, the fear of what one may face in death should one choose to take his own life due to his circumstances. Which is the most fearful prospect?

"The Men" is about a man who, following a war injury, finds that he has become a paraplegic and that life will never be the same for him again. Throughout the film, he travels through every stage of grief and grieving and, ultimately, comes to terms with his circumstance. I won't give the details of the film away, but I will say that it is definitely a "must see" movie and that, among the many touching scenes throughout, a very moving scene with Bud and his wife takes place at the end and one is left feeling so many emotions.

This is an excellent film, the first film for Marlon Brando, and one whose heart-rending insight into the personal struggles of a man faced with a life-altering situation is exhibited with absolute perfection by Marlon Brando.

Buy The Men (1950) Now

I was impressed with this movie when I fist saw it in the 50's I have been a Brando admirer ever since . Over the past 50 years I have seen all of his movies more than once. The Men has a great message , I recommend it to all my friends .

jack

Read Best Reviews of The Men (1950) Here

Great classic to watch in your home theater.marlon brando was a great actor in his time. Many more great movies to choose from.

Want The Men (1950) Discount?

Marlon shines in his first feature film and this is one of my all time favorite Brando movies. An amazing job as a recovering paraplegic.

Save 35% Off

Sunday, December 22, 2013

Let Me In (2010)

Let Me InLet Me In is one of the most beautiful films of the year, and probably the best remake that I have ever seen. It is based on the Swedish film, Let The Right One In, which was released two years ago to monumental acclaim from both critics and art-house audiences alike. This touching story, concerning a young man's crush on a 12 year old vampire named Eli, captured the hearts and minds of everyone who was lucky enough to see it. If Ingmar Bergman were to direct a vampire-themed film, it would look a lot like this. However, one should not think of the film as yet another entry into the recent "vampire" craze. It is much more than that. This is the film that Twilight only wishes that it could be.

The remake deviates structurally from the original, only in that the opening is a bit different, and a few minor characters have been altered or dropped altogether. The integrity of the storytelling remains intact, and as a result, much of the remake resembles the original in all of its snow-drenched glory.

Kodi Smit-McPhee plays Owen, a lonely young man who is constantly bullied at school in the most brutal fashion. He spends his evenings at home playing with knives, and spying on the attractive neighbor next door. In addition to these disturbing quirks, he has an almost addictive fondness for Now and Laters, and constantly eats the candy throughout the film. Chloe Moretz plays Abby, a young girl who moves in next door with a man that we initially assume is her father. The two meet on the playground one night, and bond over the intricacies of a Rubick's Cube. Soon, Owen develops a crush on his new friend, oblivious that Abby is really a vampire, and that her "dad" is in fact a serial killer, who creeps out into the night, stalking and killing random victims in order to bring buckets of blood back to Abby, in order that she will survive.

Meanwhile, an older cop tries to figure out who the mysterious killer is, as the bodies continue to surface. As far as Owen is concerned, the bullying still continues at school, but with a little advice from Abby, and a little bit of weight training, Owen realizes that he can stand up for himself in one of the film's most shocking and darkly comic sequences. It doesn't take long for Owen to realize who and what Abby really is. In all of his fright and confusion, he decides to stay by her side, and as a result, Abby vows to protect Owen in the only way that she knows how.

As I said, this is one of the best films of the year. Both of the leads deserve Oscar nominations for their layered performances. The cinematography is breathtaking. The score is beautiful, although there are moments in the film that could do without a background score. This is my only criticism of this otherwise perfect film. Matt Reeves (Cloverfield) has crafted a worthy tribute with Let Me In.

It is worth mentioning that this film is rated R, and while the film centers on two adolescents, it is not a film for the 12 and under crowd. It is much too disturbing at times, and the language is pretty rough. I would also encourage Twilighters to see the film, so that they may have a clear example of a film (Let Me In) and a product (Twilight).

Back in 1992, I believe it was, "The Last of the Mohicans" starring Daniel Day-Lewis was released to a blockbuster reception by the public. It was exciting, well acted and beautiful. However, it was not a trans-literation (word for word) of the source novel by James Fenimore Cooper far from it. Like many films that have novels as their story origin, you must endeavor to take the film on its own merits and not bemoan that what you loved in the book was not on the screen as you hoped. You can love both, one, or neither, but don't hate the one for being unlike the other.

This is the problem many early critical reviewers of "Let Me In" seemed to fall into. They had loved the original Swedish book and film ("Let the Right One In"), but didn't like this American version because the tone and focus is slightly different. (An example would be Reeves' decision to make nearly all characters in the film outside the primaries into archetypes, not only simplifying the narrative, but also reenforcing Owen's isolation a brilliant choice.) Many critics said things like it's "a needless remake" or "not as faithful as the original" or some such. The damaging thing is that Matt Reeves' beautiful film was not taken on its own terms and therefore was not given a chance by some of the very audience it was made for.

"Let Me In" is beautiful, haunting, disturbing, painfully human and engrossing. The pace is deliberate, but spot-on. This was not made for the slasher film crowd. This is a movie that dares you to think what would life be like for a vampire and those around them. It works as a morality tale about, effectively, a serial killer. It also is the story about adolescence and the horrible pain of that age and the joy of finding a kindred spirit.

What is disturbing is the questions that arise from the relationships in the film. Who needs who, for what reasons, and where does the line between 'love' and 'need' end and the other begin?

The two leads in this film are stunning. No other word will suffice for their performances. They are brilliant and carry the film with their facial expressions. Moretz and Smit-McPhee deserve high praise for their work. Utterly amazing. (Compliments to the secondary players, Jenkins and Koteas, for excellent work as well.)

One final thought, a great film is enhanced by a great musical score. Like "Mohicans", the music in "Let Me In" soars and makes this film an indispensible one.

See "Let Me In" for all the right reasons. If you are a lover of film, this is a can't miss.

Buy Let Me In (2010) Now

It was with some amount of trepidation that I first heard about the impending release of Let Me In. Like many others, I was quite taken by the original Swedish film, Let the Right One In, which easily secured a spot on my Top 10 of that year. I feared that a remake would only excise the poetic nature of the story in favor of a by-the-numbers vampire film. The attachment of Matt Reeves as writer and director didn't do much to assuage my fears. Cloverfield was entertaining enough for what it was, but its gimmicky shaky-cam aesthetic wasn't very indicative of his directorial abilities. Once the good reviews of the film started pouring in, I figured I'd see it just to say that I did and then forget about its existence shortly thereafter.

Could I possibly have been more wrong? I ultimately saw the film five times during its brief theatrical run. It's been three months since then, and I still can't stop thinking about it. Never before has my reaction to a film been so contrary to my preconceived notions. Not only do I prefer the remake, it has fast become one of my all-time favorite films, and Matt Reeves has shot to the top of my "directors to watch" list. While there is much that can be said for how Let Me In compares to its Swedish counterpart, I'm going to try and keep comparisons to a minimum, because Let Me In stands firmly on its own two feet as a film. The wonderful thing is that one film doesn't have to supplant the other; Let the Right One In is a beautiful film in its own right, and Let Me In is another faithful and unique cinematic take on the same story.

The story in question originally comes from the mind of Swedish author John Ajvide Lindqvist, who wrote the original film as well as the novel that inspired it. The plot revolves around a lonely 12-year-old boy who is bullied mercilessly at school and finds solace in his budding relationship with the girl who lives next door. Unbeknownst to him, the girl also happens to be a blood-thirsty vampire who has been 12-years-old for a very long time. Reeves' adaptation of the material is respectful, thoughtful, and personal. In rendering his version of the story, he draws on the overall structure of the original film, various details from the original novel, as well as some of his own ideas and experiences growing up. Reeves clearly has a firm grasp on the complexities of the material, and he crafts Let Me In as a poignant coming-of-age story, tender love story, and chilling horror story all at once. By thoughtfully transplanting the proceedings to 1980s Regan America, Reeves uses the sociopolitical context of that era as a backdrop for Owen's tortured adolescence, resulting in a subtle exploration of moral ambiguity and duality. Despite its fantastical elements, at its core, Let Me In tackles fundamental human needs the need to connect, the need to survive, and the need to make sense of a sometimes cold and frightening world. Whereas most modern horror films rely on excessive gore as a substitute for intelligence, Let Me In is one of the select few that brilliantly utilizes its horror premise as a multi-layered metaphor to explore a variety of thought-provoking ideas.

While Reeves' screenplay adaptation is impressive in its own right, his directorial style is just as powerful and artistic. Simply put, Let Me In is one of the most elegantly directed horror films I've had the pleasure of watching in a really long time. Reeves' controlled and careful direction is a revelation in today's frenetic cinematic world. Let Me In is one of those rare films where virtually every shot helps reveal character and drive the narrative forward. Reeves is clearly an ardent admirer of Alfred Hitchcock, and his point-of-view driven visual storytelling does an admirable job of cementing the audience in the perspective of the central characters. Furthermore, he injects his film with a sense of dread and tension that would have made the Master of Suspense proud. Between Reeves' crafted cinematic approach and his cinematographer's haunting gothic visual palette, Let Me In is a breathtaking and beautiful film to behold.

Finally, a discussion of Let Me In's strong suits isn't complete without addressing the power of its two lead performances. Kodi Smit-McPhee and Chloe Grace Moretz may have only been 12-years-old at the time of filming, but their performances exude a sense of depth and maturity far beyond their years. Let Me In may revolve around two children, but it is a dark and complex film for adults, and the fact that McPhee and Moretz are able to shoulder the weight of the film with such a sense of grace speaks volumes for their talent as actors. Richard Jenkins and Elias Koteas turn in excellent supporting performances, but the central story of Let Me In lives or dies by the success of its two leads, and McPhee and Moretz play a huge part in making Let Me In the emotionally charged film that it is.

Although it didn't do nearly as well as it should have at the box office, Let Me In deserves to find a larger audience on DVD and Blu-ray. It's a rare and precious gem that got unfairly swept aside in the chaotic rush of awards season, despite its strong critical reception. In a cinematic climate where countless films are created solely to cash in and make money, it comes as a startling surprise that such a moving, layered, and crafted piece of cinema would come in the form of a remake. And yet, Let Me In is all of these things and more. Anyone who likes their films to have equal doses of artistry, emotion, and intelligence owes it to themselves to pick up a copy of Let Me In. Don't let the genre deter you; it's not just an amazing horror film, it's not just an amazing remake, it's an amazing film, period.

Read Best Reviews of Let Me In (2010) Here

I'm not a big fan of horror movies, but this one really had me. It's the most engrossing horror film I've seen in years.

Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee) is a lonely kid, mercilessly bullied at school, whose parents are divorcing. One winter night, he meets Abby (Chloe Grace Moretz), a girl who has just moved into the apartment complex and never wears shoes.

Abby is a vampire, trapped in a child's body, and her "father" (Richard Jenkins) is actually her protector. Not only does he go out and kill people so that Abby can have blood, but when she does the dastardly deed herself, he disposes of the body.

Both friendless, Owen and Abby bond and it is a relationship that endures even after the young man learns the truth about the strange girl.

Adapted by director Matt Reeves (CLOVERFIELD) from a Swedish novel by John Ajvide Lindqvist, LET ME IN is both a horror film and a heart-wrenching tale about the pain of adolescence. Abby may kill people in order to survive, but she is also a victim. She didn't ask to become a vampire.

The picture is dark and violent, though much of the blood-letting (wisely) happens off-screen. It is also a love story that will haunt you long after the movie ends.

© Michael B. Druxman

Want Let Me In (2010) Discount?

I adore the Swedish film Let the Right One In and I was highly skeptical about the idea of an Americanized remake. The original was such a poetic, touching film I wondered how anyone could hope to improve on it. When it was announced that the director of Cloverfield was behind it and the title had been dumbed-down for American audiences (I realize that translations being what they are, the title may be appropriate, but you can't deny it sounds like a dumbed-down version of the original), I lost all faith in it until director Matt Reeves cast two of the most talented child actors working today. Whenever a film is remade, I watch it and judge it on its own merit. When reviewing a remake I don't like to compare it with the original, but I found it impossible to not break my own rule several times here.

The setting is Los Alamos, New Mexico, 1983. Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee) is a 12-year-old boy, seemingly with no friends, frequently bullied at school, and with no supporting parent figure to come home to. One night, outside his apartment building, Owen meets a young girl named Abby (Chloë Moretz), who has just moved in next door with a mysterious man that Owen assumes is her father (Richard Jenkins). It's no spoiler to tell you that Abby is a vampire.

Character actor Elias Koteas plays a policeman, who is basically a composite character of several minor characters from the Swedish version. While it's not a shot-for-shot remake, Reeves sticks very close to the Swedish film. Since I've never read the book, I can't be sure that additional elements in this film are Reeves' own ideas or simply ideas taken from the book so I ask you to forgive me if I credit him with something that should be credited to the novelist John Ajvide Lindqvist.

So, what has changed? Obviously the setting has moved from Sweden to New Mexico. Some of have commented that since Reeves didn't differentiate from the look of the Swedish version this change was pointless. I'm not offended by it as it doesn't change the story at all. The characters names have changed from Oskar and Eli to Owen and Abby. Once again, I find no quarrel here as their names aren't intact but their character is. Owen and Abby don't differ very much in character from their foreign counterparts and I like that Reeves didn't attempt to tweak with the characterization. Structurally, it's been altered too; the opening scene is changed, which seems to just be a way to capture the attention of an American audience quicker. Let Me In begins with a bang, while Let the Right One In draws you in as it progresses. The bullies portrayed here are much more loathsome, as they appeared more childlike is the Swedish version. Rather than show Owen's father as an alcoholic (do we need another alcoholic father in American movies?), Reeves largely removes his involvement and in a brilliant creative flourish chooses to illustrate Owen's disconnected relationship with his mother by obscuring her face whenever she's onscreen. The look of this film is a bit more monotonous, while scenes with the father (called Håkan in the original, but anonymous here) are played out with more suspense. There's an impressively shot car crash that, in context, I thought worked much better than the "entering the bathroom in defeat" scene from the original. In one moment where Owen simply finds a picture, Reeves adds a much deeper level to the relationship between the father and Abby.

Reeves does use a bit more CGI, but he doesn't overuse it. I think Reeves knew he couldn't make the scene where Abby meets a victim under a bridge any more poetic, so he attempted to make it, at least more, creepier. I did not approve of the decision to give Abby such a vampiric look when she feeds. The look was much more subtle and effective previously. Also, the pool scene was executed (no pun intended) much better in the original as it was simultaneously horrifying and darkly humorous. Here, it's just a dark scene (but not in the sense that it's not well-lit). Despite these changes (and despite your feelings on these changes), Reeves doesn't keep the beauty and poetry of the original intact but brings his own poetic beauty to it, really proving his merit as a capable director.

Now let's talk about the acting, beginning with Richard Jenkins. This is a highly underrated character actor who has appeared in a lot of movies (including such cinematic fecal matter as Step Brothers, among other things), but he's rarely given a role that allows him to really shine. With hardly any additional screen-time than his foreign counterpart (actor Per Ragnar), Jenkins gives a much creepier, more effective, and ultimately more sympathetic performance. He brings new life to this character that simply wasn't present before. Beyond those two performances, I will not compare any others. McPhee does a convincing, identifiable interpretation of his character and gives a performance that is more emotionally mature than you'd expect from someone who is fourteen (at the time of this writing). Moretz is a revelation in what is arguably her most mature role yet. At thirteen (as of this writing), Moretz has racked up an impressive filmography and, as Abby, she demonstrates that she's an immensely talented actress, capable of conveying emotions way beyond her years. If acting is her passion and she sticks to it, I can see her making real waves in the film industry and being the recipient of many film awards as she gets older. I don't recall seeing a performance by a child actor that impressed me this much. While many will compare her performance with Lina Leandersson's, I encourage those people to look at Moretz at face-value. This is an actress of infinite talent.

Let Me In was released to theatres in October of 2010, only four months after the third film in the Twilight Saga became a box office phenomenon. Unlike that film, Let Me In underperformed at the box office. It's a tragedy that such emotionally retarded films like Twilight do phenomenal business at the box office but something this poignant makes no impact. I mention this because fans seem to flock to human-vampire romances, yet the lesser one makes 10x the money. Let Me In is a love story, but not in any traditional, straight-forward sort of way. This adolescent love story has no kissing, no physical intimacy, and no dreary, contrived romanticizing yet is more poignant, romantic, and sweeter than Twilight while simultaneously achieving more emotional resonance than that saga could ever hope for. The fact that Moretz and McPhee, at 13 and 14, bring more pathos to their "romance" than the entire adult cast of Twilight says a lot about the childish idiots that populate that movie.

It's a remake, yes but it's one of the best horror films and one of the best vampire films to come out of Hollywood in a while. Let Me In is an admirable film that would be much more respected if it wasn't a remake. Few remakes live up to the original film while almost rivaling it as successfully as Let Me In does. Those not familiar with the original Swedish film should seek it out, but whether you're a big fan of the original or were completely unaware of it's existence I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by this film.

GRADE: A-

Save 50% Off

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire (2009)

Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by SapphireI meant to write a review of "Precious" even before I watched it. Lots of times, writing the review is more satisfying than watching the film. This is harder. I felt my heart constrict in the first scene of Precious. My eyes and temple began to throb. I could scarcely catch my breath the rest of the way through the film. "Life" requires too much of us sometimes. Sometimes even a simulation of Life requires too much.

Improbable as it may seem, coming from a retired classical musician like me, who has lived fairly well most of his life, a lot of the misery portrayed in Precious is horribly familiar and real. The poverty and brutishness and the haplessness of both takers and givers of "welfare" are not exaggerated here. Yeah, things seldom move that quickly or that much in 'real time', and yeah, Precious's classmates evolve from intolerable to empathetic as if by miracle. But the story line isn't very central to this film, or rather to my response to this film, which is all Sorrow for all of us, from Precious to Queen Elizabeth II. Life hurts too much. The rosy glow of Hope in "Precious", which some critics have applauded and some derided, is more light than warmth. There really isn't much chance for that girl-woman in the film, except for the one-in-sixty-million chance that she'll be discovered by a film maker.

"Precious" had a hundred times the impact on me that "The Hurt Locker" had. But I can't sit in judgment on the "art" of it as cinema. For sure, I won't forget it as quickly as I do most films.

Hype is often undeserved, especially when it comes to films. Add to the fact that PRECIOUS had Oprah attached to it and you might back off even further. But there's no need. This film, for all intents and purposes, is a phenomenon that deserves your attention.

Garnering two Academy Award wins and multiple, smaller award show prizes, Precious is ...well ...precious. The story could've gotten dark and downright depressing. I mean, we're talking about an abused, overweight teenager who's now into her second pregnancy (incestuous pregnancy, I might add), and one can see where you could surmise this to be a gloom-and-doom movie. It isn't. It's hopeful and surprisingly upbeat. And it's well-acted by a veritable group of unknowns.

In the prime role of Precious we have Gabby Sidibe, a first time wannabe actress who serendipitously found the casting location and locked in the role. She was the perfect choice, and gave off a sense of foreboding and hope throughout the film's length. Her flattened emotional state at home, where she's abused by her mother, contrasts perfectly with her life outside where she's trying to better herself against tremendous odds.

But if Gabby was perfect, the woman who played Mary (her Mother) was ...beyond perfection. Mo'Nique (Beerfest) pulls in the performance of a lifetime. Uneducated, uninspired, confused, and ill-equipped to deal with just about anything, Mo'Nique played the part so beastfully that it was sometimes hard to watch what she might do next. She was the perfect manipulator.

Director Lee Daniels is one of those people who aren't afraid to steer directly into the path of controversy, and does so here with an able hand. You may have heard of his other successes; things like Monster's Ball and The Woodsman. No? Then I highly recommend you check them out if you enjoyed Precious.

I would warn parents, though, that Precious has a very appropriate R rating attached. The scenes of incest (although short-lived) are vivid, and there's liberal use of violence against infants and teens, as well as language that'd make a p0rn-star blush. But all of it is done in an appropriate context, never for shock value.

Precious deserves your attention. Not because it won an award, or because Oprah's attached to it. It deserves to be watched because there are too many kids out there going through this very same ordeal in social silence. Shame, despair, and anger eat at these kids. It's a miracle any of them come out the other side in a functional manner. Which is why Precious will inspire you.

Buy Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire (2009) Now

It's hard to know what to say about this movie and this review isn't going to be some in-depth analysis. There are plenty on those all over the web from every Doctor So-and-So you can imagine; this is just the thoughts of a common, garden variety movie-watcher.

The first thing that struck me about Precious was how well everyone played their role, even Mariah, though to be fair her part is barely more than sitting and nodding now and then, but she sat and nodded very believably!

The second thing I noticed was that the movie seemed to be incredibly racist and as a white American I thought, "Maybe I've just been programmed to think that everything is racist because we live in an overly sensitive society where if you say anything about anyone who isn't white, you're a racist." So I don't know. I'll try to explain.

*All the Other Reviews Have Already Spoiled the Entire Plot, So These Aren't Really Spoilers, but I'll Warn You Anyway*

FIrstly, I found it very odd that everyone in the movie seemed to have a decidedly "ho-hum" attitude towards the fact that Precious had two kids by her HIV-positive father. Her teacher, guidance counselor, whoever were all completely non-plussed by this news that should have been stomach-churning. It's like the movie was trying to say that it's completely normal and boring for poor black kids to be having their father's AIDS babies. Really? I don't know about that message...

And how many "stereotypically poor black" problems did Precious have to have? Did she really have to be on welfare, illiterate, a failure at school, pregnant, fat, the victim of child abuse as well as sexual abuse AND HIV-positive? Man! Really? They couldn't have picked, like, three? Too bad there wasn't time in the movie for her to join a gang and go to prison! Maybe in the sequel. All I'm saying is that even though I am white, I grew up in a very poor, predominantly black part of town and none of the kids I went to school with (most of whom were black) had half of the problems this movie suggests are normal for all poor black people. Certainly all of them could read.

And it is also somewhat interesting to note that all of the light-skinned, thin characters in the movie are intelligent, well-spoken, compassionate and educated while all the frumpy, dark-skinned characters are stupid, illiterate, helpless, full of self-loathing and completely broken in every conceivable way, not to mention only able to be saved by the light-skinned, thin characters who have everything together in their lives.

Is the film racist? I don't know. I'm not a thinker; I'm just a watcher. But I will say that I am not the type of person who sees racism in everything. I think the whole race thing in this country is completely blown way out of proportion, but this movie? It's hard to look at it and not see a lot of strange stuff going on. And I really cringe when I see people saying, "This movie is so true!" There's no way any of this can be "so true" for more than just the smallest, tiniest percentage of the US population. Like probably less than .0000001 percent of the US population has Precious' life and the way the movie brazenly hints that her life is a wide-spread epidemic that most if not all black people would identify with is not good, in my opinion.

And I do think the movie is really bad for all the racist people who are out there and who have already latched onto this as their proof that this is "the way inner-city black people really are". This in no way should be used as a guidebook to how any group of people "really is". Even though, of course I guess a lot of black people probably think that Napoleon Dynamite is how most white people really are. So it balances out, I guess. Ha.

Read Best Reviews of Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire (2009) Here

This movie is unbelievable. Monique's performance is worth the Oscar she got for it. I made my daughter watch it because I needed her to see what some people go through including her own mother. Sometimes you cant find the words and movies (and books) will say it for you.

Want Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire (2009) Discount?

On the surface "Precious" could be another sad movie about tragic circumstances of the poor, uneducated, etc. What I walked away with from the movie was the following:

1) the complexity of victimization, that in this society in an effort not to resolve the true core issues of our day, we spend all our focus on painstakingly analyzing why the victim is in the circumstances they find themselves and how its their fault. In Precious, we witness the victimization of a young girl, and not till the end do we see the victimization of the mother, and we see nothing of the victimization of the father.

2) failures of a society, that in a society that doesn't spend all its resources in maximally developing its citizenry, but instead creates multiple layers of winners based on categories of class, race, education, wealth and sex you instead maximize victimization. Obviously a highly victimized society, were any victim can then turn perp, but for the most part doesn't turn activist is one that can be better managed and controlled and continually denied basic dignity.

3) choices, that each and every day we all have the choice to make our lives and the lives of others better from our vantage point. On our job when someone is being targeted, do you have the courage not to join in for fear you will be next. In your relatoinship when it becomes clear that it has taken an unhealthy turn, do you have the courage to seek support and the relationship's end instead of allowing the robbing of years of your life. As a professional doctor, lawyer, officer, etc. with the special priviliedges you enjoy in this society, your actions can be catastrophic to an individual's life, do you have the courage to not fall into the trap of feeling that the lives of others don't count, and therefore don't warrant your compassion or whatever real and safe assistance at your disposal.

4) justice, that each and everyone on this planet is deserving and in so believing that all of our resources must be brought to bear in order to bring about peace, justice, and the upliftment of life wherever we find ourselves. That it is not victims that are weak for they have truly survived unimaginable horrors, weakness are in the actions of the perp who neither possess the compulsion or imagination to do something other than harming/maiming/raping or killing of others as well as those who simply walk away (physically or mentally) when their resources could be of use.

Precious wasn't simply about the abuse of a young black girl; it was about the abuse and victimization of all people everywhere. I commend the writers, producers, actors and actresses, etc. having the courage to make this movie and in so doing make a statement.

Now what are we going to do??

Save 33% Off

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Willow (Blu-ray / DVD Combo) (1988)

WillowWhat do you get when you have George Lucas AND Ron Howard, both famous for their work in the movie-making industry, producing and directing this movie? You've got it, a fantastic, rollicking fantasy-adventure!

The evil Queen Bavmorda (Jean Marsh) has for years been searching for the baby who, according to an ancient prophecy, will end her reign of terror. Taking all the pregnant women, she searches each and every baby when one day, the sacred girl is born. But before Bavmorda could kill her, a faithful midwife takes the child away from the castle. When she realizes she is being pursued, she lets the baby drift away on a river. The abandoned girl is found by a Nelwyn named Willow Ufgood (Warwick Davis). But Willow quickly finds out that the baby is being tracked down Bavmorda's armies, including her daughter Sorsha (Joanne Whalley) and General Kael (Pat Roach). Willow sets out to the crossroads to give the baby back to the Daikini, or the big humans. He finds out though through the magical Cherlindrea (Maria Holvoe) about the baby, Elora Danan (played by both Ruth and Kate Greenfield) and the prophecy about her. Willow, with the companionship of swordsman and warrior Madmartigan (Val Kilmer) and Brownies Rool and Franjean (Kevin Pollak & Rick Overton), they go to seek help from sorceress Fin Raziel (Patricia Hayes).

A totally charming movie, "Willow" will be one of my favorite movies to watch for a long time. Though people must be warned that though it is rated PG, it's more like PG-13 in some areas and I strongly suggest that adults watch before their children do.

Everything is wonderful about the movie, from the directing, the acting by the whole cast, an enchanting plot, pretty good special effects, and plenty of humor and action. There's humor that is witty, sarcastic, and laugh-out-loud funny. Val Kilmer as Madmartigan and the two Brownies gets plenty of great lines. Yet at the same time the movie is pretty serious with all of the battles against good and evil, and Val Kilmer is a great swash-buckling swordfighter and handles the sword pretty well.

And this DVD isn't called "Special Edition" for no reason. Though it may not have as many special features as many recent movie special editions, "Willow" will satisfy you. 1) Commentary by Warwick Davis, 2) Willow: Making of an Adventure Featurette, 3) Featurette: Morf to Morphing, 4) Behind-the-Scenes Still Gallery, 5) Theatrical Teasers and Trailers, 6) 8 TV Spots, and a few more. One thing you must watch is the 'Making of an Adventure Featurette'. Looking at an older Ron Howard with his mustache certainly was a little shock to me after seeing him play Opie on the "Andy Griffith Show" and acting in "Happy Days". One part that was fun about it is when they were talking about the love scenes in the movie. Val Kilmer admits that whenever he had to kiss Joanne Whalley, afterwards he always forgot his lines and no matter how many times they had to do it, he never got it right. They were married after making the movie but unfortunately, they were divorced later on.

So if you are thinking about getting "Willow", I strongly recommend that you watch it! Enjoyable for the whole family, if your children are old enough to handle some parts of the film. And if you have a chance to check out the quotes and trivia page on Amazon, I suggest you do because you can find out all sorts of things.

A great story about a Nelwyn named Willow (Warwick Davis) who finds a baby in the river. It turns out that this baby, named Elora Dannan, is part of a profecy that was said to destroy the evil Queen Bavmorda when the child grew older. Willow sets out on an adventure with a warrior named Madmartigan (Val Kilmer) to save the baby from being killed by the queen. Fairies, trolls, dragons and sorcerers magic bring this story to life by the talents of Industrial Light and Magic. My favorite scene is when all these fairies are flying around in the woods and the head fairy Shalindria gives Willow her wand and tells him to protect the baby and how important his quest is to the whole kingdom. The brownies are very funny too. One of them is played by Kevin Pollack. I highly recommend this movie for people that really like fantasy and adventure.

Buy Willow (Blu-ray / DVD Combo) (1988) Now

Many claim 'Willow' bears uncanny resemblances to Lord of the Rings and Star Wars (Madmartigan is Han Solo with a sword instead of a gun, and the short, pastorial, innocent Nelwyns are highly reminisent of the Shire-dwelling Hobbits). Though this is true, both Star Wars and Lord of the Rings are good books/movies thus reason dictates that 'Willow' is too! People of all ages should enjoy this movie, centred on the universal theme that just one person can make a difference, and filled with adventure, romance, comedy, danger and intrigue.

The story is centred around a baby rather than a Ring, and the infant is not to be destroyed, but saved at all costs. The reason is that this child Elora Danan is prophesied to bring about the downfall of the tyrannical Queen Bavmorda (played to great effect by Jean Marsh). Through a series of fortunate events, Elora escapes the clutches of the Queen and comes to the Nelwyn village, a small community of tiny woodland folk, and the guardianship of the sorcerer wannabe Willow Ufgood (played by Warwick Davis in perhaps the best role of his career for once he's not hidden behind a mask or facial prosthetics!) Because the presence of the baby puts the community at risk, Willow is chosen to take the baby far away, into the care of the Dakini (or human) race. On the way, Willow has (inevitably) many amazing adventures with a series of diverse characters, learning not only of Elora's true destiny, but that even someone as small as he can have an impact on the world.

The story, on the whole, hangs together well, although there is some back-and-forth travelling between the characters, and some logic flaws (ie. there's no way even a magical baby could survive even half the things that Elora does, and Sorsha is accepted without question into the ranks of the 'good guys').

The movie makes up for these faults by presenting a wide range of interesting and well-portrayed characters that fit perfectly into the fanasty genre no one should be disappointed by the variety, whether it be from the shape-changing enchantress Fin Raziel (Patricia Hayes), to the skeleton-masked Kael (Pat Roach), the etheral faerie Cherlindrea (Maria Holvoe) to the comic relief the brownies Rool (Kevin Pollack) and Franjean (Rick Overton). Likewise, the scenery and sets are beautiful (Lord of the Rings wasn't the first to discover New Zealand!) and most of the special effects hold up reasonably well against today's technology. Furthermore, the musical score is lovely both poignant and heroic, and the costumes are colourful but realistic.

Although the love/hate romance between the stars of the movie (Val Kilmer as Madmortigan and Joanne Whalley as Bavmorda's daughter Sorsha) is a nice twist on the typical fairytale treatment, it could of been handled better, especially since the two actors fell in love on set (although they did later divorce...). Oh well, this is only a minor gripe, and by no means ruins the story.

The major dampener is nothing to do with the movie, but with the DVD, as it does not include the vast majority of deleted scenes that were filmed but never shown. If you're interested, they include: scenes that deepen the friendship between Willow and Meegosh, and gives a legitimate reason as to why Meegosh would leave his friend (he breaks his arm when falling down the brownie pit); a run-in with a sea-monster when Willow rows out to Raziel's island; important background information on Sorsha, explaining that her father was the ruler of Tir Asleen and once in love with Raziel until Bavmorda placed him under a love spell before turning him to stone along with the rest of his kingdom; a large battle sequence between Airk and Kael's troops; banter between Kael and a captured Madmortigan; Sorsha calling Willow into her tent to tend for Elora where they discuss Madmortigan; Airk questioning Sorsha's sudden change from evil to good; and Sorsha actually *using* the quiver of arrows she carries around on her back for the entire movie.

These deleted scenes could have made up a substantial part of the DVD and heightened it's collectibility considerably. Perhaps before buying this DVD we should wait a bit longer and see if they are released on another edition in the future.

If you like the Willow movie and are interested in 'what happens next' try tracking down the trilogy of books that are set after the events in 'Willow' Shadow Moon, Shadow Dawn and Shadow Star.

Read Best Reviews of Willow (Blu-ray / DVD Combo) (1988) Here

"Willow" is a mixed bag of different movie venues and audience reactions, ranging from originality to predictability, from exciting to downright weird. It lacks the ingenuity and spirit of such child-oriented movies as "The Neverending Story" and "The Goonies," but for the most part, it pays off, and you may be surprised to find yourself enjoying different sections of the film.

The beginning is wonderful, a highly suspenseful opening in which an evil queen brings all pregnant mothers in her kingdom before her in hopes of locating and destroying the one chosen to bring her reign of terror to an end. A midwife smuggles the child out of the castle, and before she is set upon by wildebeests, she sends the child floating down the river, where it comes to the attention of the Nelywn community.

In the world of "Willow," there are two sets of people: the Nelwyns, a community of short, midget people, and the Daikinis, regular-sized humans. The baby is a Daikini, and so Willow Ufgood (Warwick Davis) is called upon to return the baby to its original habitat. Setting out on the dangerous journey, he soon meets adventurous Madmartigan (Val Kilmer), and the two pair up to take the baby to its destination, which changes almost every minute as they encounter such beings as a forest fairy, and a sorceress who comes in the form of a rat, a bird, a goat, etc.

The movie isn't really interested in setting a straight course for itself. The constant changing of setting, pace, and destination are all a reminder that a movie such as this is more of a device for action and humor rather than logical plot. Because this movie is aimed at children, and has a childlike quality of its own, it gets away with such a tactic.

Having said that, the film is exceptionally entertaining. It's full of humor and yes, even a little bit of suspense, likeable characters, who are sometimes so goofy and cumbersome that you'll laugh until you cry, and a story that is the stuff dreams are made of. Kilmer's character is a throwback of sorts to the swashbuckling heroes of yesteryear, while Davis is a hero as well, and the one we all come out rooting for.

The action sequences are mindless good fun, ranging from a high-speed horse chase to some showdowns at various castles throughout the land. These scenes all give Lucas and director Ron Howard a chance to showcase some of the finer set pieces in a children's movie, from knights in armor and beautiful yet foreboding vistas, to dark, gothic castles and otherworldly creatures conjured out of magical powers.

Watching the movie as an adult proves to be far different than from seeing it in my childhood. As a child, I remembered the excitement of such scenes, and looking back on them, I find that it is unfair to dismiss the movie on its logic. I do find that some scenes are somewhat disturbing for younger children, at whom the movie is aimed, such as the sequence in which a two-headed dragon rises out of a river; they seem a bit too daring for a children's movie.

The fantasy land created in "Willow" lives up to the expectations of the genre, and even goes a bit further. The story is a bit befuddled, but paying attention to its flaws takes away from the fun and excitement it has in spinning its tale. The special effects are dazzling without being jaw-dropping, and the action is intense without being gratuitous. As a children's movie, "Willow" is pure, nonsensical satisfaction.

Want Willow (Blu-ray / DVD Combo) (1988) Discount?

WILLOW is a terrific movie, one of my favorites of all time. Val Kilmer, who can often seem a little too "weird" or simply annoyed to be there in some of his other roles, is the perfect reluctant hero. Joanne Whaley (Kilmer) is the best female fantasy character ever filmed. She's neither too vulnerable nor too testosteroned. The only other "princess" that can even hold a candle to her is Buttercup from THE PRINCESS BRIDE, but as much as I love TPB, I feel that Sorsha is a cooler heroine. Warwick Davis puts in an excellent central performance and is the heart of the film. The special effects were terrific, the story is simple yet rich, so that the film stands up to repeated viewings. Simply put, this was the last great fantasy film, and certainly one of the best of all time.

Now if only they would release it on DVD. My VHS copy long ago went the way of the socks in the dryer (i.e. lost between moves). I know Lucas invested $$ in Laserdisc, but it's time for him to give it up and release STAR WARS, RAIDERS, and WILLOW on DVD. Pretty please George?

Save 32% Off