Reviews

Frankenstein is one of the best horror stories ever told in the history of mankind. The story of a mad man who was able to bring a dead person back to life has shocked nations and generations and will shock in the future as well. This is probably one of the reasons why Mel Brooks' movie is so great. He was able to take a serious story, almost traumatising and make a classic comedy out of it. His movie is a pure satire from beginning to end and this is where you can see how hard he must have worked on this movie. His more recent movie Spy Hard (1996) was quite disappointing because the humor there seemed much more sexual and the parody wasn't all that great. The only interesting part of that movie was the variety of different scenes Brooks mixed in although they didn't really blend well together.

In most movies in which you have a very rich man and his butler, the butler is quite often very funny and delivers some of the best jokes. The best example for that would have to be John Gielgud's role in Arthur (1981) which won him a best supporting actor Oscar. He played a wise-cracking butler who was able to be snide to his master without being too impolite. However, I seem to find that Martey Feldman as Igor in Young Frankenstein was even funnier than John Gielgud was in Arthur. This is the second part of Young Frankenstein.

Finally, the third part of Young Frankenstein has to with family reputation. Gene Wilder plays Fredric Frankenstein and does not like his name because of the reputation it was given by his crazy grandfather. He wants nothing to do with his past family but when his great grandfather's will is found and asks him to return to Transylvania, he sees no choice but to go out of respect for his predecessor. Upon arriving in Transylvania, he quickly meets Igor and is taken to the Frankenstein castle. There, he soon becomes obsessed with the idea of bringing a dead human being back to life. This obsession is provoked by a woman who works at the castle and who was the mistress of Fredric's grandfather.

The rest of the story is developed in a very similar way to the original terrifying classic only in a highly comic manner. Gene Hackman has a cameo as a blind priest and his scene is one of the funniest ones in the movie. Mel Brooks smartly directs this movie letting the viewer hope some things happen and others won't. Gene Wilder's contribution to the script is another plus and he delivers his role very well. The scene in the classroom is highly comic. Also noticeable is Teri Garr who plays young Frankenstein's "assistant" in the laboratory room. But Martey Feldman walks away with the movie as the snide and hilarious butler Igor. He plays the role of one those people who make you laugh just by appearing on the screen. You won't want to miss this one.

John Huston made movies mainly during the 40's and the 50's. He is well known for some of his great movies like The Maltese Falcon (1941) and The Treasure Of The Sierra Madre (1948), two movies who earned themselves a position on AFI's top 100 list and what many consider to be his best picture ever, 1951's The African Queen which was ranked 17th on AFI's top 100 list. His major collaborations with Humphrey Bogart also made him quite popular in the beginning of his career. Unfortunately, he died in 1987. However, he did not leave us without giving us an 80's classic à la John Huston. Prizzi's Honor was his final stand and what a stand it was.

The Mob is probably the topic that has been the most used in Cinema. Movies like Little Caesar (1930) and The Public Enemy (1931) are the young classics that gave us a taste of things to come for the more modern classics such as Goodfellas (1990) and the ultimate movie of all-time, The Godfather (1972) and its terrific sequel, The Godfather Part II (1974). As with every other common movie topic, Hollywood has produced many disappointing movies about the Mob such as Scarface (1983). However, it has produced the ultimate disgrace to the Mob movies with 1998's Mafia which tried to parody The Godfather, Scarface, and many others. This is something that I can not tolerate, to make a parody of such great movies. So looking at Prizzi's Honor, I thought this might be a movie that had a similar objective to Mafia with a few big stars in it. I was mistaken.

Charley Partanna (Jack Nicholson) is a wiseguy. At a wedding, he sees a beautiful tall blond woman (Kathleen Turner) with whom he immediately falls in love with. He finally meets this woman. Her name is Irene Walker. He soon finds out that she had made a hit for the Prizzi family, the family of which he is part, the day of the wedding. The two of them fall in love and make plans for marriage. But Irene goes back to California for a few days. During her trip, Charley also learns that a scam has been going on in one of the Casinos owned by the Prizzis and that the man who orchestrated this scam is a man named Marxie Heller. So Charley is sent by the family to get the money back from Marxie.

Charley goes to Heller's house and knocks off Heller. He waits for Heller's wife to return as she apparently had something to do with the scam. But surprise surprise for Charley as Heller's wife turns out to be Irene Walker. Charley spares her after she returns half of the stolen money and goes back to Brooklyn claiming he could only find that and he marries Irene. But complications are bound to arise and they do.

Huston's smart directing does not allow the viewer to call out a mistake in the movie an Richard Condon's script is intelligent as it releases all its small twists and turns in the correct order at the right moments. One of the key actors in the movie is Anjelica Huston's role as the rejected daughter of a second level boss for the Prizzi family. Without her, the movie would probably not end the way it does. Jealousy, greed, love... these are the principal themes of this black-comedy along with, of course, the theme of murder. But as I said at the beginning, this is a typical Huston classic and is not to be missed.

Hollywood has produced many court room movies. However, it has also produced a few court martial movies. The difference in these court martial movies is that it has the advantage of being appreciated by anyone who likes court room movies because these movies do not deal with war or army that much but try to stay focussed on the court room case. This is the subject which feeds the script for A Few Good Men. The other part of the script is more the lines you have to walk to win a court martial without becoming subject to one. This involves walking on a very thin line and sometimes trying to move it to your benefit without being stopped by the man in the big chair.

These two key elements are greatly mixed by Rob Reiner's masterful direction and Aaron Sorkin's excellent script. Furthermore, Reiner has a first rate cast allowing his direction to be. This cast includes Tom Cruise, Jack Nicholson, Kevin Bacon, Kevin Pollak, Kiefer Sutherland, and Demi Moore.

The story is simple. Two marines are arrested after the death of a fellow marine which they have supposedly murdered. They are transfered to Washington by the orders of Lieutenant Commander JoAnn Galloway (Demi Moore), a gung-ho navy officer, who smells a code red behind this murder and asks that division assign someone to represent the two marines hoping she will be assigned. The two men are moved up to Washington but Commander Galloway is not assigned to represent them. Instead, Lieutenant Daniel Kaffy (Tom Cruise)is the one who is assigned. Kaffy is young and has been in the navy for a little over a year. He is a very good attorney but has only one problem. His specialty is plea-bargaining. So when Division assigns him to this case, Kaffy's boss has Lieutenant Sam Weinberg (Kevin Pollak) act as Kaffy's co-counsel.

Kaffy does what a lawyer has to. He meets with Galloway and immediately, the two of them develop a hatred for one another. He pays a visit to his clients who were marines stationed in Cuba and starts to believe that the case that he has is hopeless. He decides to go down to Cuba with Weinberg. Before leaving, he bumps into Captain Jack Ross (Kevin Bacon) who at first refuses a plea-bargain for twelve years and after a one minute talk agrees to the deal. But Kaffy's visit in Cuba is the critical element of his case. The marines down there are all fanatics and will do as they please on their base. At the head of their base is Colonel Nathan Jessip (Jack Nicholson) and with him are Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Markinson (J.T. Walsh) and Lieutenant Jonathan Kendrick (Kiefer Sutherland). Jessip and Kendrick give monster impressions but not Markinson. Upon his return to Washington, Kaffy goes to court with the word of his two defendants to prove their innocence but with the intention of putting up one big fight.

The best part of the movie is what follows, the whole court-room scenes and what surrounds them. Cruise delivers an excellent performance and deserved an Oscar nomination for his role and I believe that in the final Cruise vs. Nicholson scene, Cruise makes the scene more powerful than Nicholson for he must take some huge risks. Other terrific performances come from Kevin Pollak, Kiefer Sutherland (in a smaller role), and especially Kevin Bacon. The scene in which Bacon cross-examines James Marshall is almost as powerful as the Cruise vs. Nicholson scene. I think he deserved a nomination as well for his role here. The only sour touch in the movie comes from Demi Moore who, although giving a good performance has a very annoying role and sometimes slips away from her character. But even so, this is one movie you will not want to miss.

One of the movie genres which is the most popular in Hollywood is the action movie genre, movies like Star Wars (1977), Broken Arrow (1996), Independence Day (1996), The Fugitive (1993), and many more. Personally, my favorite has always been Die Hard (1988) and considering some of the action movies we have been able to see quite recently, it always will be. However, Lethal Weapon is another movie that I would consider as a good action movie. It isn't Die Hard, but it's pretty close and having been released one year before Die Hard, I give it credit for its styles which we can find in all of the Lethal Weapon movies. These styles are a blend of action and comedy and a few emotional moments which keep the movie going and do not throw it off track.

Martin Riggs (Mel Gibson) is a cop who is very suicidal and whom many think is crazy. He lives alone in his broken down trailer with no other friend than his guard dog. During the day, he works undercover busting drug dealers or as a normal cop but doing crazy things like jumping off a roof with a man who had intended to do that in the first place. On the other side, we have detective Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover), an investigative cop who has just turned fifty. Roger is married and father of three.

This is the set-up for the movie or as some people might call it, the excuse for allowing the movie to be. The only thing is, these two men will have to meet one day if director Richard Donner wants his movie to be. And this is where the emotional part of the movie comes in.

One night, in his trailer, Riggs brings his gun to his mouth and the only thing that keeps him from pulling the trigger is the picture of his wife who is deceased. It seems to be the reason he wants to pull the trigger so that he may join her, but it also seems to keep him from shooting himself. On the other side, detective Murtaugh is investigating the death of a prostitute who turns out to be the daughter of a friend with whom he served in Vietnam. However, after the autopsy of the dead girl, the apparent suicide seems to be a murder case after all. At this point, the two men have not met but they will quite soon. Riggs is assigned to Murtaugh as his new partner. The two of them quickly meet when Murtaugh assaults Riggs when he takes out his gun in the police precinct believing Riggs was about to attack the department.

Murtaugh soon realizes that his partner is a mad man and might get him killed while they work. Riggs, on the other hand, sees nothing crazy whatsoever in what manners he uses to defend himself or his partner as long as he gets the job done. For him, that is the only thing that counts considering the fact that Riggs realizes he is suicidal. There is a very intense scene in which Murtaugh is trying to push Riggs over the edge telling him he should kill himself for he believes Riggs is not willing to do it. But he realizes, just like the viewer, that Riggs is very willing and that he shouldn't tempt him.

The comedy sets in after the two of them meet and this is what makes this movie so unique. In Die Hard, we saw Bruce Willis making wisecracks every now and then which allowed the movie to be more relaxing and all the more entertaining. In Lethal Weapon however, the two actors make jokes and funny remarks about their age, Glover's family, and many other subjects all along the movie which gives it a cool rhythm and a nice flow.

Danny Glover seems to be one of the best actors they could have gotten for the job of Murtaugh as he delivers the goods and gives his now famous line "I'm too old for this s***" quite often. But Gibson is the only man there was for the role of Riggs. He steals the movie with his tough uncaring attitude of wether he dies on the job or not. His attitude in the movie is comparable to Connery's in The Untouchables (1987) as he is ready to do anything as long as that gets the job done. Fnally, the only thing missing to complete the cast is the bad guy. I this case, Gary Busey plays an evil wacko named Mr. Joshua who has a disfunction in his nervous system as he can take pain with no reaction and still keep fighting back until he is taken down. Busey is as good as Gibson and this might be one of the movie's flaws, Busey's lack of screen-time. The script could have been somewhat stronger but you can't have everything now can you. Overall, it is a very cool action movie and is definitely worth a watch.

Rob Reiner has only directed twelve movies over sixteen years including one TV movie and they are almost all completely different. From A Few Good Men (1992) to When Harry Met Sally (1989) to Ghosts of Mississippi (1996), he does not seem to concentrate on one movie genre. My favorite Rob Reiner movie is without a doubt A Few Good Men (1992) and now, a close second is Stand By Me (1986) which has absolutely no link or resemblance with his other movies.

There is no kid who wouldn't be intrigued at the opportunity of seeing a dead human body. He would be even more intrigued if seeing that dead body involved a two-day trip with your best buddies and sneaking behind your parents' backs. In these kinds of situations, reason seems to escape a child and excitement takes over. This is at the center of the script of the movie. There is a second part which is not as visible at first, but when you come to think of it, it is the most important part of the script. This second part is courage. Courage of accomplishing a dream, courage of facing the truth, and courage of standing by one another. This kind of courage is what allows us to determine which of the four boys is the movie's hero.

Four boys, Gordie (Wil Wheaton), Chris (River Phoenix), Teddy (Corey Feldman), and Vern (Jerry O'Connell) decide to go searching for the dead body of a young boy their age named Ray Brower.

We find out that Gordie had a brother, Dennis (John Cusack) who was killed in a jeep accident quite recently and was very close to Gordie. In fact, Dennis plays a major part in Gordie's trip. It seems that all four boys have something that allows them to be in a class of their own. Gordie had his brother to whom he looked up to and who loved him. Chris is a kid who comes from a bad family and has inevitably turned out bad as well. He also has an older brother who everyone calls Eyeball (Bradley Gregg) and has become a total bum. Teddy's father was in the second World War and stormed the beach of Normandy, a fact of which Teddy is very proud. But his father turned bad after his return and nearly killed his son by putting his ear to a stove. His father was then sent to a mental institution. Finally, we have Vern. The only standout characteristic Vern has is that he had buried a jar of pennies under his porch and his mother accidentally threw away the map he had drawn for it.

So these four kids are somewhat special and get along great. But there is another bunch of kids in the movie. The bad bunch. This bunch includes Chris's big brother Eyeball, Vern's big brother Billy (Casey Siemaszko), his friend Charlie Hogan (Gary Riley), two other guys whose names are unknown to the viewer and finally, a seventh one who turns out to be the gang leader, a kid who everyone calls Ace (Kiefer Sutherland). Apart from being the gang leader, Ace is also the craziest and most dangerous kid in that gang.

The important part of the story is how Vern learns about the dead body. As he was looking for his pennies under the porch, he overheard his brother Billy and Charlie discussing how they found the body after having stolen a car and gone for a ride in the woods where the dead boy's body was. However, the two boys finally tell Ace and Eyeball about the body and the whole gang decide to go looking for him to become famous. But the young boys are also in the woods and this is where things get very tricky and almost deadly.

The all-star cast is probably the best part of the movie. River Phoenix is probably the one who gives the best performance as Chris Chambers, the young boy who turns out to be, at least in my mind, the movie's hero. A close second in the acting category is Kiefer Sutherland who is absolutely abominable as Ace. There are two great scenes in which Phoenix and Sutherland confront each other showing Chris's gift to be able to stand up for his friends and defend them and Ace's personality which is pretty much to take no crap off anyone and be as big a bully as possible. Reiner's direction is very good as well with his unpredictable camera movements and shots. A great movie all-around.

In 1994, I was very mad to see Forrest Gump win all those awards. I can understand how people might have voted Tom Hanks as best actor of the year but I was sure to see The Shawshank Redemption walk away with the best picture Oscar and Quentin Tarantino with the best director Oscar for Pulp Fiction. Instead, Forrest Gump won best picture and Robert Zemeckis won best director for his work there. Since then, his only work has been 1997's Contact. Before Forrest Gump, he had done some good movies like the Back To The Future trilogy, Romancing The Stone (1985), and my favorite Zemeckis movie, Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988). So walking into the cinema, I was expecting some good work from this director. But after having seen What Lies Beneath, I guess his Oscar victory in 1994 was his once in a lifetime 15 minutes of fame because he sure won't win one for this movie.

The movie is not really terrible but it lacks originality and I mean a lot of originality. This movie is a mix of Scream (1996), Fatal Attraction (1987), and Cape Fear (1991). It also resembles Copycat (1995) in the way that the attempted murder is recreated the same way as the original murder. It has some of Scream's suspense and surprise attacks, Cape Fear's revenge and haunting aspect, and Fatal Attraction's dishonesty towards a wife and jealousy and threats from the mistress. So if you have seen none of the four movies above, you might consider this movie to be very original and suspensful but as soon as you see them, even if it after, you will realize how What Lies Beneath seems to have big chunks of these four movies thrown into the script and all mixed up together by the direction.

The final negative part of the movie is the acting. Granted, Harrison Ford is good, but his role becomes serious only in the final forty-five minutes or so of the movie. The biggest acting disappointment comes from Michelle Pfeiffer who is simply not credible as the haunted and terrified wife. A few of the supporting performances are good (like the next door neighbors and the psychiatrist) but too many of the friends' of Harrison Ford and Michelle Pfeiffer are not quite credible either.

The story is good though. A married wife (Michelle Pfeiffer) suspects her next door neighbor of having murdered his wife and soon comes to realize she is wrong. But when strange things begin happening in her house, she gets scared and finally finds out that a spirit is haunting her house. She discovers Harrison Ford has had an affair with another woman and that the spirit that is haunting her house is the spirit of the woman with whom Ford has had the affair and she comes to suspect him of having murdered her and starts fearing he might be planning to murder her.

You're probably thinking, "So what? It copies a few movies and has a few bad performances. Why couldn't we recommend this movie to someone else"? What makes me unable to give a slight recommendation for the movie is Zemeckis's direction. The way he handles the camera is way too predictable as we see the camera going one hundred and eighty degrees around the head of one of the actors. This movement means that at the end of the spin of the camera, there will most likely be another person next to the actor whose head was used to turn the camera around. What could have been a good movie turns out to be one of the biggest disappointments of the year up to now. Too much of a copy of many movies and too predictable.

Bonnie and Clyde. Now there was a classic. That movie was as much a classic as a cult movie as a ground-breaker. Over the years, we have seen many different "versions" of this movie, the best one probably being Thelma & Louise (1991). But after seeing Truth Or Consequences, N.M., I'd say this is the movie that resembles the most this masterpiece.

Donald Sutherland. Now there is a great actor. Probably one of the best living actors in today's movie industry. His small roles in A Time To Kill (1996) and JFK (1991) are just as mesmerising as his big roles like in The Assignment (1997). If you were to ask me "Who do you think will be the next Donald Sutherland?", I would have to say "No one". But after seeing Truth Or Consequences, N.M., I'd say Kiefer Sutherland could become as great an actor as his father is.

As for a great director, well, that doesn't seem to be a problem in Hollywood right for many young directors are developing themselves into great ones and many of the older great directors are still around and while not necessarily becoming one of the greatest directors in the industry, Kiefer Sutherland seems to have as much of an acting talent as of a directing talent.

The movie's story seems very simple and in a way it is. A drug deal gone awry leaves about six dead people including five cops and four young people on the run from the law. But as the movie develops, so does the story. Hostages, undercover cop, drug lords, pregnancy, the Mob, and life on the road all mix together into this delightful mixture of love and guns.

In 1967's Bonnie & Clyde, Warren Beatty was a criminal at the beginning of the movie and always wanted to rob and unfortunately killed people. In 1991's Thelma & Louise, the two women had gone on a vacation with no intention to become criminals but unfortunately were dragged into that world by a murder involving a would-be rapist. In Truth Or Consequences, N.M., only Kiefer Sutherland's character starts off as a crazy maniac with the intention of killing people and this is why this movie differs from the two others. What lead these people to be criminals is an internal action, an action caused by Kiefer Sutehrland's character, an action that could have been avoided contrarily to those of Bonnie & Clyde and Thelma & Louise.

Equally good in the movie are Vincent Gallo and Mykelti Williamson. Gallo plays the head of the gang, a man with a conscience who has no desire in killing people and whose only goal is to go down to Mexico with his girlfriend (Kim Dickens)and get married. Williamson has the hardest role of the movie as an undercover drug enforcement agent and must change the way he acts and talks in presence of Vincent Gallo, Kiefer Sutherland, and Kim Dickens. The cast also includes two very small roles, one for Rod Steiger and the other for Martin Sheen who are both in top shape. But the movie belongs to the four young people on the run who act out the movie to perfection.

People love to talk about how they would like to have their lives a little more exciting or a little stranger. But if you're leading a life like Isabella Rossellini's in this movie, you must be begging for an ordinary life. Also, we may talk about having weirder or more exciting events in our lives but when we it comes to movies, the average moviegoer seems to want everything to be plain and simple so that he can understand all that is going on and not have to ask any questions at the end. Well if you feel you're one of those moviegoers, you won't want to see Blue Velvet.

David Lynch. He is one of the most underrated directors in Hollywood today and even though I am not fond of all his movies, I have to say he is very talented and seems to have a liking for weirdness. In fact, his movies are so weird that the only movies that are as weird as one of his are his others. On IMDb, when we look for a recommendation for another movie in the same style and we're on a movie that Lynch directed, most of the recommendations we'll find will be other David Lynch movies.

The movie's plot revolves around a coincidence. One day, Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan) is walking home from the hospital where his father is and accidentally finds a human ear on the ground. This ear will allow him to discover many things: a bar singer named Dorothy Vallens (Isabella Rossellini) whose husband and son have been kidnapped, a crazy maniac named Frank Booth (Dennis Hopper) who has apparently captured Dorothy's husband and son, and many other weird adventures that are signed by David Lynch.

The movie is too weird to be explained in less than 1000 words but I can tell you that it is worth watching, primarily for the weirdness. Yes, it is very weird, sick, gross, and perverted as well, but Lynch seems able to make a good connection between all of these characteristics that the movie has and is able to make this connection rewarding. He earned himself an Oscar nomination for best director. Furthermore, Lynch was able to add to the movie a certain visual beauty through the horrors taking place on screen which are pleasing to the viewer. Even if you are in that category of moviegoers that like the movies plain and simple, you should give this one a shot and see that you weren't making a mistake by watching it.

Edward Norton is progressing faster than any other has ever done in Cinema history. And now he's declaring himself as a great director. It's incredible to see just how much talent an actor can pack in. Steven Spielberg and Francis Ford Coppola should soon be accepting him in the same director category as them. In Keeping The Faith, he not only does a great job directing but he also gives a terrific acting performance and I felt he upstaged Ben Stiller in all the scenes where they were together. Another new discovery is Jenna Elfman who shows us she is able to do much more than just Dharma from Dharma & Greg. She delivers the goods with a strong and convincing performance and Ben Stiller is also good in his role which is not at all the same as what he had to play in There's Something About Mary.

Brian Finn (Edward Norton) and Jake Schram (Ben Stiller) are two life-long friends who have always been inseparable. As the years went by, Brian became a priest whereas Jake became a rabbi. They hang out together all the time. Then, one morning, after playing basketball, Brian asks Jake who he believes is the coolest woman the two of them have ever known and Jake immediately answers that it is Anna Reilly (Jenna Elfman). Brian agrees and tells Jake that she will be coming over to New-York and that they should get together during her long trip. Brian and Jake are also life-long friends with Anna and have known her since eighth grade. Anna arrives to New-York and she's all grown up. She's a total knock-out and the two men immediately fall in love with her. And so the relationship they had together when they were in eighth grade starts all over again. They go out the three of them and hang together. Anna asks them about their relationships and Brian is not allowed to have one. However, Jake's congregation tries to set him up with a bunch of women whom he does not necessarily like but goes out with just to please the congregation and especially his mother (Anne Bancroft). But Jake falls in love with Anna and Anna with Jake. They begin a loving relationship which they hid from Brian and naturally, the worst happens and Brian finds out.

When he finds out, their relationship breaks up. At first, Anna seems to be the victim but it soon becomes clear that it is Brian. But being a priest, he knows how to forgive. Anna is forgiven but he waits a little for Jake. But they eventually become the best of friends again and Jake starts to date Anna again and everything finishes happily.

This might sound like a 21st century version of movies like Sleepless In Seattle or Forget Paris but it is far different than those movies. I thought it looked a lot more like American Beauty in the way that it was the story of love and betrayal and friendship and beauty. There are many funny scenes in the movie but make no mistake, this movie is not a comedy. This is much more than it appears to be and is Oscar-material and if American Beauty which I personally loved won all those Oscars, then Keeping the Faith should win as many. I know I am kind of early in the season to be talking about Oscars but it is so incredible. Three obvious nominations should be Edward Norton for best actor, Jenna Elfman for best actress, and Edward Norton for best director. This is sort of an American Beauty meets A man and a woman with a third party in it. But in any case, it is one you won't want to miss.

You're probably thinking that I am a very harsh guy, comparing "Se7en" to "The silence of the lambs". Well let me tell you why I am comparing them. The theme of the movie is pretty much the same as the one in "The silence of the lambs". I also once saw on a box that it was written and I quote "better than The silence of the lambs". Unfortunately, that isn't true. Brad Pitt and Gwyneth Paltrow can't give great performances like Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins gave in "The silence of the lambs". However, Morgan Freeman is a terrific actor and so is Kevin Spacey and so the two of them together can compensate for Pitt's and Paltrow's performance.

The movie starts off in a house. Someone has been murdered. The sin this person had committed was gluttony and it seemed he was killed in this way: someone held a gun against his head and forced him to eat spaghetti until he bursted open. The detective in charge of this case is an experienced detective named William Somerset (Morgan Freeman) and is shortly teamed up with a young detective named David Mills (Brad Pitt). We them have the opening credits and the camera is filming inside the murderer's house. It is filming his hands which are working on a table and you realize how careful the psycho is. He cut off the end of his fingers and put bandages around them simply to be sure the police do not find any finger-prints.

The next murder is committed is a person whose sin was greed, then sloth, envy, wrath, pride, and finally lust. The seven sinners all having been murdered, Mills assumes that the murderer will not strike again and that he has only to catch him. But that's not what John Doe (Kevin Spacey), the murderer, has in mind. No, instead of hiding out after his seven murders, he turns himself over to the police and has a last surprise for the two detectives, a surprise that will horrify them and allow the viewer which one is able to know when to hold back and which one should be holding back.

David Fincher does a better job directing this than directing Alien³. However, I thought there was too much unnecessary gore in the movie. Brad Pitt does a good job with what he is given and Morgan Freeman is as excellent a in any other movie. But Kevin Spacey walks away with the movie and gives probably the best performance as the crazy John Doe whose way to describe a murder is as scary as seeing him commit one. It wasn't any surprise he won best villain of the year at the MTV movie awards. I think he didn't get a nomination for best-supporting actor because he already had one in "The usual suspects" which he won. The only disappointing part of the movie is truly Gwyneth Paltrow's performance who seems to be shy in front of the camera. It's a good movie that got a little too much credit but is still worth watching.

I never had a clue how great an actress Kathy Bates was until I saw "Misery". She can play anything. She can switch moods in the blink of an eye and make it look believable. As for James Caan, well I already knew he was a great actor even before I saw "Misery" and I was very surprised to see he didn't get a nomination for his role in "Misery". The Stephen King adaptation is excellent as well. I think it's the best I've seen after "The Shawshank redemption". However, Rob Reiner has done some much greater jobs as a director than for "Misery". "A few good men", for example, shows how much directing talent he has. But he didn't use it all that much in "Misery".

Paul Sheldon (James Caan) is a novelist who has invented a character named Misery Chastain and uses her name in each title of the "Misery" books. Each time he finishes a novel, he goes up to a little lodge far from the city and once the novel is completed, he has one glass of champaign and one cigarette. After having finished his latest novel, he starts to head back to the city. However, a big snow storm starts and Paul has a terrible accident. He wakes up in a house and the first thing he hears is "I am your #1 fan". He comes to realize he is in the house of a woman named Annie Wilkes (Kathy Bates) and who is a nurse. It seems Annie has taken great care of him and has put bandages all over his body so that he can heal properly. She tells him that as soon as the roads are clear, she will take to a hospital.

A few days go by and Annie and Paul have become friends. One day, Annie asks Paul if she might be allowed to read the last Misery novel Paul has written before he sends it to his editor. Paul lets her and she is very happy. The next day, as she is giving Paul his soup, she tells him she has read forty pages of the story. Paul asks her what she thinks of it. She tells him she is no person to give him a critic but insists on the fact that she gives him the critic. She tells him there is way too much cursing. Paul tries to tell her that the cursing comes from slump kids and that he was a slump kid and that is the way they talk. Suddenly, she starts yelling at him telling him that they do not talk like that. After a few seconds, she apologizes and leaves the room. But the same night, Paul gets a rather nasty surprise.

Kathy Bates deserved the Oscar she won and James Caan deserved at least a nomination. As for Rob Reiner's directing, well it is very disappointing considering the great movies he had done. His directing truly gives the viewer the impression that this is not a theatre movie but a TV movie. But the movie is worth seeing simply for the performances. Richard Farnsworth does a great job as the local town sheriff in a supporting role and Lauren Bacall has a cameo role as Caan's editor and she is very good also. It's worth watching.

Peter Fonda is a terrific actor with plenty of talent. The only problem is that he hasn't played in any great movie. In fact, the only two movies I know he played in are "Easy rider" and "Ulee's gold". Until I saw it, I thought "Easy rider" was a terrific movie. However, now that I've seen it, I think the only good movie in which he played is "Ulee's gold". As for "Easy rider", it's terrible. It's very psychedelic and not at all well developed. I know it was in the sixties and that psychedelic movies were everywhere at that time but believe me, if you want a good psychedelic movie, watch something like "Midnight cowboy" or at least something good.

Wyatt (Peter Fonda) and Billy (Dennis Hopper) are two best friends. Both of them are motorcyclists and one day, they decide to go on a trip across America. Along their way, they meet many people and give rides all over the place. They also start off the movie by buying and then selling some drugs which look like cocaine. The first ride they give is to a man who is going to join his group and they all live in tents, setting themselves aside from society. There, Wyatt and Billy are invited to have dinner and when they leave, two of the women in the camp come with them to a river on the other side of the mountain. After they all swim in the river, Wyatt and Billy take the women back to their camp and they continue their trip.

Now here's the best part of the movie. On July 4th, they ride into a town where there is a big parade for independence day in the streets. The two men start to ride with the parade and are eventually arrested. In the city prison, they meet a man named George Hanson (Jack Nicholson in a terrific performance). The next morning, the three men are let free and Wyatt and Billy ask George where he is going and decide to take him with them. But one night, as they are sleeping in the forest, some men from the city sneak up on them and start beating on them with sticks and they kill George. The next morning, Wyatt and Billy leave realizing there is nothing to do but leave George there and they eventually meet their own destiny.

Dennis Hopper directed this movie which is considered by many to be an American classic. I still don't understand why since there isn't anything special about this movie except Jack Nicholson's performance. Other than that, there isn't anything special. The movie doesn't even really have any specific goal. I know it's a psychedelic movie but I've seen some much better psychedelic movies which had a goal. As for the script, well I can't really criticize it because there isn't enough dialogue to give an opinion on it. I don't recommend it. See it only if you like motorcycles and nice scenery.

Stanley Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb" is by far his best movie ever. However, my favorite Kubrick movie after that is "Th killing". I think it's better than "2001: a space odyssey", "Paths of glory", and "Clockwork orange". Plus, he had everything right for the movie, especially the actors. Stirling Hayden couldn't have done a better job and no other actor could have been more convincing. As usual, Kubrick's name is all over the credits. He directed, produced, and wrote the movie and did a great job in those three categories. Of course, the script is original and helps the movie be great.

Johnny Clay (Stirling Hayden), an ex-con, decides to round up a few men to do a robbery. It takes place in a race-track and the murder of a horse is included (that's where the title came from). Johnny finds all the men he needs and explains them how the robbery will go down. So he has one man to shoot the horse from a parking lot. He has another man to pick up the money once it was robbed, one man to create a diversion in the race-track, one man to open him the door to the money and finally, himself to rob the money and the man upstairs to hope everything goes the way it was planned. But does the man upstairs really like them?

Hayden delivers a strong performance as well as the supporting cast does. But it is Kubrick who, with his strong writing and directing, makes the movie a classic. Once again, there are a few scenes where you can see how Kubrick was an avant-garde director and once again, the movie was over-looked at the Oscars getting absolutely no nominations. It's a shame great movies like this one were often disregarded at the Oscars because if you ask me, if "The killing" had been nominated at the Oscars that year, it would have robbed every award including the best picture Oscar which was awarded to "Around the world in 80 days". But the movie is still a gem.

I've only seen two Woody Allen movies up to now and I can already state that he is one of my favorite directors. The other movie I saw from him is "Everyone says I love you" which I thought was a very good movie with lots of laughs. However, then I saw "Annie Hall" and I realized just how good a director he really was. He won an Oscar for best director in this movie and really deserved it. Diane Keaton also won an Oscar as best actress in the movie which she also deserved. The movie is funny entertaining and doesn't drag. Actually it would be pretty for the movie if it dragged because it only lasts an hour and a half.

The story starts off with Woody Allen telling two jokes back to back. Then, he suddenly becomes a man named Alvy Singer and starts telling us the story of his relationship with a woman named Annie Hall (Diane Keaton). Along the flashbacks, we see what kind of relationships he had with other women. And all along these adventures, he manages to squeeze in a ton of laughs. He finally gets to how his relationship with Annie Hall began. One day, after a tennis match with his friends where Annie was playing, he met her after the game. They talked a little and then Alvy asked her if she could give him a lift. On the way back, Alvy probably lost the taste of wanting to be in the car that Annie is driving.

Some of you could consider this to be typical Woody Allen stuff, but even if you're right, it's great stuff. What's also great about the Woody Allen movies is that in a scene in which he is playing but somebody else in speaking, it's always important to look at his face to get a funny figure or a grimace on his face. The best part of his jokes is how he is able to tell them without even smiling. Finally, throughout the whole movie, we see the love he has for New-York city. If it hadn't been for the script-writer, he would have spent the whole movie in New-York. It's a terrific movie.

"The Green Mile" will have excellent chances at the Oscars because "Th Shawshank redemption" was over-looked at the Oscars in 1994. But it isn't as good as "The Shawshank redemption" probably because it isn't realistic at all. However, the acting level can be compared because Morgan Freeman and Tom Hanks are both very good actors. As for the directing, I think Darabont did a better job with "The Shawshank redemption" than with "The Green Mile". "The Green Mile" is a very good movie however and deserves to make it to the Oscars and in many categories.

Paul Edgecomb (Tom Hanks) works on death row at the local prison. Death row at his prison is called the green mile because the floor on which the men walk going towards the execution room is green. Paul has a bad urinal infection that year. But aside from that everything is fine. Also, since the men who are going to be executed there are practically as many as the guards, well the guards have befriended them. But one day, John Coffee (Michael Clarke Duncan) is sent to the green mile. This man looks like he could kill a man by blowing him over. He is even bigger than one of the guards named Brutus (David Morse). But once he is locked up, routine-life on the green mile starts again.

One day however, while everyone is minding their own business, John calls Paul and asks him to grab his hand. As soon as Paul grabs John's hand, John pulls him toward his cell and after a few seconds, he lets Paul go. Paul instantly goes to the bathroom and realizes his urinal infection has gone away. That was John's biggest secret. The man is able to make miracles and soon starts changing many things on the green mile.

All the guards deliver great performances and Michael Clarke Duncan walks away with the movie. I'm sure you'll be seeing him in the nomination list for best-supporting actor at the Oscars. As for the movie itself, I think I found it inferior to "The Shawshank redemption" especially because it wasn't that realistic and Michael Clarke Duncan had a Jesus-like personality performing miracles and saving people's lives but he still delivers a terrific performance. As for Frank Darabont, well chances are you'll be seeing his name in the best director nomination list if not this year's winner.

Grace Kelly had all the chance in the world to prove herself as a great actress and she did prove herself. In fact, she proved herself in 1954 by winning an Oscar in "The country girl" but especially by playing in "Rear window". Teaming up with James Stewart, she is terrific and looks absolutely marvelous. But that's not the only good part about "Rear window". The script is incredibly original and Hitchcock showed the world how subtle and suggestive his movies could be without screwing up his directing.

Jeff (James Stewart) is a professional photographer who broke his leg taking a picture on one of his days off. So he is stuck in his apartment without anything to do but watch what goes on in the city through his rear window. Well, he also has company from his girlfriend Lisa (Grace Kelly) and his nurse Stella (Thelma Ritter). However, one day he notices that in one of the windows across, there is a woman who use to live there who has gone missing. The man who lived there with his wife is Lars Thornwald (Raymond Burr) and Jeff starts to suspect him of having murdered his wife.

As soon as Stewart starts to suspect Burr of having murdered his wife, you can't take your eyes off the movie. Everybody delivers a great performance in this movie, especially Thelma Ritter who also provides a couple of laughs as Stewart's nurse who is always talking. John Michael Hayes's script has hardly any flaws and is one of the best Hitchcock ever had. But Hitchcock adds the final touch with his masterful directing. the only thing I don't really like about this movie is that is considered as being Hitchcock's best whereas I believe that "Psycho" is by far his best. But still, it's an excellent movie.

I know my one line summary might not be that clear so I'm going to explain it to you. In 1994, we had classics like "The Shawshank redemption" and "Pulp fiction" who were in nomination at the Oscars and were stolen in every category in which they were nominated. They were all stolen by "Forrest Gump". These two other movies which were completely different in their style from the movies of the same genre as them but who came before them were completely over-looked. And the worst part is "Forrest Gump" is simply the biography of Forest Gump. Also, it robbed every movie in the best actor category. Of course it isn't that easy to play someone who is mentally ill but it's easier than playing just some ordinary person and playing it well.

Forrest Gump (Tom Hanks) lives with his mother and comes from North-West Alabama. However, he has a slight mental deficiency and a leg problem for which he must wear a brace. When he starts going to school, he is rejected by everyone except the bus-driver and a young girl named Jenny. One day after school, while Forrest and jenny are hanging together, they are surprised by a bunch of boys from their school who start throwing rocks at Forrest. He tries to run away but because of his bad leg, he can hardly get away. This is the classic scene when Jenny yells "Run Forrest, run." and as he runs, his brace starts to come off and the boys who were chasing him are unable to catch up to him for he is too fast, even though they have bikes.

As the years pass, Forrest and Jenny (Robin Wright Penn) go their own way. Forrest gets into the army and goes to Vietnam. But one night in the camp, all the soldiers are in bed and pass on a Playboy magazine. When Forrest gets it, he realizes Jenny has her photograph in it. Further on during the war, he saves the life of his lieutenant named Don Taylor (Gary Sinise) but loses his best friend Bubba. Also, his lieutenant is left legless because of the accident whereas the only Forrest gets is a bullet in the butt. When Forrest gets home, he as many things to do. On of them is to go over to Bubba's parents' house to announce to them he was killed in combat. Another thing he does is try to find Jenny.

The movie is a kind of comedy-drama and is pretty good. But I still don't think nor understand how it won best picture, best actor (Tom Hanks) and best director (Robert Zemeckis) at the Oscars. I mean, if it had really deserved those Oscars, wouldn't it get a higher rank than both "Pulp fiction" and "The Shawshank redemption" on our top 250 list? I actually believe that the one who deserved an Oscar more than anyone else in the movie is Gary Sinise as Lieutenant Don Taylor. However, it was almost impossible for him to win that year because we had Martin Landau in nomination for best supporting actor in "Ed Wood" and he truly deserved the Oscar he won. So all in all, this isn't a bad movie, it's just way too over-rated.

There isn't really a way to tell you exactly what "Fight club" is. Some might say it's a black-comedy, others might call it a social drama, others, a social comedy. I'm not sure which of those adjectives describe the movie best but the adjective "One of the 5 best movies of the year" sure qualifies. Another one would be "One of Norton's best performance's ever". In fact, it's probably his best after the one he gave in "American history X". And yet another way to qualify it would be "By far David Fincher's best movie yet". Yes, "Fight club" is an excellent movie and true entertainment. Plus, there are great performances by Edward Norton, Brad Pitt, Helena Bonham Carter and Meat Loaf and great direction by David Fincher.

The story is narrated by Edward Norton whose name seems to be Jack although he is never called like that by anyone leaving us in doubt. He explains how he thought his life was a total bore and how he joined certain groups like groups for people with testicular cancer just to make friends. This is where he meets Bob (Meat Loaf) and befriends him. However, at some point, he sees a woman named Marla Singer (Helena Bonham Carter) in all those groups and guesses she has none of the problems the people attending the reunions have. However, Jack doesn't either. So they make a deal so that they do not meet again: every week, they go to she goes to certain groups while he goes to other groups so they won't see each other.

Weeks go by without anything really happening and one day, on a plane, Jack meets a man who calls himself Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt). Tyler sells soap for a living. After the plane lands, the two men each go their own way but when Jack gets home, he sees that his apartment has been blown-up and decides to call Tyler to ask him if he might have a free bed at his house. They decide to go to a bar and after three pitchers of beer, they are approaching the bar's closing time and go outside. This is when, out of the blue, Tyler asks Jack to hit him. The two men finally end up fighting for real and seem to get some kicks out of it and after a while, they decide to form a fight club whose two principal rules are "You do not talk about Fight club".

The movie starts off right in the action and never lets the viewer down. Jim Ulhs's screenplay is excellent. David Fincher also uses a few slow motions to add a certain intensity to the scene. The music by the Dust brothers is excellent and the other songs used are excellent as well. However, as good as everything about this movie is, nothing beats Edward Norton's performance. He is simply incredible. Over here in Canada, the movie got the harshest rating which is "18 and over" and did deserve because although there isn't only violence in this movie, it is very graphic and depicted as it is just when it happens to a person. Also, the violence shown is especially during the fights and no one dies in these fights. It isn't for the faint-hearted and has a disappointing ending but if you can get to gather all the courage you have to watch this one, you'll see you'll be glad you saw it.

Clint Eastwood has always been really good with a gun. We saw him in westerns like "The good,the bad, and the ugly", "For a few dollars more" and many other westerns in which his roles as the man with no name was incredibly quick with a gun. He also played in the five "Dirty Harry" movies in which he was a cold-blooded cop and was once again pretty good with his gun. Yes, we could say that in addition to being a good shooter, Eastwood has always delivered strong performances. However, he has recently shown himself as being an excellent director as well. "Unforgiven" is his masterpiece.

After a prostitute are badly beaten at the bordello of Big Whisky city, the two men involved in the crime are let free by the town's sheriff, Little Bill (Gene Hackman), with the obligation to bring a certain number of ponies for the prostitute in a certain amount of time to compensate for their crime. The other prostitutes are incredibly mad when they hear that the men are free as birds, that they get to walk without even getting a whipping for what they did to the prostitute. So the women decide to put a bounty on the men's head. 1000 dollars to whoever kills them both.

Money has always excited a lot of people and when the Schofield kid (Jaimz Woolvett) hears about it, he definitely wants to go after those two men. But he figures he might need a little help. So he goes to William Munny (Clint Eastwood), an ex-murderer who now lives on a little ranch with his daughter and son. William tells him he'll think it over but as soon as the kid leaves, he packs a few things, kisses his children goodbye, and goes over to his best friend's house, Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman). The two men decide to catch up to the Schofield kid and all three of them leave on the job.

In the meantime, at Big Whisky, a man named English Bob (Richard Harris) arrives in town ignoring the board at the entrance of the town that says you must leave your firearms at the sheriff's office as you arrive. Ignoring the sign, English Bob just walks into the city carrying. However he is caught red-handed by the evil Little Bill who gives him a severe beating for this and then locks him up behind bars. Little Bill did all this for he believed English Bob was there to kill the two men on which there was a bounty.

I won't say anymore about the story so that you can have some surprises when you watch it. Eastwood, Freeman, Harris, even Jaimz Woolvett, all deliver strong performance in this violent western. But Hackman steals the show in his beautiful performance as the evil Little Bill Daggett and took home a well deserved best supporting actor Oscar. The cinematography is exceptional as well and Eastwood's excellent directing won a best director Oscar. The whole movie is one true gem and won the 1992 best picture Oscar but really deserved it. This is a movie that ranks up there with the best all-time movies.

When this movie came out, I didn't think much of it. I thought it was just some romantic comedy trying to do its best at the box-office. But then it got those thirteen nominations at the Oscars and I started to believe it was pretty good and when I saw Paltrow got a nomination for best actress, I knew she would win. However, I was surprised it beat Saving private Ryan for best picture. Recently, I purchased the movie on DVD and was very disappointed by it. I can't say that, besides Judi Dench who won her Oscar for best supporting actress, it deserved its Oscars for best picture and best actress. It really didn't and Paltrow wasn't that stunning.

The movie takes place in 1593. There were two theatres at that time who were in big competition. One of these was run by a man named Philip Henslowe (Geoffrey Rush in a superb role). Now at that period in time, women were not allowed to play in plays. However, Viola De Lessips (Paltrow), the daughter of a rich man, is in love with plays, especially Shakespeare's (Joseph Fiennes) plays. She is so desperate to act in a play that she finally uses an alias, puts on a mustache, a wig and auditions for the part of Romeo in Shakespeare's new play, Romeo and Ethel which eventually turns out to be Romeo and Juliet. But Viola has been engaged by her father to another rich man called Lord Wessex (Colin Firth) whom she doesn't love at all. Naturally, she is in love with Shakespeare and the problems begin.

Joseph Fiennes was over-looked at the Oscars. I think that instead of giving Paltrow nomination and the Oscar, they should have given the nomination to Fiennes and the best actress Oscar to Cate Blanchett for her role in "Elizabeth". One of the reasons Paltrow won is probably because she is naked quite often in the movie. Of course this is a good movie, but it was definitely not the best picture of the year. Proof is, it isn't the best 1998 movie on our top 250 films list. Judi Dench's and Geoffrey Rush's performances are, however, exceptional. So, once again, this is not a terrible movie but it is not the best movie of 1998 either.

"Basic Instinct"'s biggest problem is the way it was criticized by the critics. Everybody thinks it's just some dumb sex thriller in which Sharon Stone has sex with Michael Douglas. Yes, there is a lot of sex in this movie but, that's not all there is to it. There is a good murder mystery at the same time. People are very prejudice when they haven't even seen it. Well maybe you should let go of your prejudice and give "Basic Instinct" a try.

The movie starts off fast. A famous retired rock-and-roll star called Johnny Boz is murdered and the principal suspect is his girlfriend, Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone). The detective investigating this case is Nick Curren (Michael Douglas) and his sidekick and at the same time best friend Gus (George Dzundza). Along the way, the two detectives discover a lot about Catherine and her past. For one thing, she inherited 110 million dollars when her parents were killed in a boating "accident". She is also a writer and appeared to have written a book about a retired rock-and-roll star who gets murdered by his girlfriend and is writing another one about a detective getting killed by his girlfriend and Douglas is the main character for this book.

There is much more to the movie than what I have written in this summary but I figured that if you were going to watch the movie you wouldn't want to know too much. Michael Douglas gives a strong performance and Sharon Stone dominates the screen with dangerously seducing personality. After watching this, it isn't hard to believe she won those prizes at the Blockbuster entertainment awards for best actress as well as most desirable female of 1992.

I know what most adults are thinking when somebody talks to them about "American pie". They believe it's some stupid comedy only about young kids who want to have sex before graduating. Well, that's not what it is about. Indeed, there is much more to the movie than just four kids wanting to have sex. There is a story of relationships between friends as well as a big sports theme (lacrosse particularly). This is not only crude humor, it isn't slap-stick all the time. It has some very intelligent moments.

The movie begins with a strong beginning. Jim (Jason Biggs) is jacking off in his room as he is watching an illegal channel when suddenly, without any warning, his mother comes in. This scene gives you a pretty good impression of just how much you will probably laughing through the movie. We then move on to Kevin (Thomas Ian Nicholas) who already has a girlfriend, Vickie (Tara Reid), but have been at the same level of their relationship for quite some time now. There is also Chris (Chris Klein) who is a Lacrosse player and is too insensitive to maintain any relationship with a girl. And finally, there is Finch (Eddie Kaye Thomas) who is the fourth friend and doesn't try to hook up with girls that much. But when the four guys make a pact to get laid before they graduate, they all become enthusiastic.

First time-directors Chris and Paul Weitz do a great job with "American pie". They seem to remember pretty well what their high-school graduation must have been like because the prom scene seems to be recreated in the exact same way it was for them. They also seemed to know exactly when to cut the comic scenes perfectly so that they don't put too much and turn their jokes into stupid jokes. Also to be mentioned as supporting actors are Sean W. Scott as Stifler, Natasha Lyonne as Jessica and Eugene Levy as Jim's dad. It's a great movie with great humor and I highly recommend it.

In 1953, the Academy award winner for best actor was William Holden in "Stalag 17" which was the story of a German concentration camp for Americans and was made to look ridiculous. In 1963, the best actor Oscar went to Sidney Poitiers for "Lilies of the field" and this is totally all right by me. However, I came to notice that "The great escape" didn't get any nominations either for acting, directing, or even best picture. And this movie is ranked #81 on our IMDb voting list whereas the 1963 winner for best picture, "Tom Jones", isn't even there. Maybe "Tom Jones" deserved the best picture that year, but "The great escape" should definitely have had at least a nomination.

Captain Virgil Hilts (Steve McQueen) winds up in a German prison camp where he doesn't know anyone. But there isn't only him in that camp. A few days after he arrives at the camp, a well-known English Captain, Bartlett (Richarrd Attenborough), arrives as well and decides to take matters into his own hands by preparing escape plans for at least 250 of the prisoners in the camp. Naturally, a job like this one requires a lot of help. So he gets Hendley "The Scrounger" (James Garner), Danny Velinski "Tunnel King" (Charles Bronson), Colin Blythe "The Forger" (Donald Pleasance), and Sedgwick "Manufacturer" (James Coburn) to team up with him to make this one the biggest escape from a concentration camp ever. This one has to be THE great escape.

At first, Hilts declines Bartlett's proposition to join his group claiming that he is going to escape much earlier than the rest of the group. But after he screws up and is sent to "The cooler", he decides to join up with Bartlett as soon as he is released from "The cooler" and when he does, the Germans begin wishing these men never entered this concentration camp in their whole life. But even though these men are pros at this kind of work, the Germans are able to find out about a few of their plans but to keep myself from spoiling anything, I won't tell you anymore about the movie itself.

Director John Sturges has indeed directed some very god movies including the great "The magnificent seven", but he truly outdid himself in "The great escape". The movie offers suspense, action, and some good laughs as well and keeps you wondering what will happen to the main characters until you do see what does happen. Steve McQueen gives one of his best performances and Attenborough is excellent as well. Some of the best scenes of the movie are when you see the Americans preparing their escape and all the work and trouble they have to go through to get it done. It's definitely the greatest escape I've ever seen.

1939 is considered by many to be the best the year in Hollywood's history especially because of the release of one of history's greatest classic, "Gone with the wind". It is also the year that has the most movies on AFI's top 100 list with five: Gone with the wind at #4, Mr. Smith goes to Washington at # 29, Stagecoach at #63, Wuthering heights at #73, and The wizard of Oz at #6. Personally, my favorite of these five is "Mr. Smith goes to Washington". However, I do recognize the greatness of "The wizard of Oz" and I do consider to be the most charming and most original musical ever made in Hollywood.

During a local storm in Kansas, Dorothy's (Judy Garland) house takes off into the air and crashes on the wicked witch of the east killing her automatically. When Dorothy gets up again after having lost conscious because of the storm, she realizes that she isn't in Kansas anymore and the movie is now in color. After looking around for a while, a fairy appears and goes to see Dorothy and when she asks where she is, the fairy tells her that she is in the land of Oz and that the only way for her to get home is by talking to the wizard of Oz. As they talk, Dorothy makes the acquaintance of the lovely people who live in Oz called the Munchkins. But she is wearing a pair of red slippers which she doesn't know were the ones of the wicked witch of the east. So the witch's sister, the wicked witch of the west (Margaret Hamilton), appears before Dorothy asking her for the slippers. But the fairy defends Dorothy and the witch leaves.

Dorothy then asks how to get to wizard's home. And this is when the fairy tells her that all she has to do is: "Follow the yellow brick-road". Along her way, Dorothy meets a scarecrow who doesn't scare crows anymore and doesn't have a brain, a tin-man who is too rusty to be able to even slightly move and has no heart and therefore no emotions, and finally, a lion who has lost all his courage. She invites the three with her to see the wizard suggesting that the wizard could give the scarecrow a brain, the tin-man a heart, the lion courage and tell her how to get home. But naturally, the path that leads to the wizard is full of surprises all set up by the wicked witch of the west.

Charming and amusing, "The wizard of Oz" is a very unique movie and has no flaws. The story is incredibly original, the script is good, the directing is great, and the performances are exceptional. But it's Margaret Hamilton and Judy Garland who are the best part of the whole movie. Hamilton is very good and very evil as the wicked witch of the west and Garland is excellent as Dorothy. The singing scenes are the best that have ever been directed and Garland's singing is simply the best there ever was. It isn't a surprise that she was ranked as the eight female legend of AFI. This is a great classic and the best movie of 1939 after Mr. Smith goes to Washington. But you should still see it at all costs.