Reviews

This is the best depiction of the tragic sinking of the unsinkable Titanic I've yet seen. Kudos to the uncredited (on IMDb) director, cast and crew of this remarkable re-creation. The documentary style of the film makes one feel we're seeing the actual facts of this much-dramatized event. It far surpasses the three fictional depictions I've seen: "A Night to Remember," the Academy Award-winning film of "Titanic" and the abysmal Tony Award-winning musical "Titanic." The mixture of what I assume are cold hard facts with dramatic recreation is unparalleled. And I say this as one who has read extensively on the subject, and who enjoyed enormously the New York City exhibition a few years ago on 43rd Street, where one received a passport of a passenger, saw actual items recovered from the sunken ship, witnessed full-scale recreations of elements on the ship such as state rooms and the grand staircase, and discovered upon exit how your assumed identity had fared. Some of us died, a few survived. And we were given details of our surrogate passengers' previous lives and future plans. But this television production surpassed everything I've seen or read. I hope a DVD of this production will be made available. I will watch it again, and share it with anyone who shares my own curiosity about this dreadful event, made even more vivid by the 10th anniversary of 9/11.

Granted that I haven't seen a lot of the teen-age horror movies that this film is undoubtedly part of, but if there are worse films than this out there, I don't want to see them. I went to see it because the title intrigues. If there had been a countdown (witnessing the extinction of numbers 1,2,3) so we might slowly learn the nature of the danger, it would have been conceivably interesting. Unfortunately, we begin right with the title character, a plastic handsome blond Hollywood type who has no charisma and less talent. I laughed aloud more than a few times, and as far as I could discern, no humor was intentional. The only saving grace (if there was one) was Dianna Agron, who made an appealing ingénue -- very pretty, not exceptionally vapid (like the rest of the film) and conceivably talented. This is the kind of movie an actor would leave OFF his resume -- no one would want to admit to being in it. Of course, choices are made by agents, not actors, and to some idiots this appeared to be worth urging their clients to accept roles. I've probably seen worse movies, but as might be understood, I can't remember the titles. If there was an explanation of why the aliens wanted to eliminate the aliens who were already on earth, I didn't get it. But I wasn't paying attention much of the time, once I saw the torture I was in for.

I saw The Young Lions when I was 18 years old, the year it came out. I went into the theater a college kid from Texas who totally bought the swagger of American war heroes. I came out of the film absolutely devastated -- and decided I was now a pacifist and would dedicate my life as an artist to living up to the high standards of this film.

All the acting is extraordinary -- Cliff is at his very best, Dean Martin is a surprising revelation playing a dissolute Broadway star he was perfect for. Maximilian Schell is amazing -- I don't know how he wasn't given an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor. Barbara Rush, Hope Lange and May Britt are all indelible portraits of the three faces of 40's women.

The cinematography is black and white at its best, sharp elements of chiaroscuro unmatched by color films. The musical score is on a level with Holst's The Planets, unrelenting and devastating.

But the outstanding feature of the film is the incandescent performance by Marlon Brando at the peak of power as an actor. I don't think I had ever tried to imagine how the Third Reich came to be and how it might have affected a normal German citizen until Brando's brilliant work illuminated it for me. He is at his most handsome, obviously in great shape inside that tailored uniform, and truly epitomizes the "Golden God of War" who is enlightened by the horror he is expected to deliver, and is transformed into a tragic figure.

This is as good as Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List -- one of the most neglected masterpieces of American cinema: a Greek tragedy of our own era.

This beautiful black and white film literally sparkles with the most beautiful costumes in cinematic history. Shearer and Power are luminous and the performance of Robert Morley is a gem. I believe he IS Louis XVI! It is SO much better than than that tedious monstrosity directed by Sophia Coppola. If you've read Antonia Fraser's brilliant book, you'll see the tragic history she describes so vividly come to life. The old-fashioned nature of the film making actually contributes to our ability to surrender our modern sensibility to see a long-ago style of living recreated. And unlike the Coppola film, it is not dull and boring and static, but is filled with action and excitement. Like Fraser extraordinary book, the life of Marie Antoinette is dramatized from her becoming queen of France as a teenager to her white hair and ravaged countenance as she meets her fate. It also dramatizes the so-called Affair of the Necklace much better than the 2002 film of that title. If you can get past the somewhat corny style, you'll really enjoy what old films could do better than all our contemporary technology.

I first saw Pinky when I was nine years old, and it moved me deeply. For the first time I understood the importance of a director, and it set my standards for excellence in that field. I later became a director myself, and I owe much of my artistic life to the influence this film had on me as a child. I'm now 67, and I've just watched it again for the first time since then, and I'm pleased to experience again how brilliantly it is directed, and how well it stands up over time. Yes,the plot and the social assumptions are extremely dated, but as with all great drama, Kazan and his actors brought the story to life so vividly, and with such depth, that the drama still stirs, and makes us celebrate how our society has changed for the better. Seeing the black and white struggle in the past only illuminates how far we yet have to go to be free of all prejudice. The artistic excellence lifts the film above the limitations and sentimentality of the fifties. It is a classic of social realism.

This is one of the best films of all time. The story is heartbreaking: an 11 year-old girl has been forced into prostitution by her mother. When the police arrest the mother, Rosetta and her little brother Luciano (who is 9) must be taken to a children's home in the south of Italy. A young Carabiniere named Antonio is assigned the task of taking them from Milan to Sicilly, even though he's barely more than a child himself. The journey takes this mismatched threesome to Antonio's home province, where he re-unites briefly with his sister and his old granny, before Rosetta is recognized from a magazine cover, and shunned. The growing tenderness among the three young people is the essence of the story. The girl, although only 11, conveys the bitterness of adulthood through her ineffably sad eyes. She knows so much more about life than her 19 year-old policeman, yet without any seedy sexual implications, he comes to teach her through his tender care that there's more to life than sorrow. Luciano is a beautiful child, whose adoration of the soldier/cop is delicately and warmly depicted. Only The 400 Blows and Forbidden Games have captured the ache of childhood as well. The director has used stunning compositions and lingering takes of the Italian countryside that make the story resonate beyond its intimate canvas. The acting is brilliant. I suppose the only reason this film has not been released on DVD is it's controversial subject matter, which is a shame, because that shunning is what the film is about. The Italian title is Il Ladro di Bambini. Don't miss it!

This is the definitive version of this great children's novel, superior in every particular to the George Cukor version in 1933. Role by role, the acting is better in 1949; the cinematography is better; the script is better and more faithful to the original, etc. June Allyson is the perfect tomboy as Jo March, easily outshining the teary-eyed Katherine Hepburn (who is the only reason to watch the 1933 version). Peter Lawford is a dashing Laurie, Mary Astor a moving Marmee, and Rossano Brazzi a satisfying alternative for Jo. The all-star cast of 1949 completely outshines the 1933 version, especially in the casting of the four sisters -- Janet Leigh, Elizabeth Taylor and Margaret O'Brien, in addition to June Allyson. The Academy Award-winning Art Direction/Production Design re-creates the Civil War era to perfection, and the Oscar-nominated cinematography is breathtaking. To get an authentic Technicolor version of Louisa May Alcott's great book, see this classic.

How anyone can rate this version as the best is beyond me. It is inferior in every particular to the 1949 June Allyson version. Role by role, the acting is better in 1949; the cinematography is better; the script is better and more faithful to the original, etc. In this early version in black and white, Katherine Hepburn is about the only reason to watch, even though she's nowhere near June Allyson's perfect tomboy. I found especially wanting the dreadful casting of Henry Stephenson as Laurie -- what a wimp! Edna May Oliver is memorable as the Aunt, but Spring Byington as Marmee pales next to Mary Astor or even Susan Serandon in the 1994 remake. I know this version is directed by the legendary George Cukor, but I found his gay sensibility a distraction rather than an asset. Also Rossano Brazzi offers a satisfying option for Jo March, rather than the pathetic professor of Paul Lukas. The all-star cast of 1949 completely outshines this 1933 version, especially in the casting of the four sisters -- Janet Leigh, Elizabeth Taylor and Margaret O'Brien, in addition to June Allyson. To get an authentic rendering of the great novel, see the 1949 version.

I was completely surprised by Casanova, because I hadn't expected much. Fellini's version had been a real disappointment to a Fellini fan, so I was wary of Hallstrom.

But, joy of joys, what an inspired, fun, hilarious journey this Casanova turned out to be! It is probably about as historically accurate as Shakespeare in Love (which is to say, not at all), but with this legendary subject, it doesn't matter. I noticed that the original story was by Simi and Michael Cristofer (Pulitzer Prize winner), but the screen play is by Simi and Hatcher. It's a great story, with wonderful twists, turns and surprises, but the outstanding thing is the witty dialogue, for which, I suspect we must thank Hatcher.

Heath Ledger and Jeremy Irons are perfectly cast, as were Miller and Olin. I especially liked the beautiful actress who played Francesca's mother, but I'm not sure of her name. The sidekick was wonderful and Charlie Cox was a perfect juvenile hero -- perhaps tomorrow's Keaneu Reeves.

This movie is a lot more fun than Shakespeare in Love. The cinematography is gorgeous, as are the costumes and the production design. And Venice has never looked more beautiful! I'm booking a trip immediately.

This is an apocalyptic vision of the hell of our contemporary world. The social criticism of our shallow, commercially oriented values is what makes this film an exceptional vision of the "war is hell" cliché, underscored by a mythical journey upriver to Cambodia by a special forces captain whose mission is to eliminate (with extreme prejudice) a rogue colonel, who's left behind the army's concepts of justice to create his own world. When I saw Apocalypse Now in 1980, I thought it was a deeply flawed masterpiece. In particular, I found the final segment of the journey with Brando, which encapsulates Conrad's Heart of Darkness, to be rather boring. I finally got around to seeing Apocalypse Now Redux and the flaws have been taken care of. Redux makes the movie an outright masterpiece, certainly among the top 100 films ever made. Brando's performance now seems full and complete, perhaps rather less mysterious, but much more profound. Martin Sheen is brilliant at the heart of one of the best acting ensembles ever assembled. It's great to spot a young Harrison Ford, Scott Glenn, etc. in early screen performances that suggest what fine actors they will eventually be recognized as. The work of Robert Duvall, Fred Forrest, Lawrence Fishburne and Sam Bottoms is greatly enhanced by the additional footage. If you've never seen this film, skip the original and head straight for Redux. I wish we could get a Gangs of New York Redux from Scorcese to fill in all the gaps in that deeply flawed potential masterpiece.