AmateurMovieReviews.com

This movie is about the story of a trip in the life of youthful Ernesto "Che" Guevara, a historical revolutionary icon in Latin America. It is well done, and sends an excellent message. Most of all, it is true and it makes you think a lot about injustice, revolution, and what is noble to do in life and what is not.

The premise is this; Che Guevara and his good friend Alberto Granado decide, when they are young, to go on a trip all around Latin America, to see the land, to meet people, and maybe discover something about themselves. They are from Argentina, and they have never even been out of the country before. Here in the US we are used to traveling all over the place because it is fairly simple to do so these days, and our country is very large, so we do it a lot, and it is common, for example, to have families spread out across the company. However, it Latin America, first of all people are poorer, but moreover, the lifestyle is different, and families stay closer, and people don't travel outside of the cities where they are born very often. So for Che and his friend, this was a great undertaking, to travel around the continent. Ernesto ("Che") is school to be a medical doctor, and his friend is a biochemist. One of the amazing parts of the movie is when Ernesto is at dinner with his family not long before they take off, and his father says something like, "are you sure you want to do this? You are one semester away from becoming a medical doctor." To which, Ernesto responds "this is traveling around the continent of south america. Being a medical doctor can wait". To which, thankfully, his father smiles back at his beaming son. It is amazing that Ernesto has the foresight to realize that he should take this opportunity while he is young, and see the world, and try to understand something about the life we live, and about his home continent and the people of Latin America.

Anyway, the movie is called the Motorcycle Diaries for a reason. They are taking a motorcycle to make this trip! A terrible, aging motorcycle that is going to take them all around the suffering country roads of Latin America. They plan to go far south along the coast and return through the Andes, working their way to Maccu Piccu (a famous, ancient Incan city), and then staying for a while in a leper colony (soon to be their medical specialty) in the Amazon. The plan is to be finished by Granados's 30th birthday (Che is only 23!).

They of course, run into lots trouble in small towns in other countries (although at least language is not a barrier, since they all speak spanish, except some of the indigenous people), and of course, they find girls and do plenty of partying. Ernesto has a girlfriend in another town from where he lives. They stop to see her in the beginning and they are very clearly in love, but although it tears at him, he knows he has to leave her to go out and discover. He gets a letter from her after a few months whose details we never know, except that she is out of his life. I think he made the right choice. Even if they belonged together, he needed to see the world to know that. Anyway, somewhere in Colombia they lose the motorcycle. After lots of trouble, they try to fix it for the last time and end on foot. As Ernesto puts it eloquently, he says, "on foot, we will meet more people, and feel closer to the land". Even though it is going to take a much longer time. He is right, though. This is when they really start to learn. Walking, they meet lots of locals, and they start to learn about the injustice going on in Latin America. The governments taking land away from honest sharecroppers, kicking natives out of the places they have always lived, forcing people to take extremely dangerous jobs in mines, for example, because they are communists. It is terrible. The injustice starts to eat at Ernesto, and he is constantly thinking and writing (letters to his family, and in his journal) about the people who are defeated by these terrible governments, and about how he is not the same after viewing and somehow partaking in the acidity of this injustice.

Eventually, they reach the leper colony, where they are treated extremely well. They now have a place to sleep, new clothes, food every day, and they have some respect because they are working with the doctors. But even here, Ernesto is bothered by the division between the doctors and patients. At the leper colony, even though leprosy is not contagious under treatment, the Amazon river divides the living quarters of the lepers from the quarters of the caregivers, and the nuns who run the camp insist that all the caregivers wear gloves when working with the sick. As Ernesto points out, this is clearly just symbolic, and he chooses not to do so. Symbolic of what? Of the division of people, despite the fact that the damger is artificial. It reflects his compassion toward the sick people of the South American countries, lost and ignored by a government that treats them like lepers. This is very profound. he makes good friends through being compassionate to the sick, even engaging them in a soccer game. When the nuns refuse to serve him lunch with the lepers, his patients steal food for him to eat. When they are going to leave the next day after a few weeks at the camp, it is Ernesto's birthday, and in the midst of a joyful party on the "staff side" of the river, he takes off swimming across the Amazon (an extremely dangerous endeavor) for the "sick side" to celebrate with and say goodbye to his sick friends.

After the leper colony, Ernesto's friend, who shares his ideals but has a plan for settling down (he is older after all), go back to work in a famous hospital, and Ernesto admits that he has been changed by the trip and may not be ready to go back to medical school yet. We know from history that this means he is feeling the seeds of the revolution in which he will become a major figure. The injustice you see in this movie is amazing, startling, and moving. It is hard for us to understand it in North America, but the political conditions in Latin America at that time were intense and dangerous. The social climate was extremely delicate, and after that time, many fascist governments were overcome by revolution. When you see what Che Guevara sees, you are inspired and you feel what he feels. It is very impressive and it makes you want to do something. This movie is both heartwarming and alarming, and I recommend it to anyone who wants some food for thought about life, justice, and standing for something.

I am sure somebody has already reviewed this here, but I thought that I might as well put in my two cents. I just saw this movie, and I saw in playing in a theatre on my University campus...so although it's out of the theatres, I got a nice look at it on the big screen.

This movie is rife with special effects. It was clearly made to impress, and something like every five minutes you are bombarded with some enormous impressive image, in high detail. For example, even when we are just seeing a scene about Lex Luther in his boat, the scene begins not inside the boat's cabin's but over an impressively stormy, computer-animated sea. Or when the crystal starts growing in the sea, we see great dramatic view of the crystals growing from the bottom of the ocean. Also, when we see superman flying into space with the enormous crystal, for example, we feel like we are there because the enormous rocks are falling all around us. The only thing that is annoying is how fake superman looks when he is flying, because he looks absolutely computer animated. I don't think this is a big deal, though, since we all know it's not real, and everything is so computer animated these days that soon we are going to think that real life looks like that.

Back to Lex Luther, though, I must say that Kevin Spacey does an excellent job of playing the creepy, and sometimes comic, villain. Kevin Spacey is one of my favorite actors and I like how he entangles into the role, making us laugh in the very beginning when we meet him, stealing some dying widow's fortune and then throwing away the wig he is wearing and exposing up to the bald Lex we have always known. On the subject of casting, while Lois Lane is very beautiful, I don't like the actress they chose. She somehow didn't fit the part of Lois in my head, but that is obviously a personal preference. The other characters were fine.

The movie is nice. It is an exageration of all the other Superman movies. They poke fun during the movie at common phrases surrounding Superman ("truth, justice and all that stuff"), and make fun of hero movie in general by exagerrating everything. For some people, this makes the movie phony. In fact, my friend next to me during the movie couldn't keep from laughing during the scenes where Superman makes daring, predictable rescues, because they are so iconic and anti realistic. If you ask me, the movie does this intentionally, and it seems like a trend these days to make fun of the traditional way of making a movie, in a movie of the very same genre. For example, we see cartoons making fun of cartoons, gangsters making fun of gangster movies, and heroes making fun of their former selves, as here.

I really liked that they spent the first 10 ten minutes of the movie playing the famous Superman theme, and showing prior credits. I really liked that they gave us time to work up old memories of superman while absorbing the good old dramatic music and getting us in the mood for action.

Now, about the plot. The thing is, I liked the plot in that not everything turned out perfectly (that is, Lois and Superman don't end up together). When I saw the beginning of the film, and we discover that Lois is married, I realize that her son Jason must be Superman's, which of course we learn later when he saves his mom in an asthmatic fit when he throws a
PIANO at her attacker, but then I found myself wondering, how can they take a noble hero like Superman and allow him to break up this nice family? And the fact is, they don't let it happen, which I admire, but there is still something wrong about the son being his. Obviously it is necessary for there to be plenty of sequels, but I feel unsatisfied with an ending where Superman is just "around sometimes", and Lois has to see him but doesn't get to be with him. But I also don't want her husband to be shafted because he is also a very good man. Anyway, I guess it makes sense because although the boy is his son, he will never have to know it because being Superman is such a strong secret anyway. But what will happen to Clark? It's something terrible for him. But since he is superman anyway I guess he will strong enough to get by alone.

I liked the movie, it was entertaining. It was funny because they exaggerated so much and often Superman ended up making fun of himself and his past. The story line was clever enough, I can't complain except that it is cheesy, and as I said before, I think that that was really part of the point of the movie. They know that Superman is an icon and that it is hard to compete with the tradition of the story, except by adding thousands of amazing special effects. It is clear that this movie was made with 3-d in mind, and since it actually showed in some 3-D IMAX theatres, I think that even for me, and I don't like action movies and stunts very much, it would have been an amazing experience. I hope you like this one. It's no deep film, but it's a nice evening of entertainment for any age.

The Story: A scientist's experiments with matter transference cause his molecules to become mixed with those of a fly, with tragic consequences.

It's always a risky proposition to revisit an old favorite horror film. Sometimes it's as great as you remember it, sometimes you find previously undiscovered chills or depths of meaning or character, sometimes you find it to be cheesy but fun or cheesy but bad, and sometimes you find... not much at all. It's a gamble, but every time I go to the video store and see row upon row of endless sequels and straight to video junk, I get the urge to roll the dice anyway. Roll away...

At the beginning of The Fly, Helene Delambre (Patricia Owens) is turning herself in for the murder of her scientist husband Andre (Al Hedison, who later changed his name to David to disguise his association with this film). His head and one arm have been crushed in a huge factory press and she calmly tells Andre's brother Francois (Vincent Price) and Inspector Charas (Herbert Marshall) that she did it but can't disclose why.

The inspector lets her go on her own recognizance while he begins the investigation, and a devastated and puzzled Francois tries to get her to explain her actions. Clues begin to suggest that it has something to do with a white-headed house fly that she is obsessed with and has sent her son Phillipe (Charles Herbert) looking for. Eventually, Francois claims to have caught the fly and tricks her into opening up...

Andre's latest experiment was a matter transmitter, a science-fiction looking contraption that would disintegrate objects in one compartment and reintegrate it in another one at a different location. After a few successful tries with dinner plates and the like (and an attempt with the cat that doesn't turn out nearly as well), Andre decides to try it on himself. Something goes wrong, but we don't see what it is at first because Andre keeps his head and one arm covered with a towel as he tries to hide the results from his wife. Of course, a fly had gotten into the mix and he is revealed to have the head and arm of the poor creature. So what became (and will become) of the fly that everyone's looking for? Sorry, I'm not that kind of reviewer.

So, is this a good movie? Bad? So bad it's good? Well, as I check out reviews elsewhere, I see all three verdicts, and each has its merits, I suppose, though I don't necessarily agree with any of them. Here's my take:

Good stuff: Vincent Price! The man was always incapable of giving a bad performance, and here in a rare sympathetic role, he is nearly flawless. A bit campy sometimes, but he wouldn't be Uncle Vincent otherwise and for the most part he plays everything quite straight. The other performances are well and honestly done, with no real standouts to speak of. Everyone shows up and does their work well if unremarkably.

The budget is indulgent here as well. This is one of the few horror films of its era that could afford color, decent if unremarkable music, professional-looking sets, and good (though limited) special effects and makeup. No element calls much attention to itself at all, either for better or worse. Competence reigns supreme in The Fly. Which brings us to...

Bad stuff: Competence. Mere competence. Nothing in The Fly, aside from Price's performance (and all he had to do was show up and say his lines), is anything more or less than professional and... drab. Dull. Blah. Forgettable. And this is death in an old science fiction horror flick. Better ridiculous or overwrought than boring, I always say. The movie politely knocks on the door, sits daintily on the couch making polite conversation without raising its voice, and then leaves without leaving any muss or fuss or signs of its presence whatsoever. It just leaves the feeling that it's now an hour and a half later in your life and you still haven't got the dishes washed yet.

The Fly is the kind of date you can always bring home to meet Mom, knowing she'll feel comforted in the fact that you'll come home on time, sober and with every hair still in place. Okay if you're that type of person, but I wanna score or at least get smacked around for trying. In other words, The Fly isn't a bad time but you'll never get to second base. Whether this is a good thing or bad is up to you. Personally, I don't feel like I got ripped off but I feel quite unsatisfied and empty.

To me, the fun of movie gambling is the danger of losing everything or the thrill of coming home rich. With The Fly, I broke even. Damn.

P.S. Yes, that is James Clavell, the author of Shogun, getting screenplay credit.

Rent is a recent film, but as everybody knows it was first a broadway show. Therefore it has merits on two levels -- as a story, in which case the credit really goes to the original show, and we can take note of some of the differences in story later -- and as a movie. An incredible thing about this show-made-movie is that almost all of the **original cast** from Broadway performs together in the film version. Even though I never saw the show before seeing the movie (though I knew a lot about the show because of its popularity and several friends who liked it), I think knowing that this cast worked together from the beginning adds something to the (already heavy) emotional weight of the movie.

Anyone who is comfortable with homo/trans/tri/heterosexual issues is going to love how this film (show!) treats them, and anyone who isn't should see this anyway to get a taste of how those kinds of differences are so unimportant in light of how we ALL deal with life and troubles in the same realm, as human beings.

The story is about a group of friends who live in Alphabet city in New York, living a Bohemian lifestyle, just trying to make ends meet, and dealing with critical issues like AIDS, multi-sexuality, depression, drug addiction and suicide. On top of that, they are dealing with issues of self-awakening, understanding of others, dealing with loss, and standing for what you believe in while still trying to survive.

Of course, this is a musical, so if you hate when you see a movie where people are constantly breaking into song, you may get annoyed with this. However, the story is absolutely profound and you should give it a chance. You are probably going to forget that they are singing anyway.

Let's look at the cast of characters; you could say that the main character is Mark, although the friends all play important roles. Mark is an aspiring filmmaker / starving artist who is interested in making documentaries about the reality of life on the street and the difficulties of inner city and poor life. He lives with best friend Roger, who is lovesick over a girlfriend who died recently. Mark's bisexual ex-girlfriend is Maureen, and she has now turned to women and is dating beautiful lawyer Joanne. Mimi, who lives downstairs from Mark and Roger in Alphabet city, is a nineteen year old heroin addict who works in a night club dancing and is in love with Roger. Last, Tom Collins, a good friend of Roger and Mark, visits from his job teaching at a university and brings Angel, a sweet transvestite, into the gang when he meets her at the beginning of the movie. The first scene of the movie is of the cast on an actual stage, singing the opening song of the musical. It is obviously not pretending to be anything but it's musical origin, and this beginning pushes forward immediately the main message of the story - that we can't measure our lives in minutes or events, only in the love we collect along the way.

In the beginning of the movie, Benny, another old friend who has now married into a political family and basically owns the dump he used to live in with Mark and Roger, tells them that they need to leave or pay all the past rent that they have ignored. Benny's wife's family wants to tear down the old buildings and build a recording studio and other fancy stuff. Maureen is staging a protest against the action and Benny offers them free board indefinitely if they stop it. Naturally, they refuse. We are introduced to their Bohemian lifestyle and hippie-ish beliefs when we see how they protest in the streets, burning things to stay warm and ignoring calls from their families on Christmas day. But this strange group seems happy enough just struggling to get by.

We meet, in the first few scenes, Mark, Roger, who remains pretty reserved all the time, and Collins and Angel, who finds Collins after he is mugged in the street and they become fast friends and then, lovers. We discover that Angel and Collins, both gay men, have AIDS, and so does Roger, though we learn it a little later. Angel is an advocate for and avidly attends Life Support meetings, a support group for people with AIDS. He encourages all the others to come, because they are in one way or another highly affected by AIDS. The story takes place in the 80s in the height of the AIDS epidemic, so although it seems like an out-of-proportion number of people in the story are HIV-positive, it is not unrealistic considering the height of ignorance that existed, and the high rate of infection, especially in poorer communities and among gays, We see people in the Life Support meetings dealing with feelings about the diseasea dn trying to live their lives normally in the grip of a scary unknown. We also meet Mimi in the beginning, when she goes upstairs to bother Roger, who pushes her away. His past haunts him every moment. He avoids going out with friends, and he avoids getting interested in anyone, especially Mimi. His previous girlfriend haunts him. They were both heroine addicts and we see in a wave of music how they fell in love and did drugs together, only to learn that they both have AIDS. We infer from what is shown that his girlfriend died. This is one place that the movie differs from the original show. In the movie, we don't know exactly what happens to Roger's ex-girlfriend, only that she died, seemingly from AIDS or maybe from an overdose, since he is particularly bitter with Mimi about her addiction to smack. But in the show, we hear that in fact, his girlfriend committed suicide when she got the HIV test results, leaving behind a note that said "we have AIDS". In my opinion, this would have been super-powerful and should have been included in the movie. Regardless, this is what makes Roger push away Mimi, not only his past but the fact that he has the disease now and doesn't see any reason to do anything but wait to die. Much of the movie is his friends convincing him otherwise.

We watch the evolution of the friendships as the whole group seems to gel. Angel is incorporated into the group, and she is absolutely full of life. Always dressing in bright colors, always joyful, always supportive and always encouraging the others to enjoy life and to support each other even under the worst circumstances (drugs? AIDS? Suicide? Most of these guys have had it pretty rough - and anyone who thinks this is an exaggeration is living too comfortable of a life), she is the lifeline of the group. And as we watch the relationship between her and Collins evolve, we fall in love with her too ... they have found a true love, in the face of all the terrible things. And they provide a good lesson for anyone who is not comfortable with bisexuality or transsexuality - one cannot help but feel deeply for the two of them in love. Sometimes it just takes a story like this for some bigotry to be fought - people need to see and feel that LBGQTA people fall in love and life just like all the straight and "normal" people. This is why it is so heartbreaking when we see that she is the first who begins to deteriorate under the influence of the disease.

We also are introduced to the crazy Maureen when we see her show, which is a protest against throwing all of the poor people out of their homes and building whatever they want. What is supposed to be a peaceful protest turns violent when the police are unleashed on the crowd for no reason, but the commotion they create by their attack is indistinguishable from if the crown actually started the riot themselves. This is supposed to be a real story, and a pretty realistic interpretation of a real riot that occurred there in the 80s. It is terrible, but in the end they all get away from the commotion okay, and Mark sells some footage that he shot of the riot to a news company so they will see what really happened at the protest. They go to a cafe to celebrate and run into who else, but Benny, who is responsible for calling out the police who initiated the violence. In a show like only broadway can produce, they sing about their Bohemian lifestyle, the strengths of their beliefs even in adversity, and laugh in Benny's face about how uncomfortable he is around the ideals that he himself used to have. This night, Roger and Mimi finally get together when they realize by talking that they both have AIDS and that life is too short to be cold to other people because you are scared. Roger has a difficult time, but he decides that it is time to put himself out there instead of hiding until the disease takes him over.

In the midst of all this, Maureen and Joanne, in a rocky relationship because Maureen is continuously too friendly with other girls (and guys), a behavior confirmed adamantly by Mark from their previous relationship, have some fights and some loving moments, all awkwardly in front of Mark, who still can't resist Maureen. After a big fight, as a resolution they decide to do the equivalent of getting married and make a life-long commitment to each other. There is a fancy engagement party (Joanne's family is obviously quite wealthy), which is another model for how the world should be, accepting of all sexual styles and preferences. The event goes beautifully until Joanne catches a drunk Maureen flirting with one of the catering waitresses, and they fight with each other and break up for good in front of everyone. This is when things start to break down for the whole group.

Roger and Mimi's budding relationship goes wrong when Roger finds out that Mimi had dinner with Benny to try to convince him to leave the guys alone in their home. It turns out that Mimi and Benny had had an affair a few months before, and even though we don't find out if anything actually happened at "dinner", Roger is fed up and refuses to see Mimi anymore. She goes back into a drug-filled world and after some time gets involved with Benny again. Angel's health rapidly deteriorates as the Life Support group gets smaller, although at last Roger, Mimi, and the others are attending all in support of each other. After some time, they lose Angel and despite their difference are brought together at her funeral. This part is very painful, and now the last happy couple is also broken. Collins' pain is very real and everyone feels the loss of the lifeline of the group. It has been less than a year since they met her, and now she is gone.

After the funeral, Roger leaves New York and drives off to Santa Fe, to wander in the desert and think about how angry he is with life. Mimi gets worse, does more drugs, and then gets lost form the others, living on the street. Mark is alone in his home now, working on a film of all their adventures together, balanced between the rest of his friends. Joanne and Maureen aren't talking. At the funeral for Angel they fight on their way out, and even Roger and Mark fight before Roger leaves.

After some time in New Mexico Roger realizes he's in the wrong place and heads back to New York. They are all looking for Mimi but she is nowhere to be found, they don't even know if she's still alive. Not even Benny has heard from her. When Roger gets back, it's Christmas again, just like one year ago when the story began. Collins has returned to visit and while they are talking the girls yell up to the apartment that they have found Mimi. This is the great finale of the movie. They bring her up, barely clinging to life. She is delirious. Roger sings a song to Mimi that he wrote for her while coming back from Santa Fe. They are realizing, when it is almost too late, that they need to live life to its fullest. Mimi seems to have died, but suddenly she comes back to life, giving her and Roger a second chance and showing them all that they should do the same with each other and in their friendships.

We can learn a lot from this movie, and i can never convey its emotional impact, it is only something you can understand from watching it. There are so many things wrong in the lives of these people, and they realize after it all they should be filled with the joy o living, the joy that Angel felt and imparted onto them until her last moments alive. This is a message that you can get from a lot of movies, but this story has such a huge impact because their lives are realistic, their problems are important and their ideals are reachable. The movie is full of uncomfortable issues, and it explains that we need to see past these problems if we want to enjoy this world. The message is absolutely valuable, straightforward, and real.

some of my favorite lines from the movie are:

-"there's only us, there's only this. forget regret, or life is yours to miss.... give in to love, or live in fear!" (finale, other songs, main theme)
-"you'll never share real love until you love yourself" (Roger to Mimi)
-"live in my house, I'll be your shelter. just pay me back with one thousand kisses" (Angel, "I'll cover you")
-"goodbye, love...hello, disease..." (Mimi to Roger, when he leaves for Santa Fe)

My favorite scenes are:
-when Collins and Angel sing "I'll cover you" in the street, because it is a raw moment of the beauty and purity of their love.
-Angel's funeral, when Collins sings in front of the others; the pain is real, and by suffering it with them we learn something.
-After the funeral, in the graveyard, when they fight. because their pain is raw; they just want to be happy, and it tears them apart.
-the finale, of course. not just because Roger and Mimi can be together. Because the words are so beautiful, and the message so solid.

Please watch this movie. I don't think it made it into the mainstream, because it is sort of a cult story, and deals with a lot of controversial issues, not to mention the musical nature of it. But even if you are not as sentimental as I am about the message, the movie has a lot to say that is worth hearing, and I think everyone should experience it at least once. I am unable to describe how it affected me. I am not gay, I am not Bohemian, I am not a hippie, or any of the stereotypical things that you think a person who loves this movie would be. I simply love the message that we have to embrace life. We hear it time and time again but we don't understand it. We don't appreciate the weight of our friendships, the value of our minutes with them, and how lucky we are when so many have to deal with adversity. And seeing the joy through that adversity, lots of adversity, is the miracle of Rent.

The Story: A scientist and the woman who loves him battle with the horrifying results of a teleportation experiment that has turned tragically wrong.

Remakes! There is a special circle of Hell reserved for dirty politicians, crooked lawyers, spiteful X's, and whoever the bastard is who first said "Hey, that's a good movie. Let's make it all over again and trash its memory forever." Remakes are always lurching, sanitized, lowest common denominator, trend-of-the-month monstrosities with no personality of their own except for the suspicious odors of formaldehyde and brimstone wafting through the theater.

And all generalizations are false. The Fly is a monstrously well-made and powerful film, while its predecessor is a competent but dull B movie. Sometimes bad guys do good things despite their worst intentions. This is like a deal with the Devil at the crossroads, except Old Scratch forgot to collect on his part of the deal.

At the beginning of The Fly, research scientist Seth Brundle (Jeff Goldblum) invites Veronica (Geena Davis), a reporter, back to his lab to see his teleportation device. Just like in the original film, the scientist has two telepods set up in his Frankenstein-like lair. Put an object in one, flash some special effects hither and yon and the object appears in the other pod. Well, the setup has a few bugs to work out yet - living creatures don't come through it looking so healthy. As Seth and Veronica's relationship develops into love, Brundle fiddles with this and that until he's confident (or drunk) enough to try the ultimate experiment - to teleport himself from one pod to the other.

Hey, it worked! But of course, we know that there had to be a fly in there somewhere or we would be stuck with a romantic comedy. Why didn't he change like in the original movie? Oh yeah... because this is the 1980s and we can make this a very gruesome movie with more psychological depth. This time, the change is disturbingly gradual. As Brundle's body begins to gradually discard human parts (check out the collection in the medicine cabinet!) and gain fly parts, his mind undergoes a gradual transformation as well. As the film progresses, and we come to feel more and more pity for the man and the woman who loves him, we also become more and more horrified as his looks and behavior take on inhuman and animalistic, vicious tendencies...

Okay, I'll stop there. Are there many surprises from this point on? From a plot standpoint, not really. Some of the particulars of Seth's mental and physical degradation are shocking, but all is built from a logical foundation once you accept the basic premise. I can't describe any particulars for you, since it would ruin shocks and surprises for the uninitiated and those who have seen the movie know that descriptions wouldn't do it justice anyway. Suffice it to say that The Fly is one of the most surprising, scary big-budget horror movies of the 1980s and is well deserving of the acclaim that it collected - not to mention the Academy Award for the makeup.

Well, you already can tell that I consider this a good movie. The performances on the whole range from sturdy and workmanlike to inspired, though Goldblum's performance could have used a lot more subtlety in my view. The pathos that comes through is due more to the horror of the situation itself and the destruction that is wrought upon those around him than from anything Goldblum does with his role. I suspect he was picked more for his natural insectoid looks than for his acting skills and would have rather seen a more restrained and dignified actor in the role (supporting actor John Getz, perhaps?). Davis's role, on the other hand, is justifiably star making in its honesty and sympathy.

In contrast to the effect of the original film, we are treated to a much more intelligent and complex array of characters and situations, and Cronenberg's usual allegories and personal obsessions are fortunately held in abeyance. There are a few "deep," "metaphorical" elements here and there, and a few moments that are momentarily silly and destructive to the mood (and a ridiculous cheat dream sequence), but all in all this is a remarkably restrained and straightforward film for Cronenberg. Someone somewhere must have shackled the poor man and kept him from his usual creative frenzy, and in this rare instance I approve.

In the end, this movie breaks all of the rules - it's a remake, it's a modern special-effects blockbuster, it's a movie made by an idiosyncratic artist hampered by commercial restraints, and it's a thinking person's gore movie. Plus... it's a David Cronenberg movie with normal, sympathetic characters and no overt obsessive navel gazing. All in all, Cronenberg's "Fly" is that rarity of rarities: A deal with the devil that turns out to be a good deal for all concerned.

Except of course for Seth Brundle and the people in his life.

This movie is. a. classic. Let's face it; it's a kid's movie - but let's face it; ANYone can enjoy it. And not because it's the Lion King, for example. This is a fairy tale, a true fairy, lock, stock, and barrel. And it doesn't pretend to be anything else. In fact, the movie is a story inside a story, when a sick boy (Fred Savage....he's so young and tiny!) is stuck at home and his grandfather comes over to read him a story - a book called The Princess Bride, a fairy tale of fairy tales. As his grandfather says, it has everything - danger, royalty, heroism, comedy, true love. Although the kid isn't too excited about having a book read to him (as the grandfather says, "when I was a kid, television used to be called books"), what else can he do? He's sick. So in the end, he says okay, and waits for the story to unfold. We find ourselves in the very beginning of the story, when Wesley and the Princess meet. She is a commoner, who lives in the countryside, and Wesley is a farm boy, who is completely under her control. Whenever she finds the smallest task, she asks him to do it for her. He always replies with "As you wish", and does anything she asks. Soon enough (and we're talking about in five minutes of movie, here) they fall in love, "true" love, and they are already making out in the sunset, etc. etc. Then one day Wesley has to go to sea, for some reason I can't remember, but I guess that it is for war. He tells the girl that he will come back for her, and that nothing can stop true love. She receives news soon after that Wesley's ship has been attacked by the famous Dread Pirate Roberts, and that there are no survivors. She doesn't sleep for days, and basically loses all will to live. But of course, she must go on. The next scene we find her five years later, chosen by the prince of the land, Prince Humperdink, to marry him and become the Princess. Although she does not love him, he is allowed to marry anyone he wants from the land that his family rules, so she agrees. We see her presented to the crowd as future princess and queen. She lives in the castle while awaiting her wedding, and goes horseback riding as her only reprieve from the terrible lonely live that is about to surround her. It is on one of these rides that she is kidnapped in the woods by some men claiming to be circus performers. There is a little old man, a giant, and a Spaniard who is an expert in sword fighting. They were actually hired to kidnap the princess and deliver her to the prince's enemies in order to begin a war with them.

They take her on a boat and are well on their way to the other country when they notice a ship following them. The princess insists that they are going to be caught by Humperdink, who is clearly the best hunter who has ever lived (really, since this is true from what he see of him in the film), so they are pretty nervous about the second ship in the water. Anyway, it turns out that they reach the Cliffs of Insanity, their destination, before the other ship can catch up. They climb together up a rope that they had clearly put there before for that purpose, and while they think this "docking" will help them lose their follower, they are wrong. He pulls his ship up right next to theirs and jumps out, climbing up the ripe right behind them. Not wanting to be chased or caught by anyone, the little man leaves behind his Spaniard to kill the man in black who is climbing the rope behind them. When the man in black gets to the top, they have a pleasant conversation while the Spaniard lets him relax for a few minutes after his climb to the top, before they resume fighting. That is one of the great things about this movie; it is overly ridiculous. They discuss the Spaniard's past, and we hear for the first time that his father was killed by a six fingered man and that his entire life has been dedicated to finding the man and taking revenge for his father. We don't learn anything about the man in black, because, of course, he has to remain mysterious.

They finally sword fight, a sport that is a passion for each of them. The moves and stunts during the fight are impressive, but even though the Spaniard has studied swordplay all of his life, it is clear that the man in black is better. They both begin fighting with their left hands and each switches to the right hand as a surprise. It is very funny. In the end, the Spaniard is caught without his sword and the man in black doesn't kill him - after a few words of respect, he simply knocks him out so that he can't follow him either.

Soon, he catches up with the other two kidnappers and the princess, and once again the man leaves the giant behind to contend with (and kill) the man in black. The giant doesn't want to surprise the man in black with a rock and kill him as the little man suggests; so instead he misses with the rock and asks for a "fair" fight, hand to hand, although the odds are clearly not even since he is a giant giant. Somehow, after a few blows that clearly have no effect of the giant, the man in black climbs on his back and chokes him from behind until he passes out, but again not killing him, the naturally honorable thing to do.

He goes on to find the princess and the stupid old man. He finds them resting together. The little man says that he is clearly no match physically, but that he is the smartest man alive, and that it would be impossible for the man in black to compete with his brain. Thus, the man in black challenges the little man to a battle of wits. He pulls out a little vile of poisonous powder, and places powder in one of the wine glasses before the two men. He says that the little man should choose which one he wants, and then they both should drink, and one of them die. This is one of the best parts of the movie. The silly little man makes a ridiculous show trying to figure out which glass has the poison, and after some time he chooses (although he switches the glasses when he thinks the man in black is not looking), and they drink. While laughing about his victory, he falls over dead.

The man in black then takes the princess and they start walking. He asks her why she has betrayed her true love to marry the prince and she realizes that he is the Dread Pirate Roberts himself, come to steal her. He says that he remembers killing her love. When they see Humperdink pursuing them on the horizon, she pushes the man in black over a steep hillside, and as he rolls down it he cries, "as.... you... wish..." and she realizes immediately that it is her Wesley himself, and consequently throws her own self down the hillside after him. They land at the bottom together, kiss and make up, and then are chased into the treacherous fire swamp by Prince Humperdink and his other men.

Through some miracle they make it through the fire swamp (where the three dangers are fire coming out of the ground, lightning quicksand and rodents of unusual size, and no one has ever come out alive). On the other side, though, they get apprehended, and when the princess realizes that they are going to kill Wesley if he doesn't surrender, she begs her Prince to let him go if she will marry him after all. He agrees, takes the princess home, and immediately throws Wesley into prison, where he is tortured by a strange machine that was built by one of Humperdink's henchmen, the six-fingered man.

Now the rest of the story must ensue, filling the time between the princess's "capture" and her wedding to Humperdink. The Spaniard and the giant reappear, and since they now both feel an affinity for the man in black, and they have heard about the wedding of the princess, they know that they must do something to help him. In the end, they try to find him, they go to stop the wedding, and they all become very good friends. Humperdink is killed along with the six-fingered man, and everyone is happy. Wesley even hands along his place as the Dread Pirate Roberts (a role handed him by the real pirate and the pirate before him) to the Spaniard, since he doesn't know what to do with his life after the revenge has been reached.

It is cute to see Fred Savage reacting to the story all the time. He gets nervous when things go wrong, and since he clearly doesn't want his grandfather to notice it, his grandfather makes fun of him anyway. He offers a few times to leave the boy alone and stop reading the story, but of course the boy refuses this. He says it is very gross at the kissing parts, except of course in the end, when the kisses are extremely important because of the clarity of the true love.

This movie is excellent and amusing for kids and adults. I recommend it one hundred percent. It not only tells a good story but also teaches about life, and that even when things are serious, one can joke a little. It also makes fun of ordinary fairy tales, teaching that all those things you hear in stories are too exaggerated to be true, but that they can teach something anyway. Most importantly, this movie emphasizes the fact that true love is more important than anything else we encounter. I think this is the primary point of the story (and that grandfathers aren't always that boring).

The Story: A nerdy skid row florist's apprentice becomes a celebrity by inadvertently inventing a talking man-eating plant, which quickly grows out of control and turns him into a reluctant murderer.

B-movie king Roger Corman used to make movies almost as guerilla-type operations. There was a time during the late 1950s and early 1960s when he would use left over sets from previous movies to make new quickies as the sets were being torn down around him and his crew. Most of the time, the results were fun but obviously cheap and rather forgettable. Little Shop of Horrors, on the other hand, was a happy accident in every way. This two-day film was made for a reported $27,000 and has proven to be a comedy/horror classic with scores of imitators and admirers. It even spawned a Broadway musical version that was later successfully turned into a film by Muppeteer Frank Oz, starring Rick Moranis and Steve Martin.

According to legend, Corman found himself one Friday afternoon with a finished film and some skid row sets that weren't due to be torn down until early the next week. He asked his regular screenwriter Charles Griffith to come up with a screenplay that could utilize the sets. Griffith cannibalized his own script for Bucket of Blood, changed the sculptor character into a nebbishy florist employee, added more jokes and goofy subplots, and had it all ready for filming by the next morning. Corman drafted his usual crew and a cast of his faithful repertory actors and filmed the whole thing before the crews showed up Monday to dismantle the sets.

The film stars Corman regular Jonathan Haze as a Seymour Krelborn, a geeky apprentice in Mushnick's (Mel Welles) skid row flower shop. The sign in the window says "Lots plants - cheap!" in what is not the first and certainly not the last in a nearly non-stop series of assaults upon the integrity of the English language ("What do you call this salad?" "Caesarean." "Does your plant have a scientific name?" "Yes, of course, but who could denounce it?"). Seymour brings in a goofy-looking little decrepit plant one day. He names it Audrey Jr. after the sweet flower shop girl (Jackie Joseph) he has a crush on. Everyone in the shop except Audrey makes fun of the pathetic thing until Seymour accidentally discovers its taste for blood ("Feed me," it implores, "feeeeeed me! More!" The voice was done by screenwriter Griffith, by the way) and it grows into a magnificent specimen. He becomes a local celebrity and the flower shop finally becomes a success. The plant becomes more and more voracious, and more and more intelligent and controlling, until Seymour finds himself pressed into service providing human food for it. Eventually, Seymour's secret is found out and he is on the run.

On the surface, this sounds like a simple remake of Bucket of Blood with a slight change of venue. The basic plot is rather similar and some of the scenery and music is even recycled from the previous film. Where this film rises above its predecessor is mostly in the added dimensions of the supporting characters, from Bucket of Blood star Dick Miller as a flower-eating customer (Mushnick's inferior looking flowers have more nutritional value than actual pretty ones, it would seem) and Myrtle Vail as Seymour's hypochondriac mother (but all those alcohol-based medications sure do get her through the day) to Jack Nicholson in one of his first roles as a masochistic dental patient named Wilbur Force ("Oh God," he exclaims in the dentist's chair, "Don't stop now!"). The dialogue has also grown several layers of wit, nuance and style since the earlier film.

All in all, this is one of the most hilarious comedy horrors ever, and for a change is not even without suspenseful and rather shocking moments as well. This movie provides a never-ending supply of clever one-liners and original, quirky and multidimensional characters. The jokes come in fast and furiously, from the lowest slapstick to surprisingly sophisticated verbal wit. If it weren't for its obvious (but quite charming) cheapness and the rushed quality of the sound, camera work and editing, it would be a nearly perfect film. As it is, it is still an undying horror comedy classic, deserving of and nearly demanding repeat viewings. Viva skid row!

By Simon Woodhouse

When it comes to pitching a film to studio execs, I guess sometimes it pays to be a well known, Oscar winning writer/actor/director. If Woody Allen wasn't Woody Allen, how far would he have got pitching a film that's a supposed Greek tragedy set in New York, and tells the tale of a middle aged sports writer who becomes involved with a porn star? Not only that, but at various points during the film Greek thespians pop up in the guise of mythological figures. And add to this scenes shot in an ancient amphitheatre, which feature masked players speaking Shakespearian style dialogue.

Mighty Aphrodite has all these things. But what on paper seems like it might not make much sense, actually becomes one of Allen's funniest films once it's up on the big screen.

As with most of Allen's films that feature him in front of the camera, he's playing a slightly neurotic, quick-witted New Yorker. Though the character of Lenny Weinrib is standard Woody Allen stuff, he does have a heart, something that other Allen characters sometimes tend to lack. When we first meet Lenny, he's discussing childbirth with his wife Amanda (Helena Bonham Carter). Lenny's not keen on the idea, but eventually they end up adopting a child. They name the boy Max, and for a while everything is good. Then Lenny starts to get the urge to try and find the boy's mother. Eventually he tracks down Linda (Mira Sorvino). Up until this point the film is amusing, however, once Lenny and Linda start to interact, it becomes a whole lot funnier. Linda is a porn star and a hooker, but totally unashamed about it. She's not the sharpest tool in the box, but she has a good heart. Lenny feels sorry for her, and they start to spend time together (but it's totally platonic). He then tries to fix her up with an aspiring young boxer.

Because Lenny is just an ordinary guy, his attempts to help Linda don't really work. But his failures provide the film with some of its funniest moments. In one particularly good scene, Lenny tries to persuade a local gangster to leave Linda alone. The guy and his minder are huge, and Lenny is just Lenny. This mismatch of characters, the bringing together of two people who would never normally meet, means the encounter is priceless. It's a theme that runs through the whole film, but it never becomes tired or over-used.

As with lots of Allen's films, Mighty Aphrodite feels a bit like a whole string of short comedy skits linked together to form a larger story. But that's fine, because these different little chunks mean the film never runs out of steam. And it doesn't rely on one visual gag, or a solitary, vaguely amusing premise to keep it going (as is often the case in lots of other comedies).

The film rolls on and Lenny becomes more confused about what he's doing with Linda. At the same time, he's drifting apart from Amanda. Various characters from Greek mythology pop up to try and advise him, but they just muddy the water.

Though this all sounds a bit heavy, it's not. Even when contemplating the tragic, the character of Lenny does so in the exaggerated, desperate way that's become Allen's trademark comedy style. Mira Sorvino is brilliant as Linda. Her high-pitched, whiney New York accent, though slightly exaggerated, fits the character perfectly. She's a tall girl as well, and so towers over Lenny, making them even more of an odd couple. As with all Allen films, the jokes are in the dialogue. There's some physical humor, but it's mostly what the characters say that'll make you laugh. You have to pay attention though; because the writing is so sharp the funnies come in continuous waves. However, this means the film easily stands up to repeated viewings. Being based loosely on the idea of a Greek tragedy, the film has a twist at the end. It's not tragic though, instead leaning more towards the ironic.

Mira Sorvino won a well-deserved Oscar (best supporting actress) for her portrayal of Linda. Allen is his usual hysterical self, with the character of Lenny being his best onscreen persona of recent years. If you're not a fan of his, however, there's nothing here that'll convert you. But if you are keen, or even just a casual observer, Mighty Aphrodite is a must see.

The 1981 film The Postman Always Rings Twice is a remake of a 1946 movie, which itself was based on a James Cain novel of the same name. So we're dealing with material that is twice removed from its original source, meaning that there were likely significant differences or omissions along the way. Having never read the novel or seen the 1946 version, I was going into this viewing of Postman with no prior knowledge of what I was in for.

The Postman Always Rings Twice opens with a drifter named Frank Chambers (played by Jack Nicholson) trying to hitch a ride to Los Angeles. Frank is clearly an idler and a con man, as evidenced by the way he convinces diner owner Nick Papadakis (John Colicos) to give him a free meal when he (Frank) doesn't have any money. To do this, Frank made up a story on the spot about how he was supposed to go to L.A. to look up some friends and begin work as a machinist. The only problem is, the guy he was riding with took off and grabbed Frank's wallet in the process.

Nick immediately perks up when he hears that Frank is a machinist because he needs a mechanic to take care of the service station that is attached to the diner. He offers Frank a small salary plus room and board in order to forget about Los Angeles and stay on. Frank at first turns down the offer, but after he realizes that he doesn't really have any place better to go he accepts.

The more time Frank spends at the Twin Oaks Diner, the more he lusts after Nick's beautiful, much younger wife Cora (Jessica Lange). The effects of being out in the middle of nowhere probably got to Cora because she is attracted to Frank also, and the two soon give vent to their feelings one day when the husband is away on business.

After awhile, Frank and Cora realize that they want to be together openly without having to sneak around. But that of course means they have to get rid of Nick. The two scheme together to plan Nick's murder, but they completely mess up the execution of the plan. Nick doesn't die, so Frank and Cora are right back where they started from. Although Cora tries to break it off, she knows deep down that she could never be content with Nick now. So they try a different murder plan, which ends up working.

The rest of the film then deals with the aftermath of Nick's murder. With Frank and Cora, nothing ever works out smoothly, so there are cops to deal with, a trial, shady lawyers and assistants, insurance company representatives, etc. It seems that everyone is out to make sure that Frank and Cora don't end up together.

On the whole, I found the major plotline of The Postman Always Rings Twice to be extremely disturbing. There wasn't a single redeeming quality in either Frank or Cora, so I was basically spending two hours of my time with lying, scheming murderers. It wasn't a comfortable experience at all, which is probably what the filmmakers intended.

One of the biggest problems I had with this movie was accepting Jack Nicholson as the Frank. He looked so scummy, dirty, and untrustworthy in his role that I didn't for one second believe that a woman like Cora would be interested in him, that she could "love" him so much that she would risk going to the gallows for him. That point wasn't sufficiently addressed by the script, in my opinion.

Another point that the screenwriters chose to avoid was the question of how a woman like Cora ended up being married to a man like Nick in the first place. Nick wasn't attractive at all, was much older than Cora, and wasn't even particularly nice to her. It didn't make sense that she would be with him, and yet there she was. This bothered me a great deal when I was watching the movie because I just couldn't figure it out.

These problems, along with the rather abrupt ending, made me feel that the 1981 version of The Postman Always Rings Twice wasn't as good of a film as it could have been. If you skip this one, you won't be missing out on too much.

Those who love foreign films can be ready to experience a definitive feast with the latest comedic farce Volver, directed by the immensely talented Pedro Almodovar. The film stars Penelope Cruz, known more in America for being the companion of the likes of Tom Cruise and Mathew McConaughey, and she delivers a riveting performance that has some talking of an Oscar nomination.

The film is billed as three generations of women who manage, somehow, to survive it all, insanity, fire, superstitions, apparitions and death. Cruz plays Raimunda who is married to Paco, a rather pathetic man. Yohana Cobo plays a teenage daughter while Lola Duenas handles the role of Sole, Raimunda's sister. The third generation role is filled by Carmen Maura who plays the mother of the two sisters. The mother has theoretically perished in a fire that also claimed her husband. However, the mother appears in the form of an apparition at various points in the movie.

Cruz, also known for her exotic beauty, has been panned for her performances in recent popular American films. But in teaming up with Almodovar for the third time in her brief career, the sultry-looking, Madrid-born movie star proves she is worthy of attention for her acting ability as well.

The two previously teamed up in 1997 with Live Flesh and then again in 1999 with All About My Mother. Cruz points to Almodovar's insistence on perfection as being critical for bringing out the best in her.

Though her career already spans more than 30 films, the 32-year-old Cruz appears ready to receive accolades for yet another foreign film. Volver is being embraced by critics and audiences alike, bringing Cruz the attention that goes with a stellar acting performance.

The film is rated R.

The Story: A hideous vampire takes up residence in a German city and begins a plague that threatens to decimate the populace.

How much slack do you give a movie for innovation and influence? How much outdated technique and laughable acting do you ignore if the monster is good and the film's heart is in the right place? I can give a silent film such as The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari or Metropolis very high scores because they hold up magnificently and are still more effective than most modern films.

Nosferatu, on the other hand, despite some of the most effective andfrightening images in film history, demands some soul-searching when it comes to rating it. It is an undeniable classic, but when I watch it with a critical eye it often falls short of its reputation.
The story of Nosferatu will be quite familiar to most horror fans, as it is simply the Dracula story with names changed in a futile attempt to bypass copyright laws - the trickery failed and Bram Stoker's widow ended up suing the filmmakers anyway. Young realtor Hutter (Gustav von Wangenheim) is sent to a sinister castle in the Carpathian Mountains to sell Count Orlok (Max Schreck) a house in Bremen.

The prologue is unfortunately very sloooooow and hideously, laughably overacted in the worst silent film manner. Perhaps I should warn less patient people right up front not to give up on the movie at this point. Fast forward if you must - you won't miss anything of note and things pick up later. Hutter meets the people in the nearby village, who of course are terrified of Orlok and insist that evil things will happen if he goes. He gets a ride as far as a carriage is willing to take him and is then picked up by a ghostly carriage and met by Orlok (Max Schreck).

Orlok is initially covered by so much clothing that he looks freaky but still somewhat human. However, he is revealed to be a hideous vampire later on. This creature is perhaps the most horrific vampire ever captured on film, with his long claws, bat ears and rat face. Even if the rest of the film were wretched (it isn't), it would be worth seeing for the first view of the vampire Orlok alone. We are treated to some stop-motion creepiness as Orlok loads up his coffin and rat friends for the trip to the city. The stop motion and negative printing effects are often criticized as outdated, but I think they add a wonderfully surreal feel to the film and are among its most effectively spooky moments.

Orlok eventually arrives in the city (aboard an empty ship - someone got hungry on the trip) and the streets gradually become full of hearses as the town begins to be decimated by a mysterious "plague." The Renfield character, named "Knock" here (Alexander Granach), does his loony bug-eating bit in the local asylum and is perhaps the best of a long line of insane Dracula henchmen. Just try not to let a nervous laugh escape as he exclaims "Spiders!" Hutter's wife Ellen (Greta Schroeder, who everyone in the movie thinks is beautiful but to me looks distractingly like a rather ugly, overacting man in drag) has some kind of psychic revelation and figures out a way to end the madness.

There is a lot to celebrate in this film. All the scenes with Orlok or Knock performing their horrific duties are beautifully chilling and still effective nearly 80 years later. The early scene where Orlok (as a hyena-like creature) terrorizes some horses is eerily convincing as well. Many of the minor characters are well done, and the location photography (though deteriorated and somewhat washed out with the years) is often striking.

The primitive special effects scenes are very creepy as well. However... This film has the same major problem as many other horror films of the 1920s and 30s - horrible, horrible lead actors that require immense effort to even look at. Thankfully, they are not always on screen but when they are they almost fatally drag the film down. Another complaint is the lack of camera movement. In some other films you hardly notice this (and in Dr. Caligari or Metropolis it is actually stylistically beneficial), but this movie screams for some tracking shots and it is quite distracting at times. It is one of the most chillingly atmospheric horror movies of all time and still retains an undeniable spellbinding power.

I am against tampering with classic films as a rule (and cheerfully support the death penalty for colorizers), but Nosferatu is a great film that could use some heavy editing and restructuring. Nonetheless, this still is the first of the great vampire movies and as a fitfully frightening, atmospheric classic should be seen once by anyone with any interest at all in the history of horror. Seeing it more than once, however, may seem too much like a homework assignment.

The Story: Good-looking country boy Caleb Calton gets more than he bargained for when he unknowingly gives a beautiful vampire hick girl a ride back to some friends.

The opening shots of Near Dark are truly amazing. The first ten minutes completely build up the intensity and atmosphere for the duration of the film. While Caleb takes strange but sweet Mae (Jenny Wright) to her destination in his old beat up truck, the dark sky begins to turn bluer by the minute. As the sun draws closer to rising over the desolate dirt road, Mae's time begins to run short. She becomes quite persistent, almost frenzied, begging Caleb to hurry; while in the background the brightness of day unfolds. In the middle of the long, blank dirt road, he stops the truck and takes out his keys. The sun has almost given full delivery to a new dawn now. In order for Mae to make it back before it's too late, she must kiss Caleb. With a few seconds of reluctance, their infatuation grows upon each other; and within a few more seconds, Caleb will never be the same.

Caleb's human deterioration is absolutely genius. His transformation is practically immediate, as he tries to make it back home to his sister and father by foot. As he moves towards the house, stumbling almost without direction in a nearby field, his legs give out from under him causing a collapse. Slow to recover, he gathers himself from the ground and makes it back on the road to his house, only to be grabbed by an unknown arm and thrown into a Winnebago. This is when Caleb's destiny is realized. The reality of his future existence is shaped before him. And the gang gives their introduction. He is given a week to prove himself to them. If he doesn't succeed in his job, his new life will be simple and short-lived.

Director Kathryn Bigelow's intelligent visualization of countrified vampires is a well-respected offbeat classic. Back in 1987, when this motion picture surfaced, it set the standard for modern day vampire stories; and still does to a degree. Bigelow's undead team of murderous leeches perform their job much different from the traditional bloodsucker. Near Dark contains no scenes with long pointed fangs, garlic necklaces or stakes through the heart. Not a single frame contains a hero with a cross in hopes of sending the devilish spawn back to hell. However, one essential ingredient is weaved into the story. The vampires dread one customary factor, sunlight.

Near Dark carries a truly inventive tone, with unusual characters and a restrained setting. For the duration of the movie, our cast is trapped in either a vehicle with aluminum foil covered windows or a rundown motel. All of these type scenes are shot up close, giving off a trapped appearance. The sequences of night let the camera roam free, much like the evil of the film. A truly great example of this is a view of the vampires as they come up a dark hill, as the camera provides this sight for us from afar. A faint light silhouettes them as they come over the rise like a group of pure, walking terror. This shot is remarkable. It's moments like these that live proudly off of style, or mood, other than communication between personalities. The music provided by Tangerine Dream has a unique behavior of it's own, piercing certain scenes of the film with perfection. The score fits the drama entirely, with suspenseful measures at the correct moment.

The acting is controlled efficiently from everybody in Near Dark. The gang of vampires consists of four, aside from Caleb and Mae. The head vampire is Jesse, played by Lance Henriksen (Pumpkinhead, Aliens). He truly conquers this role, as the oldest of the group, as well as the most knowledgeable. His appearance and the expressions given off to the camera are compelling and dreadful simultaneously. The woman by his side is known as Diamondback (Jenette Goldstein). She was in fact turned into a vampire by Jesse years ago. With spazzed out white hair and the grave look on her face at all times, she is just as fear giving as Henriksen. Joshua John Miller plays Homer, whom is the perception of a man living in a child's body. Once Mae has found interest in Caleb, Homer becomes merciless and jealous; for he was the one who turned Mae into a night creature. He now wants a companion of his own, and at the same time wants vengeance against Caleb; because he feels Mae was stolen from him. This is quite a unique role, played very well by Miller. Although technically, he's got the mind of an adult, his behavior is distorted due to being stuck in a young boy's body.

Bill Paxton (Predator 2, A Simple Plan) gives one of his greatest performances ever as Severen, the craziest bloodsucker of the bunch. His goal is not only to take apart the living, but also to humiliate them before they die. He is also the most comedic element here. Severen's greatest moment takes place at a bar, which is swiftly turned into a tavern of death. While hunched over a victim leaning against a jukebox, he looks up before sinking into the neck and says "I hate em' when they ain't been shaved". After feeding, he looks back up simply to burp and drool blood for the viewer's eyes. This is one of the best shots of the film, showing precisely how grim Paxton's character is, while accomplishing humor as well.

Near Dark is one of my all time favorite vampire films and definitely hasn't lost its touch over a life span of fifteen years. It actually gets better with time. Kathryn Bigelow's wonderful work doesn't live off of lots of blood and gore, but instead relies on a smart story and brilliant characters. Many films pay some deal of respect to this gritty portrayal of what the life of a vampire is like (notably The Forsaken). If you have never been fortunate enough to view the exceptional work of art, you are sadly missing out on possibly the best vampire films of the 80's. Highly recommended.

Stuart Little 2 is the sequel to 1999's Stuart Little, a children's movie about a talking mouse with human-like qualities. The mouse, named Stuart, is taken in by the Little family and treated just like another one of their children. In fact, Mr. and Mrs. Little refer to Stuart as their "son" and their real son, George, calls Stuart his "brother." Other things that distinguish Stuart from other talking animal characters in movies is the fact that everyone sees Stuart for what he is. In other words, the human beings in the movie realize they are encountering a talking mouse, but they don't even bat an eyelash.
So that's the premise that must be accepted before sitting down to view Stuart Little 2. The sequel was made because the original was very successful and grossed well over $100,000,000 in the U.S. alone. That success was enough to bring the entire original cast back to reprise their roles: Geena Davis as Mrs. Little, Hugh Laurie as Mr. Little, Jonathan Lipnicki as George, Michael J. Fox as the voice of Stuart, Steve Zahn as Monty, and Nathan Lane as the voice of Snowbell, the family cat. Also added to the cast for the sequel were Melanie Griffith as the voice of Margalo and James Woods as the voice of the Evil Falcon.

As the film opens, we get a chance to see how Stuart is adjusting to life as a member of the Little family. Things don't seem to be going as well for Stuart as he had hoped. For instance, Mrs. Little is very overprotective of him and doesn't let him do things that other kids get to do. In addition, George is starting to want to go out and do things with friends without Stuart tagging along. Basically, Stuart is very lonely and could use a good friend of his own.

Just like that, a bird literally falls out of the sky and into Stuart's car. The bird's name is Margalo and she has injured her wing as she was being pursued by the Evil Falcon. Stuart immediately brings her back to the Little residence to take care of her. He is sure the rest of the family will like Margalo and says she can stay until she is completely healed. They do, and she does.

However, it turns out that things aren't quite what they seem. Margalo is actually working in cahoots with the Evil Falcon and routinely dupes people with that injured wing bit. The motive is to gain access to a house so she can then steal jewels and pass them on to the Evil Falcon. The target this time is Mrs. Little's wedding ring.

Margalo takes the ring and disappears, but this particular job wasn't quite as simple as the others. That's because she actually started to care for Stuart and felt she had a real friend for the first time in her life. Stuart, too, refuses to believe that Margalo would just leave without saying goodbye, so he goes out to track her down. There is a final confrontation with the Evil Falcon, and I'm pretty sure you can guess who wins!

Stuart Little 2 wasn't as successful as its predecessor, and I think the main reason for that is the fact that the sequel pretty much focused on the animals alone rather than on the way the animals interacted with the humans. Whereas in the first movie, we got to see how Stuart's relationship with George and the rest of the Little's developed, in this movie we were watching Stuart get along with other animals. That just wasn't as interesting or entertaining.

This movie doesn't have very much to offer adults who are watching with their children, but it should be able to hold your kids' attention. At just an hour and ten minutes long, it's short enough that they won't get too tired of sitting there and there are enough action sequences to prevent them from being bored.

Overall, Stuart Little 2 is a decent movie to rent. It's not one that you'll treasure as part of your own collection, but you'll definitely get your money's worth for Family Movie Night if you have young children.

By Simon Woodhouse

I do like movies with a theme. If there's a coherent thread running through the story, something that ties it together in the subtlest way, then it elevates the film to a new level of greatness. Themes might not be obvious at first. It may take a bit of work to wheedle out exactly what the film makers are getting at. But once you see the connection between all things in a movie, it adds an extra layer of enjoyment.

The theme within The Remains Of The Day runs through not only the story and the characters, but the title as well. Everything is evening. It's twilight, the day is ending, people are aging. Old ways are being brushed aside, things that were once important aren't so anymore. It's about change and then the end. This may sound a bit bleak, but the movie is actually full of life. However, if you're prone to shedding a tear or two when things get sad, you'll want to have a couple of tissues handy.

Though the movie features several sub plots, its main focus is the character of Stevens (Anthony Hopkins), a butler in a large stately home in England. The timeline within the film switches back and forth between the late 1930s and the mid 50s. These two eras show Stevens at his best, and then as he's quite a bit older. To say he's a complex character is a bit of an understatement. But many of his facets are hidden beneath an outer layer of reserved British decorum. And it's this that makes him so interesting. Stevens is a man dedicated to his job, and devoted to his employer, Lord Darlington (James Fox). When Miss Kenton (Emma Thompson), joins the staff of the stately home as housekeeper, Stevens treats her with the same aloofness as he does everyone else. But as time goes by an unspoken bond develops, despite Stevens' best efforts to resist.

There's no romance between them, but it's just bubbling below the surface. As the film progresses, you find yourself willing Stevens to let his guard down for just one second, and tell Miss Kenton how he really feels. There are several scenes where he seems to come very close to doing so, but never quite crosses the line. Anthony Hopkins and Emma Thompson are a joy to watch. The scenes where they are together, whether arguing or coming oh-so-close to romance, are the films highlights. In fact, if some of the subplots could have been left aside and the movie concentrated more on this relationship, it wouldn't have suffered.

The interplay between Stevens and Miss Kenton is set against a backdrop of political intrigue. Lord Darlington is a man of conscience, and feels very badly about the way Germany was treated after WWI. In light of this, he wants to try and help the nation recover. But by doing so he unwittingly starts to assist the Nazis. Though Stevens witnesses all of this, he never passes comment. His devotion to Lord Darlington is such that he can never criticize his beloved employer.

All the intrigue involving Lord Darlington, and exchanges between Stevens and Miss Kenton, take place in the 1930s. In the parts of the film set twenty years later, Lord Darlington is dead and Stevens is working for a new employer, an American businessman called Lewis (Christopher Reeve) who's retired to England. During these segments, Stevens has the opportunity to reacquaint himself with Miss Kenton. He never says as much, but it's obvious he regrets having never taken things further when they both worked together all those years ago. The 1950s scenes also contain some of the most poignant moments. Before his death, Lord Darlington was accused of being a traitor by the British press. When Stevens mentions where he works, people bring up the fact that his former employer was a Nazi sympathizer. When faced with such situations, Stevens denies having known Lord Darlington. This in no way makes him seem cowardly, but rather he can't bear to hear anyone talk about Lord Darlington in such a way.

The final few scenes all take place in the 1950s, and this is where the film really pulls at the heartstrings. Stevens meets Miss Kenton for the first time in twenty years. As they take tea together by the English seaside, they seem like the perfect match. I won't spoil the ending, but this is where you'll need to be ready to wipe away a tear or two.

For some people, the thought of sitting through a period drama such as The Remains Of The Day has all the appeal of watching paint dry. But there's nothing dreary about the film. It moves along at a cracking pace, and bristles with no end of fine performances. The subplots and the flashbacks blend together perfectly, and the story is neither confusing nor dull. If you like movies that feature characters with real depth, first class acting, intriguing storylines and a glimpse of life how it used to be, The Remains Of The Day is the film for you.

Most people would probably give anything to be famous because that would mean being able to buy anything, go anywhere, do anything, and just generally enjoy a lifetime of leisure. It's the stuff of fairy tales, after all. But from time to time, we get a story about a famous person who simply wishes to be anonymous, if only for a day. That's precisely what the 1953 William Wyler film Roman Holiday is all about.

Roman Holiday stars the incomparable Audrey Hepburn as Ann, a princess who is touring the world with her family. Their current stop is Italy, and Ann is at that age where she is pretty much tired of the whole "royal duty" thing. She wants to go out on her own and see Italy the way a regular person would. So she waits until the rest of her family and entourage are asleep, and climbs out through the window to begin her adventure.

Ann soon runs into a man named Joe Bradley (Gregory Peck) who is on his way back to his apartment after a late night out with friends. Joe notices that Ann doesn't belong on the streets, and sensing that she has no place else to go, offers to let her sleep at his place for the night. Ann accepts, and the two continue on.

The next day, Joe, a newspaper reporter, is late to work. He makes up an excuse on the spot, saying that he was busy interviewing Princess Ann. His boss then shows him a published article that claims Princess Ann was sick the night before, which essentially means Joe has been caught in his lie. But Joe is not interested in that point anymore. He's struck by the photo of Princess Ann because he realize that that's the young woman he took home to his apartment. Thinking quickly, he immediately strikes a deal with his boss: Joe will get a real interview with the princess -- an exclusive, with photos and all -- for a $5,000 payoff. The boss, while skeptical, nevertheless agrees to the proposal.

Joe then calls a photographer friend named Irving (Eddie Albert) and the two of them plan to take Ann out to see the sights. Of course they don't tell her that they're working for the newspaper, and Ann doesn't tell them that she's a princess, so that leads to some interesting situations.

As Joe and Ann tour Rome, Joe is quickly won over by the princess's charm. She is so innocent, genuine, and happy that he can't help but soften up towards her. They start to fall in love even though both know deep down that nothing could ever come of their relationship.

The rest of the film deals with the budding relationship that can't last very long and the eventual revelation of everyone's identities at the end.

I thought Roman Holiday was an excellent movie for many different reasons. First of all, it was fantastic to see the emergence of Audrey Hepburn as a true Hollywood star. Roman Holiday was Hepburn's first major film and paved the way for her long, successful career. Her performance as Princess Ann was so remarkable that she took home an Oscar for Best Actress. Hepburn positively glows each time she is on the screen, and it's so easy for viewers to believe that she could be a princess.

Gregory Peck was good as Joe Bradley too. It was fun to watch his character transform from a mostly cynical reporter to a sentimental, unselfish person after spending time with Ann.

As good as the actors were in this movie, another compelling reason to see the film is for all the external shots of Rome. Roman Holiday was shot entirely on location, so viewers get to see Rome through Ann's eyes, just as if they were seeing the Eternal City for the first time themselves. It's a magical tour that will make you want to jump on the next plane to Italy, rent a scooter, and do all the same things Ann and Joe did.

Overall, Roman Holiday is a fun, entertaining, lighthearted film that you won't want to miss. I recommend renting this one the next time you're in the mood for an old-fashioned romantic comedy.

For me, the best sports movies are those that focus on underdogs. You know what I mean: when teams or individuals that are undersized and underpowered dig deep and come up big against a favored opponent. There seem to be very few areas in life where people continually push themselves to the limit, but sports is one of them. It makes for interesting drama, which is why there's never a shortage of sports films at the video rental store. One of the best sports movies out there is 1993's Rudy.

Rudy is based on the true story of a young man named Daniel "Rudy" Ruettiger, played by Sean Astin. Rudy hails from a large, blue-collar, devoutly Catholic family in the Chicago area. The entire family lives and dies with Notre Dame football, and are slightly amused when a young Rudy tells them he will play for the Fighting Irish someday. Kids from the Ruettiger's neighborhood just don't end up at Notre Dame.

What started out as a childhood dream persists with Rudy even as a young adult. He doesn't immediately go to college after high school, but starts working in a steel mill with his father and brother. After a tragic accident claims the life of Rudy's best friend, he decides that the time to pursue his dream is now. Rudy's whole family thinks he's crazy when he says he's moving to South Bend to go to Notre Dame, but they reluctantly let him go.

Unfortunately for Rudy, it's not as easy to get into Notre Dame as he thought. He can't just walk on campus and start enrolling in classes. Instead, he has to take classes at nearby Holy Cross until his grades are good enough to meet Notre Dame's rigorous standards. Rudy's first application to Notre Dame is rejected, as are man