Reviews

The 3 movies represent over 9 hours of celebrating a mass murderer and a corporate criminal who is too street-smart always gets away with it.

Good actors, excellent director, but the script is abominable.

There are many so-called scary movies, but the scariest ones are those that play out in our mind. Where your imagination completes the picture and your brain delivers the jolt of horror! Alien is one such movie! I saw it first at 15 and was scared out of my wits, and it really was not until my 20s that I could look at the whole movie without goosebumps.

Now, after watching the movie perhaps 100 times, I am still attracted to it and drawn into it. But my perception of it changes. Having seen it today again on TV, I realized the really positive message was that the CAT has survived :) The Nostromo crew is dead and the ship destroyed, a colony would be set up on the planet and destroyed again, Ellen Ripley loses her daughter and ultimately her life, but the Weyaland-Yutani Corporation prospers. Everything sucks except the cat makes it! And that is good :)

Bottom line: Cat 1 - Alien 0

The script is OK, follows that of The Invasion Of the Bodysnatchers. Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig are good. The direction is a bit wooden, thus only 6 stars. The space shuttle crash shots are from the Columbia crash.

This is a sucky story of politics getting in the way of proper military tactical planning. Sending an unprotected cruiser into the middle of Japanese defended waters with no ASW protection and no CAP cover, it could hardly end up any other way. To be sure, no today warship (which have NO armor) would do any better if she was exposed to enemy subs or attack aircraft.

The most amazing part of the story is that the captain of the USS warship was put on trial, while on a secret mission with no support, losing most of his men to exposure, saltwater poisoning and sharks. But that is standards US politics, unfortunately. A convenient scapegoat.

I liked Mario van Peebles directing. He rose from playing a supporting role in Heartbreak Ridge, to a leading role in a B-class movie American Warships, to directing this. I salute him!

I am a big fan of these two guys!

After seeing this, it is clear where the creators of the Miami Vice TV series got the idea for the opening title sequence (very similar score, same type of video clips :)

An Iowa-class battleship defending herself by M-16s and other assorted handheld weapons ... and F/A-18s fighting worms. :)

Sorry to piss on your parade comrades, I cannot give more than an average rating to a movie where the main character says the purpose of his life was "to build communism".

I watched it in Russian in Kazakhstan, enjoyed it, practiced my Russian language skills, and basically thought it was OK. Have seen many more movies that were far worse. But the movie follows the Russian line of thinking: slow, thoughtful, no glorious action. Compare that to Gravity or to any other good Hollywood flick that has a pace, a pulse and more dynamics. Maybe they should have hired George Clooney, Tom Hans and Ed Harris to play the lead roles and dub them in Russian :)

Top Gun is one of the best movies ever. Period. Great flight scenes without CGI, great actors. I have seen it probably more than 50 times, starting at the movies when I was based in Germany in the 1980s, then VHS, laser disc, DVD and Blue Ray Dolby Digital. I never get tired of it.

But the script bothers me as I get older. Maverick loses his comrade in an accident, and then has a major confidence problem to carry on with his job. Won't fight. Now translate this back to the 1940s to the Battle Of Britain. All the guys who are now in their 80s and 90s, flying Spitfires defending Britain against the Luftwaffe, lost a friend EVERY DAY, somebody who they knew and had downed a few beers with. Every single day, they returned to base and found out that this and that guy did not make it back. Yet, they found the resolve to GO ON, CARRY ON FIGHTING. That is true heroism: carry on against the impossible odds. Compared to that, Maverick losing Goose in a training accident is BS.

In short: dull, stupid, unimaginative. A huge disappointment for someone who has been a major Star Wars fan. A typical sequel rehashing old themes. The movie feels like a remake of the original 3 movies, borrowing here and there, but overall the effect is just boring. What the h**l was the studio thinking?

Good visual and sound effects that were never dreamed of when Episode IV was made, but that is little consolation. The acting is wooden, staged, feels like a cheap TV show. Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher cannot salvage things. Harrison Ford is quite good but the overall effect is just not captivating. No more sequels to this please!

I liked this, some negative comments on this board notwithstanding... I thought the action scenes were not bad for an 80s movie. It's obviously an attempt to make a Hollywood-style action flick. While there were probably better action/thriller flicks made in the 80s, I can think of many, many worse ones! Having seen it for the first time when I was 18, the high point quite obviously was Dalila Di Lazzaro's chest, a memorable scene… :) I bought a VHS copy on Ebay a few years ago, in German – that's all I could find.

What was the car he drove at the beginning of the movie, by the way? A Lancia Gamma.

As for the comment about Delon wearing white socks with black pants, that actually was considered somewhat fashionable in Europe of the 80s…. :)

This movie ran in Europe for quite a while in the 1980s. I saw it several times there and, quite unexpectedly, on HBO or Cinemax late at night a few years ago.

The movie was about war and wars are nasty things. I do not think the violence was overblown in the movie - not after visiting a few Holocaust museums in Europe. McDowell's portrayal of a fanatical psychopath (not that know any) seemed very fitting.

In terms of the amount of blood and gore on screen, it seems tame compared to movies made later. Schindler's List is much more terrifying. Starship Troopers has much more severed limb type stuff than The Passage. But what makes this so chilling and repulsive is its realism; that things like these truly happened and happened not that long ago...

If you like French cinematography, you will like this movie. I must respectfully disagree with the previous post, but I liked it. Although it has been a while since I saw this movie, I remember it as being light-hearted, witty and fun to watch.

Also, I seem to remember that the much of the plot takes place in Venice along the Grand Canal, not in Paris. The movie starts in Paris, ends in Venice. Perhaps the previous review was asleep?

Pierre Mondy is a retiring bank employee who is sent on a pleasure trip by his colleagues. On the train he "happens to" meet Clio Goldsmith. His character is a man who is craving adventure after decades of marriage and two kids. Although, having been married to Claudia Cardinale, one does wonder on what planet the scriptwriter was on...

The movie ends on a very high note. Claudia Cardinale travels to Venice and meets her husband and the flame is re-kindled.

While not a grand piece of cinema, it is fun and uplifting. Try it.

The interesting part of the background of the movie is that it was shot before and during the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968. The bridge in the movie is on the Vltava river in Davle, south of Prague. I visited it a month ago. When you stand on it it seems much narrower than in the movie. It was a road bridge in reality, the railroad was built as a set for the movie. The remains of the railroad tunnel, the entry of which was also built for the movie, is visible behind a real railroad that runs perpendicular to the bridge and parallel to the river along its eastern bank. Today it serves as a pedestrian bridge. I cannot upload a picture here but here is one on the web taken during the floods in 2002: http://img.radio.cz/galerie/povodne_prehrady/davle_most1.jpg

One city wants to live in peace, while their neighbors (The Steel City) is building a bomb that kills people but does not damage buildings or equipment. This is an oblique reference to the Neutron Bomb, the development of which was fostered by the Reagan administration. The Neutron Bomb is a tactical weapon primarily intended to kill soldiers who are protected by armor. This was naturally a MAJOR thorn in the eye of the Soviets, and therefore this movie was made. The original Jules Verne's book provided a fitting story the Czechoslovakian media censors of the time found useful.

The original book by Jules Verne tells a similar story from a different angle. It is set at the turn of the 19th century in the U.S. state of Oregon and tells a story of two fictional cities: one French and one German. The German city (Steel City or Stahlstadt) is one big factory producing the best steel and military machinery, and is rumored to be developing a secret weapon. On the other hand, the neighboring French city is depicted as the poster child of peacefulness. Clearly, this is Verne's take on the German unification under Bismarck following France's defeat in 1871, and the consequent German military buildup leading to World War I.

I saw this movie in the 1980s and remember that it had great sets and good acting.

Think "Dances with Wolves" but with a ton of ideological overtones added by the East German communist regime. The movie has an average plot but nice sets and sceneries, shot most likely in Yugoslavia (?). I saw this movie sometime in 1975 or 76, growing up in Czechoslovakia. I remember it being quite boring - even for a 10 year old who wanted to see every cowboy-and-Indian movie in sight. This movie has since all but disappeared - and it is no loss.

After his immigration to East Germany, "Red Dean" was used as a poster child for every propaganda campaign the government could think of, mainly in music and movies. Even Dr. Goebbels would have been amazed.