price：$30.50
Paramount
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Save your money on this one!) 『Normally I love the Friday the 13th movies so I thought I would buy this box set from Amazon. When it arrived I must say I wasn't very impressed at all with how the box set looked. Besides the fact that Paramount released it on 5 slim cases with 2 movies on each disc... on the 3rd disc, part 6 would not even play at all! The only thing about this set was the special features. Other than that, this set is not worth the money!』
(Classic!) 『Friday the 13th series is a classic (excluding a few films, mainly some newer ones...). If you're just looking to have some fun and see a good ol' horror slasher film, definitely get this set! It includes 1-8 of the series and some extras. Didn't really get around to watching any of the extra's. But it's great to be able to watch any of the original F13 movies when you want. It's two movies on one DVD, so the picture/audio quality has probably taken a hit. But it's not really important for this type of movie.
If you've liked the F13th series, this should definitely be in your collection! Currently waiting for the whole series to be released on Blu-Ray and released as a set. Even if the picture quality can't be compared to a movie such as Wall-e (One can dream :P ).』
(Love Horror) 『Thank you so much for offering the series..I am a true fan to horror movies..This made a great addition to my collection!』
(Drive-In Movie Horror (on a disc)) 『More than half of these movies I first saw at a local drive-in movie theater when me and some friends got small cans of margarita mix, some snacks, and had a blast laughing most of the time. Now I dont have to leave the house, and I still laugh. Who needs boring talk and endless extras when this movie set cuts (CUTS??) to the chase with the main arena in a long line of typical laughable folk in absolute harms way. This movie line cannot be too bad when the first movie presents the beginning of the terror with the realization that it is the mother who actually started it all, and the rest to follow is nothing more than a series of a grotesque on revenge for his mother's assasination. Though I basicallly gave up drinking (and what not), this great easy to put on the tube discs run the gamut of what made me tick in the drive-in movie 80s, and well worth the fondest of memories. Now wasnt that sentimental, AWWWwwwwww. Slash!!!!!』
(Friday the 13th from crystal lake to manhattan 8 movies) 『Now I dont have to wait to rent the next movie. I can sit in my living room and watch them in sequence. I added to my collection of scary movies』 『DISC 1: FRIDAY THE 13th - The film takes place years after a young boy named Jason drowns in a lake while attending Camp Crystal Lake and shortly thereafter, the camp closes. Flash forward to the present, where the owner decides to re-open the camp and one by one, the counselors have mysteriously been murdered by an unseen person. PART 2 - The second installment picks up with Jason Voorhees, presumed dead from drowning years ago, exacting revenge on the innocent campers at "Camp Blood." Living as a hermit in the woods all these years, Jason witnesses the graphic murder of his mother and decides to wreak havoc on everyone at the camp - killing each camp counselor one by one. DISC 2: PART 3 - Vacationing teenagers take off for a weekend of relaxation at Camp Crystal Lake. Planning a few days of sex, drugs and rock-and-roll, they are in for a series of frightening surprises when a local motorcycle gang follows the teenagers back to their campsite, only to find a persistent Jason with an agenda of his own. Adorned with his trademark hockey mask for the first time in the series, Jason delivers non-stop chills and thrills as everyone on the lake must fight for their lives. Part III includes cast commentary by author Peter Bracke and actors Larry Zerner, Paul Kratka, Dana Kimmell and Richard Brooker. PART IV: THE FINAL CHAPTER - Jason resurfaces from a seemingly deadly massacre and returns to Camp Crystal Lake to a new set of prey. Starring a young Corey Feldman as Tommy Jarvis, it seems Jason has finally met his match in the 12-year old horror movie maven. Enlisting the help of a local hunter, Tommy and his sister must rely on one another to help defeat Jason, while also trying to avoid their own demise. DISC 3: PART V: A NEW BEGINNING - With Jason dead, someone new has begun a killing spree of their own, using Jason's M.O. and preying on inhabitants of a sanctuary. PART VI: JASON LIVES - Tommy returns to the grave to ensure that Jason is indeed dead. Instead of remaining dead, Jason is accidentally brought back to life by Tommy and now Tommy must stop all the mindless killing and make sure Jason dies for good this time. Part VI features commentary by director Tom McLoughlin. DISC 4: PART VII: THE NEW BLOOD - The film centers on Tina Shepard, a young girl with telekinetic powers who believes she drowned her father in Crystal Lake. Returning to the site as a method of supposedly helping her cope with her grief, Tina accidentally frees Jason from his watery grave, only to lead to more killing sprees by the man in the infamous hockey mask. Part VII features commentary by Kane Hodder and director John Carl Buechler and Part VIII features commentary by director Tom McLoughlin. PART VIII: JASON TAKES MANHATTAN - A graduating class of a local high school vacation on a cruise ship and unbeknownst to them, Jason is a stowaway on the same ship. Slowly killing students one at a time, Jason eventually sinks the boat, stranding the few lone survivors in Manhattan. Among those survivors, is Rennie, who believes Jason attempted to drown her as a child. Fighting for her their lives, Rennie and the other survivors must make sure Jason dies once and for all. A featurette "Tales From the Cutting Room," in which exclusive deleted scenes and footage is revealed for the first time. An 8-part featurette "The Friday The 13th Chronicles," which looks at the legacy of the films throughout their history, featuring cast and crew commenting on each film and why they appeal to audiences. Includes Adrienne King, Amy Steel, Corey Feldman, Kane Hodder, Lar Park Lincoln, Betsy Palmer, Tom Savini and directors Sean Cunningham, Tom McLoughlin, Rob Heddon, Joseph Zito and John Carl Buechler. A 3-part featurette "Secrets Galore Behind The Gore," which looks at the work of master make-up effects designer Tom Savini in Part 1 and Part IV and John Carl Buechler in Part VII. Includes rare and never-before-seen footage, drawings and stills illustrating the make-up techniques used to create Jason and achieve elaborate death scenes. A featurette "Crystal Lake Victims Tell All!" in which cast and crew from various films share amusing anecdotes. Includes Corey Feldman, Larry Zerner, Adrienne King, Amy Steel, Lar Park Lincoln and directors. A featurette "Friday Artifacts and Collectibles," which looks at props and collectables from the films. The theatrical trailers from all 8 movies except Part VI, which is represented by the teaser trailer.』 『Five discs gather the first eight movies in theFriday the 13thseries, plus a batch of behind-the-scenes featurettes. You can track the rise, fall, and endless resurrections of Jason Voorhees, from the original 1980 film to Jason's self-kidding trip to the Big Apple. Horror fans eat up packages such as this, but there's something odd about the deluxe treatment for a series that spotlighted atrocious acting, pitiful production values, and inane storytelling.
You'll spot a few future "name" actors in various installments: Kevin Bacon is morbidly dispatched in the first one. But in general, the dominant focus is how to kill horny teenagers, most of whom have gathered at Camp Crystal Lake in the misguided belief that the curse of the impossible-to-kill Jason has worn off. The first movie has a certain raw, crummy ability to shock,Part 2is a dismal retread, andPart 3actually features interesting use of 3-D, which doesn't translate to its flat DVD version. The fourth is boldly subtitledThe Final Chapter, and we all know where that went, but it does have Crispin Glover doing a funky dance.A New BeginningandJason Livescontinue Jason's bad mood, maybe because the hockey mask doesn't fit right. The seventh chapter,The New Blood, stakes Jason against a worthy opponent (Crystal Lake's answer to telekinetic Carrie), but the result is the same. Part 8's subtitle,Jason Takes Manhattan, is wittier than the movie itself, as Jason menaces an unlucky cruise ship of high-schoolers bound for New York--where Mr. J fits right in.
Some of the films come with commentaries from directors or cast members, including heralded Jason performer Kane Hodder. Brief documentaries (ranging from five to 15 minutes) cover separate installments with amusing anecdotes, including interviews with Sean S. Cunningham, Tom Savini, and various actors. In another doc, actors speak of the fraternity of young actors who've been slaughtered by Jason over the years. A deleted-scenes section is skimpy and not very interesting, while the tricks of special-effects gore merit a film to themselves. It's a customer-savvy DVD box, even if the effect of watching a bunch of this stuff together is a little dispiriting.--Robert Horton』
Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (A Quick review of Bram Stoker's Dracula) 『This 3 time Academy Award winning movie is based upon Bram Stoker's original novel, Dracula. Directed by Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather) this film is highly original and creative. Coppola takes full advantage of the movie's eerie nature and plays with shadows, settings and costumes. In this version of "Dracula" Coppola tries to bring out Dracula's psychological and emotional aspects. It shows how Dracula had lost his soul and was forced to remain undead for the rest of his life while feeding off the blood of the living. This movie is definitely not for the faint-hearted. In fact, I do not recommend this film for everyone. Starring Anthony Hopkins, Winona Ryder&Keanu Reeves. Warning: This film contains excessive gore, strong&heavy sexuality and nudity.』
(Great movie, horrible Blu-Ray quality) 『I gave this product a five, because the film is fantastic and Amazon hasn't figured out how to separate the various mediums of a single movie version yet, but THE QUALITY OF THE BLU-RAY DISC IS HORRIBLE. This is one of my all-time favorite films, but I quickly traded it in, despite having already sold off my DVD copy (which was of better quality), because it looked that bad...and I'm not particularly picky! How can studios be allowed to rip off the public like this? "Here's your nifty new Blu-Ray version of your favorite movie! Oh wait, did we forget to tell you that we made the transfer from an old VCR tape we had laying around? Sorry, but you can't return it, because you've already opened it." I'd love to see some class action suits filed for this and other movies I've heard similar reviews of, because this is seriously defrauding the public.
In regard to the film itself, the costumes, sets, storyline and music are all top notch, despite a miniscule budget. The movie follows fairly closely to the novel and those changes that are made, due justice to the story, in my opinion. Most of the acting is good, if not great, the exceptions being typically-dull Keanu and Oldman's best performance to date, in my opinion. That this film got so little Academy consideration in a week Oscar year has always befuddled me. If you like the book, horror movies or Gary Oldman, don't miss this one.』
(Problematic but Theatrically Brilliant 85%) 『When it comes to vampires, there are many, many ways to approach such a creature and it's whole sorrounding aura. Some people seem to take it seriously and actually see these creatures as terrifying personifcations of evil. Some, like the Twilight people, believe some ham handed epic crap (seriously. What was wit the horribly hammy and maddenigly silly New Moon anyway?). Others have, well, I don't know just how many you can name since all people are different and have different visions. There are tons and tons of ways of portraying one of fiction's most celebrated and loved figures, the vampire. And if you ask some people, I'll bet that everybody will give a different answer on their personal preference on the take of the Vampire (screwy wording, I know).
For me? Unlike some people, I never find the vampire to be a terrifying personification of evil, as the vampire is largely a fictional character and the whole evil notion never clicked with me. Don't even get me started on Twilight (hate that movie). I like my vampire stories to be theatrical, somewhat over the top, one that absolutely BATHES in lush visuals, sound, and characters that are equally as theatrical, so much it's like playing dress up (okay that just sounds plain gay). I don't quite know how to put it in words, but it's the similar feeling I share with a Nightwish song. You just love the whole theatricality but still know how to treat it like a theater production.
Bram Stoker's Dracula (though not quite as faithful as you would want to believe) is such a movie, one that has so much lushness, so much theatricality, and so much heavy handedness that it's more of an opera than anything else. It's an acquired taste, and to begin with, I have to be in a certain mood to even think of enjoying this movie. Sometimes, I feel absolutely nothing when watching, only sterility and not engaged with this movie on any emotional level. Other times, the movie is so hamhanded and theatrical that I can't help but go into fits of laugher at how stupid some of the movie sounds. But when I get into that mood, nothing quite draws me into this movie.
ACTING AND CHARACTERS 7/10
Bram Stoker's Dracula has lot's of heavy hitters in it's large ensemble cast, starting with Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Anthony Hopkins, Keanu Reeves, who make up the starring cast. Unlike some people, I think the cast does a great job, even if some of the dialogue coming from Ryder and (especially Reeves) sometimes makes me laugh. Gary Oldman is easily the best actor out of all this movie, considering he has to play young Dracula, Vllad Dracula, creepy Dracula monster, old Dracula, and wolf Dracula. He does all of these with ease. Anthony Hopkins is great as Van Helsing as well. He's sometimes strangely hilarious, but As far as women go, Sadie Frost, Winona Ryder and the three actresses that make up Dracula's brides are all sexy. I suppose Reeves is the worst, and when I laugh at the movie, it mostly comes from his stupid attempts at drama (his only real performance is Bill and Ted's, but even I could have played that role). But I digress at the performances. They may be highly operatic, but given the reasons why I like this movie, asking anything less would ruin the whole thing.
Oh, and did I mention Tom Waits is in this as Reinfield? Amazing weird music master blows every other Reinfold out of the water.
The characters are probably the weakest point of the movie, they are great and all, but I never really thought the other characters of Dracula stand out well on their own, you have to have good portayles to make me care (thankfully they did a pretty good job). But Dracula has always, in my opinion, been memorable because, well, it's friggin' Dracula.
PLOT 7/10
Judging from the title of the movie, you would probably think that Bram Stoker's Dracula is very much faithful to the source book, but as many people have said before, this is not true. Minor characters have been deleted, there is not much nudity in the book, and Dracula ultimately is more evil than he is in the movie. Most of all, the novel does not fall into the romance genre, and while this movie is not entirely a romance movie (thank god), it still has a romantic subplot thrown in. Even though Dracula is a more sympathetic character this time around, it still has the same type of plot for the most part, with him hunting down Mina, buying up land in London, killing Lucy, and so forth. Reincarnation, redemption, damnation, curses, and living for centuries makes it's way into this movie.
Now, when it comes to movies, there is NO genre I hate more than romance. However I still thought I was drawn into the energy Oldman and Ryder put into their performances. Besides, I like the fact that Dracula was unhinged, while Harker was completely stiff and very typical of a person that probalby existed in the late 19th century. Even though. And I'm not quite sure if Dracula's reaction to the suicide of his wife is still a very good thing to do. Are you quite sure there are other things that are worth your attention. How about the breakthroughs of art and science?
Still though, I would have to go with my real feelings and say the romance didn't really bother me thanks to the fact I never take this movie too seriously. Was I moved by the romance? Nope. Anybody who takes this seriously needs to grow some balls. However, I think it's pretty interesting actually to see something like a 400 year old curse being lifted thanks to virtue or something be restored. Remember, were dealing with reincarnation of a 400 year old vampire who renounced god in the 14th century. I feel, that, despite some advances in art and science, in the 15th century there was a lot less to believe in besides a lovely bride (well, Winona is damn good looking anyway) and god. This was a time where we didn't have as many people who really knew religion is a bunch of _______. For me it makes the story a bit more believable than drake bell's latest cinematic turd.
However, I'm still going to take some points off for the romance. I just think this movie would be much better if it didn't have the romanntic subplot, and just went with the man who practiced black magic. Sorry, but that's much cooler even though it's obviously a bunch of baloney as much as the love story.
DIRECTING (EDITING, SPECIAL EFFECTS, SOUND DESIGN) 10/10
One of the most well known things about this movie are the special effects, which are all done with old fashioned cinematic tricks instead of the newly emerging CGI. And it's not subtle, as it's everywhere, and really adds to the story. Dracula casts shadows, walks down walls like a friggin's spider, green fog, and even turns into rats. It doesn't stop with Dracula either. Coppola's visual tricks include putting three images on screen at once (such as the part where Harker is on the train), Flowers deterioating into a dead flower, making rats walk upside down, and even friggin' waves of blood coming from both sides of the room. This movie never let's up in giving you a godly amount of great special effects that enchance the movie. The only CGI in the whole movie is the blue ring of fire near the beginning of the movie.
Coppola's directing is also very great, as it's probably as effective as the special effects. It's kind of hyperkinetic, but I wouldn't lie if I said it's just beautiful to look at. I love his many shots he uses, especially those close ups. An example of this beauty would be the scene with the absinthe. Never before and never again will a movie capture something as trivial as alcohol again. Oh, and he even uses cameras to make the scene in London look like...what is that camera called? I digress.
Another great thing I love about this movie is the sound design, which actually won an academy award. With it's ambience, it's library of ghostly and creepy sounds, and intense sound effects from the creatures, it's so well done that I can't help but be immeresed in the movie thanks to it. Sound design is a lot more important than one might think, and this movie would definitely be lost without it. How come nobody mentions how great it is?
ART DIRECTION 10/10
I have only one word for this aspect: _____! Sure, the razzle dazzle of this movie will some of it's freshness if I watch it way too much, but I don't anyway. Coppola and company pull no punches in toning down anything regarding art direction (probably nothing even subtle), and the result is a theatrically stunning and meticolous jewel of art direction. The whole movie just looks and feels amazing, and even somebody who normally doesn't care much about things like costume design can't help but sit up and take notice at everything of it's design. The music, the sets, the costumes (or make up even! Someone had to make Oldman look old), you just have to give props for everything. I don't quite know how to describe the look of the film, since I have little to no explanations on what architecture is used, what kind of style the costumes are, or the music's style. However, I'm still kind of burned this movie didn't win all Four Oscars instead of three. I thought the art direction was amazingly well done. Overall, the art direction is so good I really excalimed something the first time I saw this movie on Television.
In my mind, this is probably my favorite Dracula movie, for the reason that it's totally theatrical and bombastic. I never take vampire movies too seriously to begin with, so what makes you think I'm going to be scared by the outtdated Tod Browning movie? Sure, Bela Lugosi's portrayle is actually much better than Oldman (then again, what is?), but it's clunky and hasn't held up very well in my opinion (while it's not a bad movie, it just has problems). One could say this movie hasn't held up well, but I beg to differ as far as I'm concered. This is a great vampire movie, and for the right audiences, it's a definite version. Recommended.』
(Bram Stoker's Dracula) 『I enjoyed the movie simply for the way it looked and felt. A newer version of Bram Stoker's masterpiece. I must say that this thrilling movie is close to that masterpiece. Oldman is phenomanal as Count Dracul. Anthony Hopkins is brilliant as professor Von Helsing. The visuals are just amazing and heart stopping. A must see movie.』
(dracula) 『The movie was good, a diifrent kind of dracula. I recevied product in a timely manner, would purchase from this buyer again』 『The vampire comes to england to seduce a visitors fiance and inflict havoc in the foreign land. Studio: Sony Pictures Home Ent Release Date: 09/20/2005 Starring: Gary Oldman Anthony Hopkins Run time: 127 minutes Rating: R Director: Francis Ford Coppola』 『With dizzying cinematic tricks and astonishing performances, Francis Coppola's 1992 version of the oft-filmed Dracula story is one of the most exuberant, extravagant films of the 1990s. Gary Oldman and Winona Ryder, as the Count and Mina Murray, are quite a pair of star-crossed lovers. She's betrothed to another man; he can't kick the habit of feeding off the living. Anthony Hopkins plays Van Helsing, the vampire slayer, with tongue firmly in cheek. Tom Waits is great fun as Renfield, the hapless slave of Dracula who craves the blood of insects and cats. Sadie Frost is a sexy Lucy Westenra. And poor Keanu Reeves, as Jonathan Harker, has the misfortune to be seduced by Dracula's three half-naked wives. There's a little bit of everything in this version ofDracula: gore, high-speed horseback chases, passion, and longing.』 『Francis Ford Coppola's 1992Bram Stoker's Draculais a feverishly inventive movie that often overwhelms its own narrative flow, yet proves irresistible to watch. In the high-definition transfer on this two-discCollector's Edition, Coppola's baroque, operatic set design, costumes, and cinematography look as lavish as they did on the film's first release. The director's grab-bag of visual effects are still bold and unabashed, if often over-the-top, and the actors still appear caught up in a certain hysterical pitch that feels a little forced but can be a lot of fun to watch. Gary Oldman's imaginative performance as the titular vampire carries the weight of Coppola's vision of Count Dracula as a tragic-romantic hero with Christ-like overtones. Keanu Reeves still looks a little lost in the pivotal role of Jonathan Harker, the London clerk who finds himself a prisoner in a Transylvanian castle while a 400-year-old vampire makes a play for his fiancée back home (Winona Ryder). Anthony Hopkins is fearless as a daft Von Helsing, and Sadie Frost is very good as the doomed Lucy.
The second disc in this set includes several good documentaries, including a featurette on the making of the film, involving past and present interviews with the principal artists involved. (Coppola and screenwriter James V. Hart speak persuasively about their commitment to bringing Stoker’s vision to the screen, rather than another revision.) Another documentary, "In-Camera: The Naïve Visual Effects of 'Dracula,'" is a fascinating overview of Coppola’s sometimes-frustrated effort to get the timeless special effects he was seeking. There are also quite a few deleted scenes amongthe special features, the best of which is an alternative cut to the film’s bloody ending.--Tom Keogh』
price：$14.98
Universal Studios
Usually ships in 2 to 3 days Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Shoddy Packaging for Otherwise Superb Release) 『This review refers specifically to the 2-Disc 75th Anniversary edition of Dracula.
Clearly, this 1931 version of "Dracula" is the definitive version of the tale, yet to be surpassed going into 2010. The special features here are fantastic as well: a great tribute to Lugosi, a documentary on the making of the film, a great "Universal Horror" documentary, and the Spanish version of "Dracula". Considering how wonderful this release is, I simply had to award at least three solid stars. Still, those two crucial stars are lost on awfully kitschy, occasionally defective packaging. This probably won't be an issue for most, but any serious DVD collector should be aware of these packaging issues.
The discs are packaged in the "little golden book" packaging that is the norm for all titles in the Universal Legacy Series. It is essentially two plastic trays that connect into each other, held together by a folded piece of cardboard. The problem is that the glue isn't entirely effective, and the trays often detach from the cardboard. I've bought four titles in the Universal Legacy Series, and all but one have fallen apart in this manner. Granted, it's a reasonably simple enough task to reglue the sets, but this wouldn't be an issue at all if the studio would simply package them in standard DVD cases, or even those flimsy Eco-Box cases they're so fond of lately.』
(UNDEAD!) 『Classic Bela Lugosi. I loved the DVD. I own the majority of Bela Lugosi movies and sadly I hadnt had this one in my collection. I had scene the movie multiple times and know almost every word but had never actually BOUGHT it. The quality of the dvd was good. I purchased it from a used seller because quite frankly I have no desire to spend a crap load of money on ANY DVD. It came in like new condition. Some people have complained about the soundtrack but I didn't even notice it.』
(Brilliant, and let's leave out 'campy.' This was 1931 and lugosi.) 『The artistry of the film is magnificent. Lugosi defined Dracula, and [i forget the actor] defined Renfield (tho they changed his character and merged him with half of Harker's original role. I am willing to say that the film far outdoes Stoker's book and also the German Nosferatu (Is anyone charmed by that ugly, sharp-eared beast?). The Victorian author's vivid description of Harker's stay in Dracula's castle was the extent of the book's brilliance. The genius of this film is that no character is anywhere near as illustrious as Dracula, and that is certainly not the sentiment most people have historically felt having read the book. Also, I think the actor that played Renfield was brilliant and is not talked about enough. Lugosi, stripped of his dignity, had the memory of his first (film) role, and one of the few with artistic merit, tho some others are certainly worth seeing. He was buried with his Dracula cape. I also credit Glass for recognizing the merit of this film and writing a full score for it. I recommend playing the film with the new score on, and do not believe it to be a deviation from tradition. The film, however well done, was a Depression-era film, and an original score was never composed. I feel that the film has finally received what it has always been worthy of. It is nice that a (relatively) widely accepted artist such as Glass recognizes this classic and has added to its legacy. The score is wonderful. As for this aspect ratio, it is the original. At one point, I thought that they had always used a wider-screen format. True that the film deviates far from Stoker's original vision. So much the better. The bombast actually had the gall to say that Dracula was partly inspired by Walt Whitman. And--after they leave the castle, it is a load of sanctimonious hot air justified by the hollow ideals of High-Victorianism. The reinvention of Dracula--much welcomed. By me, anyway. And I know that the book started a huge legacy that I admit I am indebted to personally. Just a little personal sourness towards Stoker. But with me, it is really most all of 19th Century British fiction. The poetry, especially the Romantic poetry, I loved. And I really loved Mary Shelly's Frankenstein. Anyway, a personal prejudice makes me prefer this film over the original book, and incidentally, over any other film version of the story.』
(Dracula on DVD) 『If you are a fan of classic horror movies you will want this one in your collection. No one played the part better than Lugosi. The quality is good and the sound track is clear. A must for your Halloween movie line-up.』
(Absolutely great. Like revisiting an old fiend) 『First, my copy of this did not "jump around" and audio&video were clear as a bell, just perfect. I've not yet watched the Spanish language version, but I'm looking forward to it "Buenas tardes, Mina, donde esta Lucy?" "Lucy, you've got some 'splaining to do". Sorry, all of a sudden I thought of the classic TV show, I Bite Lucy. Anyway, the Phillip Glass accompaniment was kind of disconcerting, simply because it is so clear! When I think of watching classic monster films, I think scratchy: scratchy films, scratchy sound, and scratchy upholstery on the couch while I watch KTNT Channel 11 on Saturday night. So far, the extras are just great, and the "Universal Horror" feature is wonderful, especially the visits with the mayorr of Metropolis, Forrest J. Ackerman. It's been more than 30 years since I picked up a Famous Monsters Of Filmland magazine, but seeing the artifacts gathered around FJA took me right back, sort of like the opening scenes of Matinee did. While I REALLY enjoyed this, I'll probably never watch it again, but it was sure nice to see.』 『Dracula (The Restored Version) Although there have been numerous screen versions of Bram Stoker's classic tale, none is more enduring than the 1931 original. The ominous portrayal of Count Dracula by Bela Lugosi, combined with horror specialist director Tod Browning, help to create the film's eerie mood. Dracula remains a masterpiece not only of the genre, but for all time. Dracula (Featuring New Music By Philip Glass) The original version of Dracula starring Bela Lugosi has been remastered to feature a specially-composed musical score by world-renowned composer Philip Glass and performed by Kronos Quartet. Glass' music lends greater depth to an already timeless classic! Dracula (Original Spanish Version) Filmed simultaneously with the English language version, the Spanish version of Dracula is completely different, yet equally ominous vision of the horror classic. Utilizing the same sets and identical script, cinematographer George Robinson and a vibrant cast including Carlos Villarias and Lupita Tovar deliver this chilling and evocative tale.』 『When Universal Pictures picked up the movie rights to a Broadway adaptation ofDracula, they felt secure in handing the property over to the sinister team of actor Lon Chaney and director Tod Browning. But Chaney died of cancer, and Universal hired the Hungarian who had scored a success in the stage play: Béla Lugosi. The resulting film launched both Lugosi's baroque career and the horror-movie cycle of the 1930s. It gets off to an atmospheric start, as we meet Count Dracula in his shadowy castle in Transylvania, superbly captured by the great cinematographer Karl Freund. Eventually Dracula and his blood-sucking devotee (Dwight Frye, in one of the cinema's truly mad performances) meet their match in a vampire-hunter called Van Helsing (Edward Van Sloan). If the later sections of the film are undeniably stage bound and a tad creaky, Dracula nevertheless casts a spell, thanks to Lugosi's creepilylugubrious manner and the eerie silences of Browning's directing style. (After a mood-enhancing snippet ofSwan Lakeunder the opening titles, there is no music in the film.)Frankenstein, which was released a few months later, confirmed the horror craze, and Universal has been making money (and countless spin-off projects) from its twin titans of terror ever since. Certainly the role left a lasting impression on the increasingly addled and drug-addicted Lugosi, who was never quite able to distance himself from the part that made him a star. He was buried, at his request, in his black vampire cape.--Robert Horton』
price：$12.50
Dreamworks Video
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Just what I Wanted) 『This product was great, it came brand new, it great condition, and worked perfectly. I am incredibly satisfied. I would have liked there to be a few more special features, but that is just due to the edition of the DVD, and does not at all take away from this seller's service. Thank you!』
(Tugging at My Heart as You Serve it on a Plate) 『One uneventful Friday night while curled under a blanket I watched the musical on DVD entitled Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. Not expecting much from a movie makes for no disappointments. I slipped the disc in with no certain hope. What a surprise when the final credits floated off the screen. I found myself left with the gruesome reality of what the hunger for vengeance can do to an innocent victim. Sweeney Todd, a barbaric barber who seeks to settle the score for the robbery of his perfect life, is masterfully played by Johnny Depp. His devilish companion, Mrs. Lovett, was played by Helena Bonham Carter. She selfishly keeps Todd blinded to everything but his need for reckoning. She does this by feeding Todd's ravenous anger with exposed necks for his barber's blades to devour. The blades themselves could have won an Oscar for best supporting actor. They were brought to life in the hands of Todd and the lighting of the movie. They glistened in a similar manner to that of an evil eye just before a malevolent plot unfolds.
Todd and Lovett sing charming tunes in a gentle British accent while cutting the throats of whoever may wander their direction. Although it seems contradicting, it is a perfect melody of emotions which helps the viewer see past the gore and find the relevance of their corruption. As if this was not enough, the duo further defiles the clueless people traveling Fleet Street by secretly serving their victims up in a pie.
Although Todd is sinister and brutal some may say it was not without cause. He had the life that anyone would wish for: a lovely wife, a beautiful baby girl, and a successful barber shop. Unfortunately his idyllic life was coveted and stolen by the dark-hearted judge played by Alan Rickman. The judge exiled Todd for fifteen years while he defiled his wife and claimed his daughter for himself. When Todd returns to London he is a changed man. He has returned angry and ready to make everyone pay for what he has lost.
Tim Burton brought his masterful creative eye to this project as the film's director. Todd begins the movie on a ship headed for London. He sings, "There's a hole in the world like a great black pit and the vermin of the world inhabit it." Once he hits the shore you see Todd has arrived in that pit. The mood is perfectly captured in the use of hues and the angles chosen for the camera lens. Watching the smoke course from the chimney the viewers are left feeling cold and dirty. You can hear the dampness looming when the unaware city dwellers walk through the residue of rain resting on the cobble stone streets. The only use of vivid shades is when Lovett attempts to paint the possibility of a happy union between her and Todd. The contrast in color boldly communicates this future is impossible.
If you can tolerate the bloody violence this is a worthwhile movie to see. Attempt to see beyond the animated slashing and ask yourself, "Who benefits from a life driven by revenge?" Retribution can serve a purpose and there are times when bad things happen to good people. The message is clear; don't be blinded by the need for reckoning or you may become the villain, driving away any chance for peace and you will lose sight of who you love most. 』
(Not as good as I was expecting.) 『Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (Tim Burton, 2007)
Perhaps my problem with Tim Burton's much-praised adaptation of Sweeney Todd is that I'm seeing it too soon after Dave Moore's version, which was the sublime side of the sublime/ridiculous coin. It's not that this version is bad, in any way, it's just not all that good compared to a number of Burton's other masterworks.
Burton regulars Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham-Carter take on the roles of Sweeney Todd and his neighbor Mrs. Lovett, a destitute pie-seller. Todd, a barber by trade, is bent on getting revenge against Judge Turpin (Alan Rickman), who sent him to prison in order to steal his lovely young wife. Todd starts taking out those standing in his way, and needs something to do with the bodies. Lovett hatches a plan--grind 'em up and sell 'em as Mrs. Lovett's meat pies. They, of course, sell like the proverbial hotcakes. Tension arises when Lovett starts having feelings for Todd, who is so obsessed with his revenge and his lost love that he has eyes for nothing else...
Burton brings the same phantasmagoric, hallucinatory visuals to Sweeney Todd that he did to his previous remake, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, and when it comes right down to it, I wasn't all that fond of them in that movie, either (which I just looked up; I gave it two and a half stars back in 2006). The over-the-top Burton vision works just fine for me when he's doing original material (viz. Edward Scissorhands or Beetlejuice), but when it comes to Burton adaptations, I always preferred the much lower-key look of Sleepy Hollow (or, while it's not a remake, the similar feel of his best film, Ed Wood). I'm also not as fond of the Sondheim adaptation, which Burton follows rather faithfully here, as of some other incarnations of Sweeney Todd. It really comes down to whether you want your murder and cannibalism with lighthearted whimsy, as presented here, or whether you want it in a dark, claustrophobic presentation without musical numbers, which you get from Moore's 2006 adaptation. **½ 』
(Dark Miracle of a Movie) 『What is it about the musical? Just when you think the genre's dead and buried, along comes this lyrical, flowing, river of dark poetry. The screenwriter-- a lifelong fan of Sondheim's masterpiece-- did a brilliant job of adapting a semi-Brechtian theater piece and making it into a dark dream film. Gone is the post-modernism, replaced by grand guignol that may sometimes scream too brightly in crimson, but that works far better than one might have had reason even to hope.
I loved every minute of it (and if there were a few seconds here and there I could have lived without, well, that's why fingers are long enough to shield the eyes from the sight of lawyers being processed into sausage).』
(What's so scary about this????) 『I had heard a great deal about how frightening this movie was. I guess the concept is a bit scary, but in this day and age, it's not nearly as scary as a madman with nuclear weapons, or people walking into shopping centers or classrooms with automatic weapons. I know that the play was a musical, but it would have been a great deal more frightening if the characters hadn't burst into song periodically. On the plus side, this proves that Tim Burton can sing.』 『Johnny Depp and Tim Burton join forces again in a big-screen adaptation of Stephen Sondheim's award-winning musical thriller "Sweeney Todd." Depp stars in the title role as a man unjustly sent to prison who vows revenge, not only for that cruel punishment, but for the devastating consequences of what happened to his wife and daughter. When he returns to reopen his barber shop, Sweeney Todd becomes the Demon Barber of Fleet Street who "shaved the heads of gentlemen who never thereafter were heard from again." Joining Depp is Helena Bonham Carter as Mrs. Lovett, Sweeney's amorous accomplice, who creates diabolical meat pies. The cast also includes Alan Rickman, who portrays the evil Judge Turpin, who sends Sweeney to prison and Timothy Spall as the Judge's wicked associate Beadle Bamford and Sacha Baron Cohen is a rival barber, the flamboyant Signor Adolfo Pirelli.』 『After years of rumors, it turns out that Tim Burton was the perfect visionary to filmSweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, Stephen Sondheim's Broadway masterpiece, and the result is a macabre and moving musical movie as enthralling as anything Burton has ever done. The show's mix of gothic horror, Grand Guignol,verydark humor, and witty and beautiful music never was the stuff of traditional musical comedy, but it's a powerful work, and perhaps the richest of the late 20th century. In the movie, Burton's frequent collaborator, Johnny Depp, plays Todd, a wronged man whose lust for revenge drives him to murder (an 19th-century legend who has been traced to a real-life barber). Helena Bonham Carter, another Burton mainstay, is Mrs. Lovett, the barber's partner-in-unspeakable-crime. It's no surprise that Depp is an excellent choice to convey Todd's brooding intensity and volcanic rage, but he can also sing a score that is so challenging it has often played in opera houses (though not with the same style as the Broadway original, Len Cariou, and he occasionally lapses into pop style). Bonham Carter is small of voice and lacks the humor of the original Broadway Lovett, Angela Lansbury, but she sings on pitch, in rhythm, and in character at the same time, which is no small feat for a Sondheim show. Aficionados will regret the loss of certain musical passages--"The Ballad of Sweeney Todd" is just an instrumental overture and the chorus is gone altogether, among others--but the reassuring presence of orchestrator Jonathan Tunick and conductor Paul Gemignani ensures that the music feels right and sounds great. And the film's depiction of a Victorian London hellhole--with cinematography by Dariusz Wolski and costumes by Colleen Atwood--also looks and feels right.
The excellent cast is filled out by Alan Rickman as the villainous Judge Turpin, Timothy Spall as his seedy Beadle, Sacha Baron Cohen (Borat) as a rival barber, Jamie Campbell Bower as the young lover Anthony, Jayne Wisener as his object of affection, and Ed Sanders as the young Toby. For fans of Tim Burton and Johnny Depp who don't think they like musicals,Sweeney Toddshould be a revelation (though not for the squeamish, as the gore is intense and completely appropriate). For fans of Broadway and Sondheim, it's hard to imagine getting a better adaptation than this. The fact that there's no newly composed Oscar-bait song sung by a Josh Groban-type over the end credits only makes it better.--David Horiuchi』
price：$3.95
Sony Pictures
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Dreadful!) 『I almost turned it off during the first ten minutes. That ditzy, hyper reporter cavorting with the firemen was absurd and lasted for what seemed like forever. So much wrong with this movie...shaky cam, too dark, bad acting, silly plot. I did manage to get halfway through it and then went to fold laundry which was more enjoyable.』
(This one is a keeper.) 『I know, I know everyone says go rent REC. I did, and........I still like this version. It's not better than REC but it's no worse. I can understand if some people don't like it because it IS a shot by shot remake of the original. So why do I like this version? Jennifer Carpenter. I loved her in "Emily Rose" and she's just as awesome in this movie. The acting, directing and story are brilliant. I don't mind the "shaky cam" thing either. It works well with this movie. And I TOTALLY have to agree with one other reviewer that stated the studio did NOTHING to promote this movie. I don't remember seeing one commercial for this on tv. Tragic. It's a great movie and one of the best horror movies I've seen in a long time. It is a little gory in a few spots but nothing too bad. And it's not really a "jump out of your seat" kind of movie. There are a few parts like that but for the most part it's a very claustrophobic movie. And that's what really makes this film work. When the scares come, they come fast. All in all, one of my favorites from the "shakey cam" genre. Quarantine comes.... HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.』
(Great Idea, Bad/PoorFinishing (Directing).......) 『The idea of this moive is pretty cool, yet I think there have a lot of horror movies out there, and the director cannot focuse of his or the direction of the movies. Also, the script was pretty crappy... sorry, but I have to say that. It can be a really good story line, but end up, somehow, someone screw up the script, and make the movie terrible.... I will say, don't even bother to watch it. Waste of your time...』
(What's The Point?) 『European, Asian, and Australian films have really made an impact on me over the last few months. After seeing "I Stand Alone", "Irreversible", "Eden Lake" (and several other Dimension Extreme titles), and of course "Rec" -I truly have become jaded towards American horror. "Quarantine" is exemplary. This film tries to virtually copy "Rec" scene for scene with lower grade scares and FX. Unless your're a completist just skip it and watch "Rec". Even those who hate subtitles will be glad they did. What's with this trend anyway? Even Michael Haneke remade "Funny Games", his own film, for crissakes. This unneeded remake cycle seemed to occur about the time Gus Van Sant made his biggest mistake in tackling "Psycho" which I think everyone agrees was a waste of celluloid. As much as films cost to make nowadays one would think there would be better things to "Rec".』
(REC REC REC!!!!) 『Un burdo plagio de REC, ni comparación a esa película, esta...da risa...estos gringos siempre creen que pueden mejorar las versiones originales y NUNCA lo hacen!!!...mala, muy mala, no pierdan su tiempo viéndola!!』 『When a news crew decides to trail a brave fire-fighting team, they never suspect that the first call for help they respond to that night may be their last. Now they're trapped in an apartment complex sealed off by the government. With no way of escape, they find themselves surrounded by frightened residents who are infected with a deadly mutant virus. What happens next is only known because of the footage they left behind.』 『Based on the Spanish-made chiller[REC],Quarantineis an effective piece of scare machinery that derives most of its terror by viewing the action from the perspective of a cameraman covering a routine emergency call that blooms into a nightmare. Jennifer Carpenter (Dexter) is a TV host who accompanies a firefighting unit on a disturbance call at a decrepit apartment building. Once inside, the group discovers that the tenants are infected with a disease that has turned them into ravenous cannibals--and that all possible exits have been sealed off by a government-issued quarantine. As POV horror goes,QuarantineThe Blair Witch Projectwith the super-sized shocks ofCloverfield(without its nausea-inducing camerawork), and it largely delivers in both departments. Characters are stock at best, and the relentless jumping and shrieking gets wearying before the end credits, but the cast is game, especially Carpenter (a world class screamer, as established inThe Exorcism of Emily Rose) and Jay Hernandez as one of the firemen, and the technical aspects (including some gruesome gore) are top-notch.-- Paul Gaita』
price：$15.96
Criterion
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Criterion does it right again.) 『Criterion's Blu-ray release is another fine example of how film should look when on video. The film is gorgeous in black and white and quite creepy at times. I highly recommend this disc for anyone who is interested in horror films of the good old days, i.e. before today's 'torture porn' came along. If I had to compare this film to any one other film it's be 'Psycho', where the main character is awkward and violently insane, yet you have an understanding of them. That is of course what makes this film so creepy. As for the extras, you'll have to get someone else's opinion. They are there, and I'm sure they are good, but I don't buy discs for the extras. As such I haven't watched them.』
('Repulsion', into a dark world...) 『Though rabbit is seldom a featured menu item these days, once you've seen Roman Polanski's 'Repulsion', you're unlikely to think of one without linking it to the other. Polanski explains that every time food appears in his film it is intended to look unappetizing because it's seen through the eyes of Carole (Catherine Deneuve), and Carole is one tortured soul. There isn't a single corner of her mind that's blessed with peace or harmony, and as the story progresses, we're treated to a journey into madness that has few equals in the world of film.
The story is set in then-present-day, 1965 London, where Carole holds down a job as a manicurist at a beauty salon. Her work life, where she's often reprimanded for failing to follow through with average tasks, offers no shelter or security. She lives in a London apartment with her well adjusted, outgoing sister. The contrast serves only to accentuate awkwardness. She's often undone by the ever present boyfriend and the sound of their nightly passion. There's no source or place of solace, but there might be a few days reprieve. Her sister and boyfriend have decided to leave town on holiday. But leaving Carole alone and to her own devices, might be the worst prescription imaginable.
Dialogue can be a wonderful thing when well written and artfully executed, but there's little to compare with a story told primarily through effective images; it takes us back to the birth of motion pictures, when images carried all the weight. And it's here where Polanski's direction, along with the stark and effective black and white cinematography of Gilbert Taylor succeed to a rare degree.
Let's go back to the dinner menu: Rabbit, when skinned and uncooked, takes on the appearance, or at least easy suggestion, of some strange life-form that has been hideously silenced. I couldn't help being reminded of Henry Spencer's inhuman newborn, in David Lynch's 'Eraserhead'.』
(a shocking film) 『This review is for the Criterion Collection DVD edition of the film
Repulsion is a film directed by Roman Polanski and is his first English language film. It is about two sisters from Belgium who are living together in a London apartment. While one goes on vaction, the other decends into schizophrenia and madness. The film is a psychological thriller and was given an X rating in the UK upon its release. It is indeed dusturbing and I recommend it not be shown to children.
Unlike the previous Roman Polanski film released on DVD by the Criterion Collection, Knife in the Water, it is possible to pause this film, and to scan the film forwards and backwards.
The DVD includes a 2003 documentary on the film's production, a 1964 French documentary about the film's production, Audio commentary from 1994 with Roman Polanski and actress Catherine Deneuve, and two theatrical trailers.』
(Gripping, Riveting, Frightening, Hypnotic!) 『"Repulsion" is Roman Polanski's disturbing look at a woman (Catherine Deneuve) gradually going mad. Polanski takes us into the mind of Carol Ledoux, a French manicurist working in London. In the streets outside the beauty salon is a world where leering men send her into a panic. In bed each night, she waits, petrified, until her sister (Yvonne Furneaux) and her married lover come home to the apartment next door and engage in their their noisy nocturnal recreation. When the lovers leave for a holiday in Italy, Carol descends into madness as her sexual repression triggers hallucinations that drive her to murder. Simple objects become dreaded portents, silence is broken by buzzing flies, dripping water, and a ticking clock. Soon, she imagines that someone is in the apartment to rape her. Polanski is adept at using the claustrophobic apartment as breeding ground for Carol's myriad escalating fears and visions. This is the kind of movie that makes you look over your shoulder and make sure the doors are locked. Polanski would later go on to direct "The Tenant," a movie with a similar theme, and the hugely popular "Rosemary's Baby." "Repulsion" is an atypical horror film, since the terror is all in Carol's mind, and we are witnessing events through a frightened, paranoid woman's eyes. Ms. Deneuve is superb in a chilling role. Bluray bonus extras include audio commentary featuring Polanski and Ms. Deneuve; the 2003 featurette "A British Horror Film," on the making of "Repulsion;" a 1964 French TV documentary filmed on the set of "Repulsion" showing Polanski and Deneuve at work; and original theatrical trailers. The new print is a high-definition digital transfer, approved by Polanski himself.』
(Newly Restored, director approved DVD) 『For the viewers that didn't like this film, if they were expecting a film like Psycho, this is not that film. In any case, this film was quite effective at depicting, a character on the edge of sanity, who is schizophrenic, and has paranoid delusions, which leads to violence and psychosis. The films, visual elements carries the story through expressive camerawork and lighting, and only uses sparse dialogue, to tell Carol's story. A different approach to a similar theme of mental illness, was the film A Beautiful Mind, by Ron Howard, which also deals with schizophrenia, and paranoid delusions, but is presented in such a way so that the viewers can identify with what the central character is going through, although, it's hard to tell, what's reality or fiction, and what is just a form of storytelling for the screen.』 『Roman Polanski followed up his international breakthrough,Knife in the Water,with this controversial, chilling tale of psychosis, starring Catherine Deneuve as Carole, a fragile, frigid young beauty cracking up over the course of a terrifying weekend. Left alone by her vacationing sister in their London flat, Carole is haunted by specters real and imagined, and her insanity grows to a violent pitch. Thanks to its unforgettable attention to disturbing detail and Polanski’s unparalleled adeptness at turning claustrophobic space into an emotional minefield, Repulsion remains one of cinema’s most shocking psychological thrillers.
SPECIAL EDITION FEATURES:
• New, restored high-definition digital transfer with uncompressed monaural soundtrack
• Audio commentary featuring director Roman Polanski and actress Catherine Deneuve
•A British Horror Film(2003), a documentary on the making of Repulsion, featuring interviews with Polanski, producer Gene Gutowski, and cinematographer Gil Taylor
• A 1964 television documentary filmed on the set ofRepulsion, featuring rare footage of Polanski and Deneuve at work
• Theatrical trailer
• PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by film scholar and curator Bill Horrigan
Stills fromRepulsion(Click for larger image)
』 『Roman Polanski was still a newcomer to the world of cinema when he unleashed this unforgettable exercise in skin-crawling terror.Repulsionwas the Polish director's first film in English, but that hardly mattered: much of the movie is as wordless (and as weird) as the silentNosferatu. The young Catherine Deneuve plays a Belgian girl stranded in '60s London, a shy beauty with no social skills. When her sister leaves their shared flat, Deneuve goes gradually, quietly, completely mad. Her world becomes Polanski's paintbox, as the devilish director distorts reality via a series of surrealistic touches (grasping hands that protrude from elastic walls) and out-and-out murderous horror. Very few films cast the kind of eerie spell that this 1965 classic achieves, and it clearly points the way toward Polanski'sRosemary's Baby. As with most of the director's work, what is unsettling is not the overt violence, but the terrifying sense of emptiness and isolation, and the boiling unease inside one's own mind.--Robert Horton』
price：$2.99
20th Century Fox
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Hush, maybe they won't hear you if you get up and leave...) 『I laugh when I think of what I thought I might get out of `Hush...Hush Sweet Charlotte'. It looked so `dangerous' and so `chilling' and so; entertaining. Sadly, the film falters on so many levels that it can't really be taken seriously despite the fact that it tries so hard to be taken seriously.
I think that is my biggest complaint when it comes to this film. It should have embraced its flaws and fully embellished its own `silliness'. Instead, `Hush...Hush Sweet Charlotte' doesn't seem to get the fact that it is campy. It tries so hard to be serious that it winds up becoming laughable, especially when you consider the fact that nearly everyone involved is so intent of `acting their parts' that they bring a new meaning to the word `theatrical'. Bette Davis and Olivia de Havilland are all over the place (they truly compliment one another, if you get my drift), but neither are as slapstick crazy as Agnes Moorehead, who gives one of the worst supporting performances I've ever seen!
Am I crazy for thinking that Joseph Cotten was really good here?
So, the film has this layer of darkness that overwhelms it from the very beginning, when young Charlotte's lover is hacked up with an ax. I only wish that the film had known which way to go with itself. I mean, that opening scene is just delicious and could have led way to some horrific and truly chilling sequences, but instead the film feels cheap in its delivery and thus never once musters enough fear in us to care `one way or another' what happens in the end.
And the villains are so plainly obvious that one really only has to be introduced to them to know that they are no good, which kills any and all suspense that this half-baked thriller is trying to cook up.
When this film tries to be scary it's almost comical.
And yet, I really, really liked Joseph Cotten in this!
Some really love this film, but I for one can't really say much good for it, aside from Cotten. I found it to be sloppy and completely overly acted. The director didn't understand how to extract true suspense here, and with the ridiculous Moorehead stinking up nearly every other scene, this film is truly a disaster. What they should have done was embraced Moorehead's camp and turned this film into a spoof, intentionally serving us up laughter in place of terror. This could have at least become another `What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?', a film that established a clear cult following because it seemed to understand and toy with its own camp value.
But alas; this is a film that honestly thinks it's better than it is.』
(HELP ME FIND BETTE DAVIS MOVIE) 『DONT REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE MOVIE...one scene i do remember she was stealing old people checks and killing them, she told one lady to look in a ditch then hit her in the head with a shover???? cant remember the name of this movie???』
(Wild and creepy fun ;o)) 『Bette Davis at her best in this crazy flick. I found some short clips on the net one night and I knew I had to order this excellent movie. Turn the lights out and have some fun.』
(the damned don't cry) 『Under no circumstance can I give this movie more than one star after the way that Joan Crawford (may she rest in peace) was mistreated and abused by the producers, the director and the high holy priestess of the silver screen, Ruth Elizabeth Davis.
Although I have never been too interested in her, I know that Bette Davis was a talented actress, but she could also be very callous and vengeful and extremely mean-spirited. I find it inexcusable that she collectively had poor Joan blackballed because Bette Davis was jealous of Joan's beauty and gentility and gracefulness. Joan Crawford, a star who pioneered the modern American cinematic form, a star who acted in silents when Bette Davis was still in nappies, no less, deserved much, much better than she received.
According to Joan's close friends and assistants at the time, Joan was so emotionally and physically torn, drained and beaten down from the wanton abuse that Bette Davis threw at her that she had no other choice but to check herself into the hospital. Joan did not know how to fight. She was not a fighter in the literal sense. Joan was a pacifist who loved people. And we have to remember that this was her doctor's orders and it was for her own personal health and well-being. And while poor Joan was in the hospital she actually heard of her firing over the radio. They just threw her away like yesterdays newspaper. So sad and so tragic and so disrespectful and disgraceful. But Joan (may she rest in peace) was always a professional and always such a kind and wonderful person and even until the day she passed away never had a bad word to say about Bette Davis or the producers of this film.
Bette Davis always got the very best writers, directors, editors and producers and scripts. Like a poor, starving, innocent, puppy, looking for tables-scraps, Joan simply had to make do with whatever the studio was throwing her way. But Joan, unlike Bette, was always able to make it work because she personified the American woman. She worked harder than any other (wo)man in Hollywood and like a cat holding onto it's 9th life, sustained her career for 6 decades.
As if playing second-fiddle to a second-rate "actress" wasn't bad enough, kind-hearted Joan had to contend with the veiled comments about her appearance, too. Yet, these same critics making these comments almost never bothered to mention that Joan always looked at least 17 years younger than Better Davis. Nor did they ever mention how beautiful and elegant Joan always looked whenever she was seen out in public, even when she was well into her late '60s.
Joan made a classic movie of her own in 1964, titled "Strait-Jacket." And as Ms. Diane Baker (Joan's co-star in the film said in the '02 DVD featurette) if it hadn't been a horror movie, where, by now everyone had all of these preconceived notions about Joan, she likely would have been nominated for an Oscar.
Incidentally, the plot of "Hush...Hush...Sweet Charlotte" is actually rather similar to Joan's other 1964 film, "Fatal Confinement," which is much, much better than "Hush...Hush...Sweet Charlotte" (and came out first.)
I found the performance (or lack there of) by Bette Davis to be lacking in anything even remotely real and human. Like most of her roles (with a very, small exception) she came off as hard, brazen, not very ladylike and rather inhuman (and inhumane) and un-relatable. Incidentally, Agnes Moorhead looked like a regular transvestite. The only performance that was not lacking pretense was that of Ms. Olivia de Havilland (who is still very much alive and kicking.)
If you can find the rare Key Video release of this film, I say get it only because it has a rather unusual cover. However I do not recommend this movie for any other purposes, but if you really must see it wait for it to come on TV.
According to Wikipedia there is actually an original scene in the movie that Joan filmed that is still intact, "There is a long shot in the beginning of the movie, when Miriam gets out of the taxi upon her arrival at the Hollis plantation, that actually shows the back of Joan Crawford's head and not de Havilland's." Why would Joan's portion be left in and not cut out? Some conspirisists think that this was done on purpose to capitalize on Joan's huge name and worldwide box office appeal and loyal public, who, to this day only have the best to say about her.
Contrary to many books and reports stating otherwise, there was never a "feud" between Joan and Bette Davis. Joan was too much of a lady to wallow in the mud with the pigs and simply found it beneath her to ever disrespect anyone, so she simply said nothing. That is one of the (many) reasons why I have so much respect for her.
No, this is not the review you probably came here to read but I didn't start witting reviews on this forum to be anyone's patsy. These are my opinions and I stand by them because this is how I feel about a very poor movie that could have been very good. Sometimes I really believe that I would be more welcome at a clan rally because some people on this forum are so threatened by anyone else's different opinions because perhaps they're afraid that it will undermine their own.』
(Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte) 『Love this movie, but ordered for a friend who loves it even more!!! It's a classic!』 『This is the tale of a wealthy southern spinster Charlotte Hollis (Bette Davis) who lives with her eccentric maid (Agnes Moorehead) in a decaying southern mansion, shunned by the townsfolk after the mysterious axe-murder of her late lover. When her jealous cousin (Olivia de Havilland) and her cousin's wily husband (Cotton) arrive for a visit, the two conspire to drive Charlotte insane and have her commited so the two can sell off her estate and pocket the proceeds.』 『Poor Charlotte Hollis. She's been shunned by the community for decades, ever since the fateful night in 1927 when her lover was hacked apart with an axe. Her antebellum southern mansion is slated for the bulldozer, as it stands in the way of highway construction. Charlotte's only hope lies in her cousin Miriam (Olivia de Havilland), coming down from up north to help settle things. Miriam, however, has other designs. Together with her boyfriend Drew (Joseph Cotten), she embarks on a scheme to systematically drive Charlotte out of her mind (not a great leap) and get her mitts on the family fortune. From there, things only get more complicated.Charlotteputs the "gothic" in southern gothic, as a great showcase for completely bizarre, overwrought, and out-of-control performances from all involved. Agnes Moorehead plays Charlotte's loyal, disheveled housekeeper to the hilt, with an odd inflection that calls to mind Amos and Andy more than southern gentility. As the drunken, conniving Dr. Drew, Cotten's accent is indeterminate at times, and seems to come and go. As great as the supporting players are, though, the crown goes to Bette Davis as the shrieking Charlotte, a portrait of isolation and decay stuck in a world of tragic delusions inside her crumbling mansion. De Havilland is a close second as the scheming Miriam; the scene where she slaps the holy snot out of a hysterical Charlotte is itself worth the price of admission. Mary Astor (in her last role) and Cecil Kellaway (as a kindly Lloyd's of London adjuster) put in the only performances with any restraint, acting as counterweights for the rest of the cast. Besides, you'll never get another chance to see Joseph Cotten playing the harpsichord and singing, or caked in mud and lily pads! With Robert Aldrich's claustrophobic direction,Charlotteis as Southern as a field of kudzu, and as subdued as a train wreck.--Jerry Renshaw』
price：$2.00
Chaos Squared Sideshow Pictures Harrington Talents
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (bloody good time) 『If you're like me and you miss old school slasher-type horror flicks, you'll find a lot to like here. An old ghost story taking on new life, a high school party, teenagers leaving the group to have sex... for the most part, you know what you're in for here, but it's a fun ride.
One other note: I think the visual storytelling (for lack of another way to put it) really stand out. The special effects, lighting, editing, storytelling, and even the music are exceptional for what is apparently a fairly low budget project by a first-time director. There's talent on display here, and I suspect (and hope) we'll see more from the creative team in coming years.』
(Blood Night - Watch out for Mary Hatchett) 『I took a chance with this film. I had not heard of it before and you cannot get it here in Australia so I decided to give it a go as per the decent reviews and hope it was worth my money. Will I watch it again? For Sure! Am I happy I purchased it? Absolutely!
This one is about a town that is still celebrating the deaths of many one night, 20 years ago when Mary Hatchett (Who has a rare psychosis condition where when she menstuates, she becomes unstable and homocidal) went loose on her parents and then on the local mental asylum that locked her up. After her murderous rampage she was shot down and the town lives her story like their own 'Halloween' celebrating it once a year and running around with Mary masks etc. Then one year, it all starts again. A group of teenagers are harrassed by a killer that show the same MO as Mary but Mary is dead.... or is she?
This one has loads of cheesy 80's moments. It is like watching an old 80's slasher thats been 90'd up! And look, it works. You got some good scares, some good kills, some creepy moments. Not huge on the character development but not necessarily bad either. It honestly is an entertaining little flick and I am glad I got it and I did enjoy it.
Its a must for all horror fans, its a pass for those that arent. 3.5/5.』
(Fair Horror film) 『I actually got a kick out of this film. The special effects where fair and the film clips referring to a past event where good. Not you cinematic classic but worth a one time look.』
(Celebrating Blood Night) 『 In recent years, the horror genre has been plagued by more duds than gems. For every decent slasher film, there are scores of movies that barely deserve a second glance, much less a full viewing.
The reason for this is a conflict of interests that rarely compromise with each other. On one end, we have low budgeted movies that try to bring us back to the golden age of horror(circa the 1970s and 1980s) with their gritty kill-shots, fountains of blood, and enough bare breasts to make Hugh Hefner blush. On the other end we have high-gloss production houses putting out cookie-cutter horror stories, many with the dreaded PG-13 stamp.
With the release of Blood Night: The Legend of Mary Hatchet, we are given the best of both worlds; a movie made by fans(in horror afficionado/director Frank Sabatella), for fans, and with a dynamic production value to capture the guts, glory, and breasts, of the film for a stellar visual effect.
The story is as follows: A young girl named Mary Mattock(played by Patricia Raven) butchers her family for no apparent reason. We later learn that this is due to a physiological problem called Menstrual Dysphoric Disorder which makes PMS look like a walk in the park. The young woman(now played by Samantha Facchi) is sent to the King's Park Psychiatric Hospital, where she is raped by a hospital night-guard. She becomes pregnant, but loses the baby in child-birth. This brings on another intense bout of MDD in which she slaughters what seems to be all staff and patients at the hospital, and is gunned down by police.
The story brings us to the present, where high school kids celebrate that night of butchery by calling it Blood Night, and proceeding to paint the town red in a night of vandalism and excessive partying. The movie focuses on one group of kids, who decide to visit Mary Mattock, or as she is now known as Mary Hatchet, at her grave, and unknowingly release the ghost to wreck vengeance once again. One by one, the group is dispatched in various, high impact slaughterings, as they try to lay the spirit to rest.
Sounds simple? It's not, but who am I to ruin it for you?
This movie lacks in nothing for entertainment. The kill-shots are highly detailed, thanks to the superb special effects of Monster in My Closet special effects artist Jeremy Selenfriend and Harrington Talents virtual effects artist John Morena. Dismemberments, spinal readjustments, and blood washes all become intensely realistic by utilizing Selenfriend's definitive prop functions, from custom sculpted heads(and brains) to mouth interiors. To make sure these effects lack nothing on-screen, Morena utilized digital enhancements to help make the kill-shots pop off the screen with the addition of blood enhancements that were shot seperately, and then transcribed into the final edit. With these talented artists and the fantastic camera-work, the film popped off the screen, much to the glee of fans of gore.
There is humor interlaced into the horror, as well. Graveyard Gus(played by Bill Moseley) is nothing short of the drunken graveyard-keeper who drinks way too much whiskey and yaps about Vietnam. A conversation about Tom Jones between Alex(played by Nate Dushku) and Chris(played by Anthony Marks) had me giggling out loud. A male virgin wiping his brow with a pink, "Princess" pillow while getting frisky with a hot chick? This movie has it. The comedy is just enough to help the viewer fall into the comfort trap before being shown a decapitated head flying across a room. By balancing these bits of comedy into the horror, the bar of suspense is raised, because you never become too jaded by seeing an overflow of gore. Not that either way would be bad, but for Blood Night, comic relief makes the suspense grow. And lets not forget Eric(played by Billy Magnussen), who is the pinnacle of every sex-crazed high school guy we've ever known.
What's amazing is that all of these actors and actresses are able to turn their clown routines off when director Frank Sabatella calls for it, with great results of suspense. Let us not forget that scream-princess Danielle Harris, playing her part impeccably in the storyline as the knee-socked Alyssa, who can never seem to hold her liquor and brings back some intense stories of her time in school.
So what defines this movie beyond all others? High production, an extremely gifted cast, and intense kill-shots, all embedded into a suspenseful story-line where even if you think you know what is going on, you really don't. At the same time it's just good, head-jerking fun, a horror movie with serious overtones, but doesn't take itself too seriously. Think Wes Craven's Scream meets Lucio Fulci's The House By the Cemetary, and out of that seemingly scandalous affair comes its offspring, Blood Night: The Legend of Mary Hatchet.』
(Great movie, nice surprise!) 『Saw the preview at Monster-Mania, and I admit, it looked good then. Met all the guys at the booth and they were very nice and their props looked very professional. Received my copy today and really enjoyed the film! Great job.... Better than I expected!!』 『A group of teenagers celebrating the anniversary of the death of a local axe murderer suddenly find themselves face to face with the realities of this haunting urban legend.
Long Island, 1978: A young girl named Mary Mattock gruesomely murders her family with a hatchet and is locked away for life in Long Island's notorious Kings Park Psychiatric Center. Ten years later, Mary escapes from the asylum, leaving a grizzly trail of bodies and blood in her wake. Gunned down by the police, Mary meets her own demise outside the sanitarium walls. This incident gave birth to the legend of Mary Hatchet's walking ghost and the mischievous night named in honor of her death, BLOOD NIGHT!
Stemming from the real life Long Island legend of Mary Hatchet, Blood Night: The Legend of Mary Hatchet tells the tale of a group of teenagers enjoying their annual Blood Night festivities, when they come face to face with the reality of this haunting legend. One by one, the teens begin to disappear and meet their fate. As the body count rises, so do the unanswered questions about their missing friends and the secrets of Mary's horrifying past. Is there more to this legend than the vengeful ghost of Mary Hatchet? And if so, who will survive to tell the terrifying tale?
Fueled by intense and energetic performances from Nate Dushku, Bill Moseley, Danielle Harris, and Samantha Facchi as Mary Hatchet, audiences are in for a non-stop splatter fest filled with sex, guts, and heads that roll! Blood Night puts a neck-breaking spin on the gory and gut-wrenching "slasher" pieces from the legendary decade of 1980's horror!
This product is manufactured on demand using DVD-R recordable media. Amazon.com's standard return policy will apply.
price：$6.49
New Line Home Video
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (I LOVE the films but i hate the quality of this pack) 『I got this for about 10.00 and I can say that the first disc doesn't evean work because they are double sided disc's. Evean one little scrach will make it unplayable, at least for me. I just decided to pay extra money and get the box set, but hey if you are low on cash I guess its not that bad of a deal. Just be very carfull with the disc's.』
(Entertaining movies except for part 2) 『This set is definitely worth the ten bucks all these movies are entertaining except the lousy and lame part 2, but if your a Freddy Fan, it's a great buy. I personally like to save space even if you lose some packing material, I take these over those big box sets that clog too much space. As far the Movies go, Part 1 is a classic and one of the best horror movies of all time, part 2 as I already mentioned is a dud, makes no sense with Freddy not being in dreams, and of course the homosexual themes, don't understand why people try to defend this movie, it's horrible. Part 3 is clearly the best sequel of the series, while Freddy is still scary and the return of Heather Langenkamp is good enough, the story is great with Freddy victimizing all the kids at the asylum. Part 4 is a decent sequel but this is when Freddy was more funny than scary. Overall a great value.』
(no nightmare) 『I recieved my order sooner than expected and will use this seller again. Thank You』
(A great value pack!) 『As most of you probably know, the Nightmare on Elm Street series has its highs and its lows. Out of these 4, the first and third are highlights with 2 and 4 being.. a little lackluster. None the less, whether you're a casual fan or a major fanatic, you'll have a blast screaming or making fun of Freddy and his horrific antics with this easy-to-store value pack. It comes with 2 double sided discs that shows the movie in full screen or wide, with a bare minimum of bonus features. I thought the first four would be enough that I'd never want to watch another movie with an Elm reference, but actually I enjoyed them enough that I rushed to buy A Nightmare on Elm Street 5-8: 4 Film Favorites, and I'm sure you'll feel the same way.
Like I said, this is a great value pack. I love me some Nightmare, but not enough to store 8 DVDs. With this I get all the fun without the guilt of having to find a place to put it. If you are a major fan, however, and would like an attractive box set to show off your fanhood, The Nightmare on Elm Street Collection looks like a great box set of the entire series (doesn't include Freddy VS Jason, though).
Pleasant dreams!』
(Great Movies) 『This is a great collection. People have already stated the pros and cons but I need to state one additional problem. The first two movies had terrible sound quality. I was constantly adjusting the volume because the scenes went from barely audible to deafening. Maybe some other people can post reviews and say whether they had this problem too.』 『Studio: Warner Home Video Release Date: 11/11/2008 Run time: 374 minutes』
price：$9.98
Buena Vista Home Video
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (The Good Son) 『In this suspense thriller a 12-year-old boy goes to live with relatives after his mother's death and comes under the influence of his malevolent cousin. This movie is wierd and realistic. The way that Culkin's character acts is twisted but sometimes that is how twisted people get. This movie is very suspenseful. The plot was to die for and the acting was astonishing.』
("Suspenseful!) 『After Macaulay Culkin became an overnight star in the "Home Alone" series his agents were anxious to cast him in roles that were very different from his comedic performances. In "The Good Son" Culkin portrays a character that is many watts away from "Home Alone". In this film his character is obviously disturbed and his evil side emerges when his family takes in his cousin (played by Elijah Wood) after the death of the cousin's mother. When the Culkin character realizes his own mother is starting to bond with his cousin, he takes drastic measures to halt the relationship. Superb performances, creepy camera work, and an intense well-written script makes "The Good Son" a must-see film. The movie is great to watch on a winter afternoon as the film , I believe, was shot mostly in the northeast in the dead of winter near the Atlantic ocean. Unfortunately, the DVD doesn't come with any extras, but the film contains both the full and widescreen formats for your enjoyment. Although nearly all the critics panned the film, "The Good Son" has so far grossed over $60 million worldwide.』
(amazing! my favorite thriller!) 『great dvd! there's (at least one) deleted scenes that were cut. one was when they were on the bridge singing some song..cant remember it now (youtube it) in the novel there's more, giving the novel a more fitted ending to henry (SPOILER ALERT RIGHT NOW) he still dies but there's something included. all in all a great film, amazing score by bernstien, and a great thriller! buy it!』
(Brilliant movie) 『I absolutley loved this movie, it is one of the best horror/thrillers I have seen for a long time. Macaulay Culkin is great as the cute-but-evil Henry as is Elijah Wood as Mark, the protagonist. I thought they both did a great job as portraying beleivable charactors (especially considering that they were six years too young to legally watch their own movie).
The plot of the movie is very consistant and goes not slow down or drag in places and some of the scenes are very suspenceful, particularly the scene where Henry is pointing a nail-gun toward a cat and we dont know if he is going to kill it.
I was very surprised that this movie was rated 18 as there is no sex or violence at all and only one swear (the F word) so I would say this movie is probably ok for children over the age of 12 or so to watch.
Shortly after Mark's (Elijah Wood) mother dies, his father takes him to live in New England with his Aunt and Uncle and 12 year old cousin, Henry (Macaulay Culkin). At first Mark seems to be having a good time until he begins to see the real Henry when a slip leaves him dangling over the side of a treehouse (which is about 100 feet high) and Hery asks him "If I let go, do you think you could fly?". Then, Henry throws a dummy onto a busy highway causing a ten-car pileup and Mark realises that Henry is much more dangerous than he thought...
A great horror/thriller movie that I would highly recomend.』
(Cute Li'l Devil...) 『Henry (Macaulay Culkin) is a typical young boy. He spends his care-free hours playing, building crossbows to kill neighborhood pets, and causing major freeway accidents. He enjoys watching the results of his play. His mum and dad have been down in the dumps ever since Henry's little brother had his fatal "accident" in the tub. Unlike Henry, the folks just let it keep bothering them for some reason. Now, there's cousin Mark (Elijah Wood from The Ice Storm, Lord Of The Rings, and Sin City) to worry about. He's staying for a couple of weeks while his dad (David Morse from The Green Mile and Disturbia) is in Japan. At first, Henry thought that Mark might be fun, but he's a drag. He doesn't seem to enjoy Henry's games at all. Not even the chain-reaction car wreck game on the interstate! What a bore! If only Mark could get over his mother's recent demise. What is it with people and their "feelings" anyway? Henry just wants to have fun, and if Mark wants to be a big baby and a tattle-tale, then he just might have to have an "accident" of his own. What a shame. Oh well. THE GOOD SON is a terrific thriller from director Joseph Ruben (The Stepfather). Culkin and Wood are utterly believable in their roles. Culkin's portrayal of a budding serial killer is so good it's frightening! Why did this kid disappear?? Wood is great too as the boy who knows what's going on, but can't get anyone to believe him. TGS is wicked and perfectly perverse...』 『Evil resides in an unexpected place in this gripping, suspense-filled drama. Macaulay Culkin stars as Henry, an angelic-looking boy who seems loving and loyal to his parents, sister and friends. Only his cousin Mark (Elijah Wood) sees what lurks behind Henry's smile- secret thoughts and a love of deadly games. But when Mark tries to warn Henry's family, they won't believe him, leaving the terrified youngster alone to battle his jealous, menacing cousin.』
The scallop of large satisfactory ! northern countries and - [ of how much ] botan shrimp are ! tightly.
getting to know the technique of motorbike expensive sale -- Ta -- if -- -
>,Kane Hodder
>,Bette Davis,Olivia de Havilland,Joseph Cotten,Agnes Moorehead,Cecil Kellaway
>,Bill Moseley,Danielle Harris,Nate Dushku,Samantha Facchi,Anthony Marks
>,Robert Englund
>,Macaulay Culkin,Elijah Wood,Wendy Crewson,David Morse,Daniel Hugh Kelly