price：$9.19
Turner Home Ent
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Watch the skies!) 『You know, I really think that you can trace a line from every sci-fi movie ever made back to this film and "Forbidden Planet".
The Thing is a true classic of the genre, beginning what we know as science fiction as well as many elements of good filmmaking, on what was at the time a low budget. Snappy dialog, likable characters, and some "thing" that is drinking their blood like high-test Miracle-Gro.
If you're seeing it for the first time, you have to notice the foreshadowing of "Alien"; the xenophobia, the claustrophobia..."there's something in here with us...we can't seem to find it...but it's finding US." Also the element of the good doctor wanting to preserve the creature for science...willing to trade the life of everyone on the team as well as his own to "save" the creature...shades of Ash, anyone? You'd almost bet that the scientific team here gets its paycheck from what will become Weyland/Yutani.
Carpenter's remake is an absolute classic on it's own; much more faithful to the original short story; but I think it unfair to call it a remake. This original film used elements of the source material, sure, but it's an entirely different film all on it's own (albeit an allegory for cold war paranoia), and it's unfair to compare the two.
Any film that can stand the test of time like this one has and still have the chill factor and feeling of dread that it provides is one for any sci-fi fan's collection, purist (as I am) or not.
Buy it. Watch it.
...and watch the skies.
』
(The Thing) 『Quick delivery. Quality product. Classic black&white Sci-Fi movie. Great entertainment. Well worth the money. I am a very satisfied customer.』
(Still one of my favorites) 『They show this on TV a lot but having it at home for whenever I want to see it is great. The quality is good. I had to adjust the contrast for some scenes but overall it's easy to watch and who doesn't enjoy watching James Arness (Matt Dillon of Gunsmoke) as the Thing!』
(Just an opinion!) 『The Greatest Sci-Fi movie ever made,whether it be 50's,60's to the present.It has it all,great story,good script and acting with incredible atmosphere and what do you know all done without computers and million dollar budgets!!』
(A Very 'Scary' Classic !) 『"The Thing From Another World", affectionately known by 'older kids', as simply "THE THING!" Is a must for every lover of fright. Although it is older and in black and white, it is well produced and believable! [Review by Ypsilee]』 『Members of an Antarctic research team are killed off by a frozen alien they uncover.』 『With its modest special effects, lean plot, and small cast of lesser stars, this 1951 thriller remains a sturdy blueprint for fusing horror and science fiction. The formula has been employed countless times since, fleshed out with more extensive and elaborate production values, and manned by higher profiled marquee names, but the results have yet to improve onThe Thing from Another World, Howard Hawks's lone foray into sci-fi.
The story begins as military airmen are dispatched to a remote Arctic research station where scientists have detected the crash of a spacecraft. An effort to retrieve the saucer-shaped vehicle fails, but the team returns to the station with the frozen body of its sole occupant. When the extraterrestrial pilot is accidentally thawed, the crew, headed by a tough-talking pilot (Kenneth Tobey), grapples with a massive, chlorophyll-based humanoid (James Arness) thirsty for blood and in no mood for galactic diplomacy.
Hawks takes only a production credit for this low-budget exercise, but his filmmaking style transcends Christian Nyby's nominal direction: rapid-fire, overlapping dialogue, an ensemble of comrades whose professionalism is tempered by wisecracks, and unsentimental female characters (embodied by feisty romantic interest Margaret Sheridan) recall Hawks's signature works, while propelling the plot over any potential gaps in credibility. It's hardly surprising, then, thatThe Thing from Another Worldremains among the most influential science fiction movies ever shot, or that it remains exciting entertainment a half century later.--Sam Sutherland』
price：$16.99
Universal Studios
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Splendid remake of Romero's '78 thriller) 『I just purchased this remake of Romero's thriller in HD DVD at a bargain price and it's a winner in many ways, an improvement over the original. Although the original had some political points to make, Zack Snyder's version is more focused on the myraid characters who find escape, temporarily, in the mall. Also the acting is much better here than the original plus the wide screen and Dolby sound pull you in on the horror that is to come. Definitely recommended for all horror purists and zombie enthusiasts! Much better than the "28 Weeks Later" debacle.』
(Worthy Remake with Updated Flow, Effects and Twists) 『I am a huge fan of this genre of movies and have to say that this is one of the best ever. I've been enjoying "Dead" movies since the original "Dawn of the Dead" from George Romero in 1979 which stood completely alone in it's time and is still a great classic.
Having said that, here's what I really like about this wonderful remake:
- The updated setting, story and feel - Updated special effects - superb! - Faster flow that makes this a bit easier to watch than the original - The new level of terror introduced by zombies that run full speed! - Using the "Mall" motif again - Celebrity target practice - fun! - The baby - yikes! - The acting and character development - The armored bus - The chainsaw scene - Great action and stunts - The completely screwed up ending - delightful!
All of these elements come together into a very satisfying experience for those who like this sort of thing.
』
(Dawn Of the Dead-I hate Remakes.) 『I didn't care much for the original and I certainly don't care for the remake, With more Gore to try to out-do the other.If your a fan perhaps you would appreciate, but I don't count Gore as Classic Horror.』
(Dawn of the Dead... Isn't a good remake an oxymoron) 『 Dawn of the Dead (2004): 10 out of 10: I sympathize with the fan boys that feel any remake of Dawn of the Dead is sacrilegious. You get an emotional attachment to films that scared you in your youth. (One on mine is Assault on Precinct 13 that was remade recently and I just know I will be disappointed with the remake. I am still scared of ice cream trucks as a result of seeing that film when I was 9)
Remakes themselves have a well deserved bad reputation. (Easiest movie trivia question: What is the best film remake? The Maltese Falcon of course. That Humphrey Bogart perennial was a remake of a 1931 film of the same name. I'm sure back in 1941 that there were a couple of people complaining that Bogart was no Ricardo Cortez and the ruined the story by taking out the affair and homosexual subplots. The first film after all was a pre-code affair.)
Dawn of the Dead is in reality a different movie than the original. This is no shot for shot Psycho remake nor is it the same movie with a glossier CGI coat of paint. It is a faster more intense zombie film. It is one of the best action horror films of the last ten years. The opening twenty minutes in simply one of the scariest action packed sequences I have ever seen. By the time our band of protagonists gets to the mall they are not the only one's catching their breath.
It becomes a pretty good sized group at the mall and you end up slogging through some slow bits as the zombies eat it down to a more manageable size. The acting is across the board good and the effects are suitably gory and plentiful. Director Zack Snyder wisely dumps much of Romero's sociological subplots and replaces them with a more timely commentary. (Instead of zombies as consumer motif we have shooting undead celebrities. And instead of an outwardly hostile motorcycle gang, we have a more subtle power struggle between the otherwise powerless.)
The updates honestly work, as a more literal remake would have simply fallen flat. Is Dawn of the Dead better than the original? I won't say. Is it one of the best films of 2004? Yes. Is it better than Romero's own sequel Day of the Dead? Good Lord yes. 』
(I HATE ZOMBIE MOVIES.....) 『I hate zombie movies, mostly because the thought of the unstoppable living dead who want to feed off your flesh and brains scares the S@!T! out of me.
I thought it was nicely down for a remake. The make-up was great, the special effects where good. It had a solid cast including Clint Eastwood's daughters first major role. They've been making Zombie flicks since the 60's, most of them stink, there like porn you can only go in one direction with it. This was not one of them, this was a good movie and it proved it at the box office.
I say it is definitely worth seeing and purchasing the uncut version. I did both and I hate zombie flicks, its just one of those films that when its on you have to watch.
My one and only complaint it the fact no one ever survives.』 『Studio: Uni Dist Corp. (mca) Release Date: 09/30/2008 Run time: 215 minutes』 『Are you ready to get down with the sickness? Movie logic dictates that you shouldn't remake a classic, but Zack Snyder'sDawn of the Deaddefies that logic and comes up a winner. You could argue that George A. Romero's 1978 original was sacred ground for horror buffs, but it was alow-budgetclassic, and Snyder's action-packed upgrade benefits from the same manic pacing that energized Romero's continuing zombie saga. Romero's indictment of mega-mall commercialism is lost (it's arguably outmoded anyway), so Snyder and screenwriter James Gunn compensate with the same setting--in this case, a Milwaukee shopping mall under siege by cannibalistic zombies in the wake of a devastating viral outbreak--a well-chosen cast (led by Sarah Polley, Ving Rhames, Jake Weber, and Mekhi Phifer), some outrageously morbid humor, and a no-frills plot that keeps tension high and blood splattering by the bucketful. Horror buffs will catch plenty of tributes to Romero's film (including cameos by three of its cast members, including gore-makeup wizard Tom Savini), and shocking images are abundant enough to qualify thisDawnas an excellent zombie-flick double-feature with28 Days Later, its de facto British counterpart.--Jeff Shannon』
price：$6.99
Lions Gate
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Amazing!) 『I love this movie! It's fantastic and it's written by the guy who plays the Graverobber! I think this movie is extremely well made and it's the best Paris Hilton has EVER looked! (Best she ever will unless they do a sequel)』
(Best rock opera I've ever seen!) 『I saw previews for this on a few DVD's&the song that was played on the preview was very catchy, so I decided to buy a copy just to watch once or twice. The whole movie is so awesome, I watch it several times a week&have memorized all the songs (and I own the soundtrack so I can sing along in my car). But, you have to remember that it is a rock opera, and if you don't like musicals/rock operas, you might not like it. This is my new favorite movie of all time!』
(I love Paris Hilton!) 『I've seen better, but it wasn't a "horrible" movie . Paris is amazing, I adore her. I agree, people took this movie way to seriously. it's a movie to have fun with, it doesn't need an Oscar but it's a good movie just to lay down, relax and enjoy it. I bought in on DVD and we all liked it but we weren't disappointed because we knew it was a movie to have fun with. it's a hilarious movie, but talks a lot about sex. Paris looks amazing with brunette hair, and her acting was AMAZING. Overall, good movie, enjoy it!
Luv Ya Paris<3』
(UTTER GARBAGE) 『What else can be said? My mind recoils from this artless disease of a movie. It should come with a free stick for gagging yourself. Even better a blindfold and earplugs. Save yourself the pain and avoid.』
(REPO a movie worth getting) 『I wanted this movie very much and was very happy to get it at a little cheaper than the listing price on Amazom. The sound quality is not always that great, but the movies indomitable will can not be denied. It will draw you in and make you part of it. And the most powerful feature of the movie is it's believability. Could we be like this is 50 years or so?』 『Studio: Lions Gate Home Ent. Release Date: 01/20/2009 Run time: 90 minutes Rating: R』 『LikeningRepo! The Genetic Operato its predecessors,Little Shop of HorrorsandRocky Horror Picture Show, conveys this film’s high camp and operatic bursts of song, but does little to describe how absolutely bizarreRepo!is. LikeRocky Horror, Repo!was written for stage performance by Darren Smith and Terrance Zdunich, who stars as a Graverobber, dolled up in vampiric makeup to resembleRocky Horror’siconic tranny, Dr. Frank-N-Furter. Hiring newbie director, Darren Lynn Bousman, fresh out of film school to shoot this mutant movie, Smith and Zdunich clearly focused on writing comedy into extremely gruesome slasher scenes, which works with mixed results. Stills of comic strips contextualize each scene, telling the story of biotech corporation Geneco’s repossessions of organs that they implanted into various patients to save human lives during a long history of operations. Organs, here, were bought on credit, and as the economy nosedives, citizens of this a makeshift Gotham City cannot pay bills, and must forfeit their lives to repo men makea killing around town, literally. Heading this enterprise is CEO Rotti Largo (Paul Sorvino), who has two bickering sons, Luigi (Bill Moseley) and Pavi (Nivek Ogre), whose white facemask is third generation Phantom, borrowing directly from Winslow Leach’s in Brian De Palma’sPhantom of the Paradise. Central to the plot is head repo guy/slaughterer, Nathan Wallace (Anthony Head ofBuffy the Vampire Slayer), who hides his career path to preserve his sexy teenage daughter, Shilo’s (Alexa Vega), innocence. As Shilo discovers her godmom, Blind Mag (Sarah Brightman), and the "Z"-addicted surgery slut, Amber Sweet (Paris Hilton), she embarks on adventures through an urban landscape constructed of metal gear, corpse piles, and S/M zombie girls, while dad straps people up in his torture chamber to take back body parts. Hmmmm. SinceRepo!looks likes a Marilyn Manson video, its musical niche sensibility will only appeal to fans who like Goth and Industrial music. To anyone who doesn’t go for that look, it does impress for its sheer dedication to choreography and song. In the least,Repo! The Genetic Operais an anomalous glimpse into visionary horror. --Trinie Dalton』
price：$11.00
Paramount
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Hapers Island) 『This was an awesome show, that my son loved so much that he wanted this for his birthday. Great edition to have to your Dvd collection.』
(LOVED IT FROM EPISODE 1) 『I was hooked from episode 1. I couldnt wait til the next week to see who was next on the chopping block. It had so many different characters it could have been, but wasnt. When the killer was finally revealed i was shocked I bought it when it came out and everybody who borrowed it loved it. Sure it might have had a little corniness in it but it was still a great show. I loved it.』
(who-dun-it) 『I loved it from start to ... well, almost finish. I couldn't wait to get my dvd set and start watching - again. Of course I watched it on tv, suffered through commercials etc. I thought it started to fall apart in the next to last show but it really hit the bottom on the last episode. Oh, well. I watch it like some other of my favorites, and when it gets to the end, I stop the movie. Don't even watch the ending anymore. Of course, Harper's Island had a decent ending, if you like girl gets boy, finally.』
(Nice tv series) 『This was a really good series that reminded me of the story Ten Little Indians but the ending was pretty weak. I still liked it though. It was fun to try and guess who would be killed next.』
(Scream for more Harper's anything) 『This show was amazing breath of fresh air amongst your reality tv shows. I read about it in Ent Weekly and waited for dvd release to watch, no cable. In the negative reviews it talks of the first four episodes being to crowded but I was hooked from the first ten minutes, watching the first murder through fingers and yelling at my tv omg! omg!. The show takes it turn in ep five, this was planned and explained in the extras. It is guilty pleasure show so dissecting it seriously ruins the show for you so don't. The arcs and twists are swift, some expected some surprising. Watching and guessing is the fun. Desertion of the island of it's locals and tourists is explained you have to be paying attention. I avoided spoilers on this show until I seen it, I won't put any in my review. Very good show, what I expected my only dissapointment was the final credits. Get it, watch it, have fun!』 『A horror-inspired drama, this CBS series is about a group of friends and family who meet to celebrate a wedding on an island just outside Seattle, an island that is famous for a streak of unsolved murders seven years ago. Suspense ensues when they end up dead one by one; has the killer returned or is someone else to blame?』 『Harper's Island, the guiltiest pleasure of the 2009 summer TV season, is part Agatha Christie and partFriday the 13th. This cleverly plotted 13-episode CBS mystery event invites return visits to the eponymous island where a good portion of an ill-fated wedding party will not survive to celebrate the happy couple's first anniversary.Harper's Islandbegins with a "Whap" and goes out with a "Sigh" (each onomatopeaic episode title replicates the sound of a victim's demise). Here's the set-up: Pauper Henry (Christopher Gorham) and princess "Trish" (Katie Cassidy) have invited family and friends to Harper's Island, located 37 miles off the coast of Seattle, for their nuptials. Seven years earlier, John Wakefield slaughtered six people there. These were the first murders in the history of the island. A title card warns us they will not be the last. One by one, episode by episode, a killer (or killers) methodically picks off the wedding guests in grisly and gory fashion. Some characters are more expendable than others, and those who are dispatched early don't get the chance to make much of an impression (cousin Ben doesn't even make it out of the dock in the opening episode), but as the mystery unfolds and the body count escalates, viewers become more emotionally invested in those who survive the longest. For Abby Mills (Elaine Cassidy) this is all kinds of personal. Abby, Henry's once-inseparable childhood friend, has not been back to the island since Wakefield, presumed dead, slaughtered her mother. She is reunited with her estranged father, the sheriff (Jim Beaver), and Jimmy (C.J. Thomason), the boy she left behind.Harper's Islandwill keep viewers guessing until its final twist, which is a doozy, although somewhat suspect. But until then, the series is an effective horror show that gets under your skin with its attractive cast, soap-opera dramatics, tantalizing red herrings, and quality kills (although nothing in the show is as creepy as the unnerving little girl named Madison). Those who missed the boat whenHarper's Islandfirst aired are advised to steer clear of the spoiler-heavy bonus features until you've watched it through to the bloody end.--Donald Liebenson』
price：$13.49
Universal Studios
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Got the item in a timely manner) 『Haven't watched the DVD yet, I hope it is in good condition. The delivery time was great. Thank you.』
(sick twisted) 『This is a sick and twisted movie with nothing new, except the sick minds that made it, Don't waist your time. Its over done., and becomes boring to where you wish it hurry up and end.』
(nothing new) 『5.0 THE FILM ITSELF 8.2 VISUALS 6.6 SOUND 5.0 PACKAGING 0.2 EXTRAS
*** SOME SPOILERS *** REVIEW IS OF UNRATED VERSION ONLY, NOT THEATRICAL I have never seen the original that got people all worked up. So when I saw this remake and heard talks about how this is "the best remake in years" I was expecting... more. After seeing alot of horror films, one thing that stood out is that The Last House on the Left (2009) does nothing special and offers nothing new. Sure, there's little blood or gore which is surprising seeing as that's what the kids need these days to stay entertained, but this film could've probably used it.
Is there an atmosphere? Yeah, I guess so. But the score pounds it into us that these people are so 'evil' that it gets old very quickly. Guess what? We know they're evil. We've seen them kill cops, kidnap two little teeny-bopper girls, kill one of them, and then freakin rape one of them. We know that these people are sick and twisted, we don't need to be bludgeoned with a spooky score to get the picture.
The film itself runs pretty boring. Clocking in at 107 minutes (unrated version), there are alot of boring moments and the typical dumb characterization. How many teenage girls are going to go with some strange pot-head back to a hotel room? Especially ones that appear smart and focused on school, but I guess that's the power of drugs.
Aside from the horrorific (and over extended) rape scene, there's nothing else here to call this a horror movie (until the last 30 minutes). I've heard people say that it's hard to cheer for the parents... this is not the case. Everyone should be rooting for the parents. If not, you should be placed head first into a microwave.
8.2 VISUALS There's not much to see here, but this 1080p film looks pretty good. Colors are sharp and vibrant and while there's some grain, I believe that's supposed to be there for the feel of the film.
6.6 SOUND Aside from the blaring, overused bass for when we see the criminals, there's very little else here for surround sound fans. The film runs more off of scenery and visuals than a decent score.
5.0 PACKAGING The main menu is the oddest thing I have ever seen in a blu-ray release. It looks like a computer start up screen or something and while choosing through the dozens of special features and options (sarcasm ending now) most of the screen is clips from the movie.
0.2 EXTRAS Now how about those special features! Oh boy. The year is 2009 people, and this is a remake of what some would call a classic for the horror / snuff film genre. So one would think that this blu-ray release would be littered with features. Even some of the most boring films of the last few months have a commentary track ("The Haunting in Connecticut"), but not here. How about an interview with Wes Craven or someone else about the difference between the new and old film or who's idea it was for a remake? Nope.
All we get are 9 minutes of boring deleted scenes and something called "A Look Inside" which is a 2.5 minute clip about the film that virtually tells you everything that happens in the film (minus the rape scene). And that is it. Extremely disappointing film matched by an even more disappointing set of special features.
IN CLOSING I was let down by The Last House on the Left (2009) due to it being nothing memorable or fun. Aside from the rape scene, this is barely a horror film by any means. Sure, the crazy parents at the end extracting revenge is horror-ish, but it's understandable what they do. Special feature wise there is nothing here. So will a movie that visually won't be anything to show off to friends, a movie most people won't want to watch twice and completely worthless special features, this should only be purchased by absolute horror diehards who love to add to their collections. Or blu-ray fanatics.
4.4/10 "POOR"』
(good movie to pass the time) 『I was kind of scared of watching this movie due to the reviews that the rape scene was really bad I like scary movies and action movies and was told this movie was really good so I decided to purchase it I did not think the rap scene was that bad as they make it seen it was very infuriating and something you don't like to see but I was happy with the ending of this story! I liked this movie it was full of action and I feel the ending was very really good I would have liked it to have told us a little bit about what happened afterwards with the boy and the girl but I liked the movie.』
(What more can you ask of a Reboot?) 『I'll keep this short and sweet. This was gruesome and twistedly faithful to the original in spirit and effect. I totally expected to be the one tortured when watching, well I should have left my preconceived notions at the door. The acting was sharp, the plot devices made just enough sense that it never broke my disbelief and I admittedly had to briefly look away from some scenes.
The setup was stellar and the ending did not disappoint. I give it a 5 but if it was possible I would have given it more.
Good for the genre and great by comparison of other remakes.
I would definitely suggest it to anyone that enjoys the genr』 『Renowned horror director Wes Craven returns to the scene of the most notorious thrillers of all time in this darkly disturbing reimagining of The Last House on the Left. After kidnapping and ruthlessly assaulting two teen girls, a sadistic killer and his gang unknowingly find shelter from a storm at the home of one of the victim's parents-- two ordinary people who will go to increasingly gruesome extremes to get revenge. Loaded with shocking twists guaranteed to leave you on edge, it's the ominous film critics call, "One of the best horror remakes ever made" (Scott Weinberg, Fearnet.com).』 『A hot-button topic in the horror community from the minute it was announced, the 2009 remake of Wes Craven and Sean Cunningham’s controversialLast House on the Leftwill undoubtedly leave audiences polarized in regard to both its treatment of the source material and its level of violence. As with the original film, which drew inspiration from Ingmar Bergman’sThe Virgin Spring(and was itself based on 13th century Scandinavian legend), director Dennis Illadis’ film traces the downward spiral of two teenage girls (Sara Paxton and Martha MacIsaac fromSuperbad) who fall prey to a quartet of degenerates. The perpetrators then seek refuge in a nearby vacation home--which happens to be occupied by Paxton’s parents. Both versions spare no quarter in detailing the torments inflicted on the two girls, as well as the ruthlessly efficient revenge metered out to the killers by the parents; the difference, however, lies with the intent. Craven and Cunningham (who serve as executive producers for the remake) sought to shock Nixon/Vietnam-era audiences by showing the limits to which the "average" citizen could be pushed by violent acts; Illadis, however, is simply content to deliver a glossy, overamped thriller that neither delights in nor condemns the atrocities committed by its characters. The result is a flat, often tedious exercise in nihilism buoyed only by its cast, especially Paxton, Tony Goldwyn and Monica Potter as her parents, and Garrett Dillahunt (No Country for Old Men) as the malevolent leader of the depraved foursome. Fans of the original need not bother with this version; newcomers should seek out Craven’s version, which has lost none of its power to overwhelm.--Paul Gaita
Amazon.com The legendarily scuzzy 1972 shockerLast House on the Leftgets all dressed up in this slick remake, which retro-fits the original storyline to an isolated lakeside cabin. This time out, unsuspecting teen Mari (Sara Paxton) makes the crucial mistake of going to buy some weed at a rundown motel room with a stranger (Spencer Treat Clark). It must have sounded like a good idea at the time. Soon Mari and her pal (Martha MacIsaac) are confronted by the stranger's diseased posse, and the real trouble begins. The set-up of the 1972 picture, which director Wes Craven borrowed from Ingmar Bergman'sThe Virgin Spring, is a blunt exercise in brutality followed by revenge, the twist being that the revenge is as savage as the initial transgression. This structure remains in the remake, although a few key plot points are changed, with little improvement. Monica Potter and Tony Goldwyn play Mari's parents, who at some point will be called upon to put aside their merlot and their civilized constraints and get to it; Garret Dillahunt, coming off his strong work inDeadwoodandNo Country for Old Men, is far too qualified to be playing the stock role of the creep-in-chief. There is something distinctly strange about watching a film that took much of its original power from its cheapness, an outlaw energy that is completely lost in this dressed-up, professionally made remake. Here the scenes of rape and murder are presented not as pulpy shouts from the subculture but as necessary ingredients in a respectable machinery, which somehow makes them more dispiriting and unpleasant to watch. That this filmis a technical advance on the original film on every level--acting, writing, photography--does not make it a better film.--Robert Horton』
price：$7.99
Warner Home Video
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Hits too close to home for me) 『"Rhoda", the rotten little bitch in this film, is a frightening bully brat. The character reminds me a lot of my own sister, who is a lot like this little bitch, only my sister is now 48 years old. She behaves like a teenager who never grew up. If you know someone who is a sociopath, it is not a pleasant thing to discover. I finally wised up when I couldn't take her abuse any more. I refuse to have anything to do with the woman. If this is the kind of entertainment you wish to indulge in, be my guest. I've seen this film several times in the past but have no wish to view it ever again. It is too realistic in its portrayal of a little girl with no conscience. To have any contact with someone like this, whether in a film or real life, is more frightening than any ghoul or movie monster ever invented. Disturbing but morbidly fascinating, "The Bad Seed" is a stage play made into a film, and it shows. It is well-played by its cast. I just find it a rough movie to sit through because of the horrid personal experience I've had with my own relative. Her own son won't have anything to do with her either, and he's only 26 years old. Tragic, just tragic. I don't recommend viewing this film due to its disturbing nature but it is educational because it shows what destruction bullies, especially female bullies, are capable of. Bullies are extremely dangerous; like a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, only it's the monster Mr. Hyde who is the real person. Dr. Jekyll is an act, just like Rhonda is in this film. Don't say I didn't warn you if this movie creeps you out.』
(The definitive wicked child) 『If you love horror films and psychological drama, you must see this film. Melodramatic performances are over-the-top. There have been many imitators; you must first meet Rhoda, the original nasty child.』
(ultimate scary movie) 『This is the ultimate scary movie. My daughters weren't allowed to watch this one until they were in Junior High. Looking back on that, I think this one should be rated for 17 years and older.
Thanks Amazon for offering such great classic thrillers.』
(Campy Classic) 『My Mother made me watch this when I was about 7 or 8. I used to bully my sister and Mom would call me "bad seed".
I remember being appalled that she would compare me to that horrible child. The moral of course was that God punishes bad children....that's what my Mom wanted me to know....and it worked........for a little while. ;)
Favorite character? Leroy of course!』
(Excellent!!!) 『A classic!!! A movie made the way a movie should be made. Good drama and good acting. An old movie that would be appreciated by all generations.』 『Movie DVD』 『"A basket full of kisses for a basket full of hugs." Those are chilling words, at least when uttered by that ice princess, Patty McCormack. As Rhoda Penmark, she is as pretty as a porcelain doll but drips venom with each curtsey and polite response. Little Rhoda's mother is terrified she has passed on her own mother's corruption. Oops, turns out she's right. This passes the test of time, as it still gets under your skin. The character development is tight and the story very involving. Not even Freddy Krueger had the ability to scare like tiny McCormack, looking just like a little adult while she literally beats out the competition for a penmanship award. However, director Mervyn LeRoy's hands were tied over the ending, which was changed from the source material--Maxwell Anderson's hit Broadway play. A supposedly more appropriate, and moral, ending was demanded by the studio. This was remade (badly) in 1985.--Rochelle O'Gorman』
price：$9.00
Echo Bridge Home Entertainment
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (For $[...] There is Nothing Better!) 『If you are paying $[...] bucks for 65 episodes of Great Entertainment dont be picky. I found this Collection while i was looking for Twilight Zone dvds, For The same Cost of 4 episodes of The Twilight Zone, you can get this! Video Quality is not the best but it is Bearable, I would have paid at least $5 bucks extra if the set was on 8 or 9 Dvds』
(Ray Bradbury DVD) 『Can't beat the price of over 60 episodes of half-hour stories. Some are outstanding and some are just okay. There are so many, so you don't have to worry about being bored. Ray is one of the best storytellers of our generation.』
(A lot of content) 『As others have mentioned - the quality is pretty bad, BUT there's a lot of content for the money, so it's certainly worth it. I've never seen these before, so it's like an all new series to me. I haven't seen them all yet, but I really like it so far. Let's see, 65 episodes at 30 minutes each = over 32 hours of content! Nice!』
(The Ray Bradberry Theater Collection) 『I liked the collection of the Bradberry Theater. It brought back memories. He had some interesting concepts and his stories about Mars are so different from todays sifi stories.』
(ray bradburys) 『for 15.00 these are good movies ive paid fifteen for some movies i wouldnt have paid one dollar for and gave them away, butt these are lot of three and four star movies for fifteen bucks one of the best buys』 『Featuring 65 Episodes! Entranced by magicians, comic strips, and science-fiction magazines, Ray Bradbury began "educating" himself at the Los Angeles Library three to five times a week. By twenty-seven years of age he "graduated," having written over several million words. In his early twenties, he supported himself by selling newspapers on street corners and writing for radio programs such as Suspense, Escape, CBS Radio Playhouse, and X Minus One. Bradbury has now written over one thousand short stories--400 of which have been published in such magazines as The New Yorker, The New Republican, The Saturday Evening Post, Amazing Stories, Colliers, Dime Detective and McCall's. He has also written for Alfred Hitchcock Presents and for Rod Serling's The Twilight Zone. And now, showcased in this 5 DVD set are some of Ray Bradbury's finest works.』
price：$14.19
Warner Home Video
Usually ships in 4 to 6 weeks Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Best) 『They made movies then, ! But then they had Quality actors {actresses} and good wriers !!!』
(San Francisco, 1937) 『I can't help it!! This is one of my favorite movies. The actors, story, writing, and most especially for me, the music. Always the music. Too bad that the music credits were not listed in the end credits.』
(San Francisco movie) 『This seller was very prompt. I would buy from them again. The movie was as I remembered it. A treasure from the past.』
(A timely gem.) 『This film is a little rough around the edges; The acting can get a little exaggerated, MacDonald's screeching is hardly attractive, and the sentimentality is clear.
But what struck me about this film is how you will never see such a thing in modern filmmaking. Nowadays a film like this would be relegated to the ghetto of "chick flick", all of the appealing and serious aspects would be taken out, and gobs of vapidity would be heaped on.
Back then Hollywood was not afraid to have a serious and religious film, backgrounded with historical importance, that nonetheless focuses mainly on a romantic plot between a man and a woman. It was not afraid to have a strong female character who goes too and fro between her suitors, despite the presence of a tiger such as Mr. Gable. It was not afraid to have a character so truly good at heart that he had not a shred of selfishness as Mr. Tracy's. And it was not afraid to have the villain not only not all bad, but with a truly sympathetic mother and who gives his life for the heroine. All sides are ultimately presented as truly human and truly a part of San Francisco: the rich and poor, the priests and the whores (though the Chinese are left in the background). It was not afraid of the symbolism of a community walking arm in arm singing a religious hymm; with a tone of purpose and seriousness which can only come from 1930s or 40s America. And it was not afraid of happy endings that actually felt real, an ending that not so subtly symbolized America's resurrection from the Great Depression as San Fransisco's recovery from the 1906 earthquake. One can only hope that, that spirit of community and maturity can return to this country. Nowadays we have the artsy indie film, the romantic comedy, the strong but secondary female character in a man's film, and everything else. But we no longer have the serious womans' film, or real community film (of which the later Studio era produced many, including Grapes of Wrath, Gone With the Wind, It's a Wonderful Life, and Best Years of Our Lives). So to say that they no longer make them like this is no hollow boast or simply nostalgic tripe, but a real reflection of what some might say a cheapening of the movies. Molly Haskell would find it a pity.』
(San Franciso) 『Great movie - thank you. Could you please carry more of the Janet MacDonald movies in DVD.』 『Romantic drama combines with humor, starpower combines with lavish spectacle and the walls come tumbling down! This Academy Award?-winning* extravanganza's street-splitting, brick-cascading, fire-raging recreation of the cataclysmic earthquake remains "one of the greatest action sequences in the history of the cinema, rivalling the chariot race in both Ben-Hurs" (Adrian Turner, Time Out Film Guide). Clark Gable plays rakish Barbary Coast kingpin Blackie Norton. Jeanette MacDonald portrays a singer torn by her love for Blackie and her need to succeed among the operagoing elite. Earning the first of nine career Best Actor Oscar? nominations,* Spencer Tracy is a priest who supplements spiritual advice with a mean right hook. He urges Blackie to change. But if love and religion can't reform Blackie, Mother Nature will.』 『"San Francisco, open your Golden Gate...." If the classic city anthem isn't part of your life already, it will be after a viewing of this 1936 hit, a wonderful blend of cornpone, spectacle, and song. It's set in 1906, the year the earthquake flattened much of Baghdad by the Bay. Like the disaster movies that followed (includingIn Old Chicago, a Fox cash-in from a couple of years later),San Franciscoslowly establishes its characters before unleashing the destruction. Clark Gable is Blackie Norton, a cocky and ruthless Barbary Coast character whose heart is--well, not softened, but at least dented by the arrival of an opera singer (Jeanette MacDonald) looking for a job. He hires her for his rowdy club, while his childhood chum, Father Tim Mullin (Spencer Tracy), disapproves. As they would subsequently demonstrate inTest PilotandBoom Town, Gable and Tracy have great he-man rapport together (Blackie's rampant maleness is challenged only by the fact that he knows the priest could punch him out). Director W.S. Van Dyke (The Thin Man) keeps everything cracking along, except for those moments when Cultcha rears its head and MacDonald sings an aria. When the quake hits, and the fire follows, the movie uncorks some really quite awesome special effects, including the unforgettable image of a street heaving up and separating under people's feet--much superior to the disaster effects inThe Last Days of Pompeii, made just a year earlier. Needless to say, this could only be MGM in its heyday, laying on the big budget, an acceptable level of naughtiness, and a dose of religious turnaround in the end. It worked then; it still does.--Robert Horton』
price：$6.99
Universal Studios
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (The Best of Lon Chaney) 『This set has the best horror work done by Lon Chaney; the original "Wolf Man" and the follow-up movie, "Wolf Man Meets Frankenstein." I know the first movie by heart and see it often on TCM during Halloween. The second movie isn't shown as often and is one of my all-time favorites.
In the "Wolf Man Meets Frankenstein," they give us a chilling atmospheric opening. Two grave robbers break into the tomb of Lawrence Talbot, who died in the first movie. I won't spoil it for you if you haven't seen it but the grave robbers learn the error of their ways. Lawrence Talbot aka The Wolf Man is free again.
I hadn't seen "Werewolf of London," or "She-Wolf of London," in years. But the addition of these two movies doesn't distract one bit from the set. In "She Wolf," Lockwood is terrific as the frightened woman who thinks she's a werewolf. She may be, but I'm not saying!
In today's world of horror, this is tame enough for family viewing. If you have very young and easily-frightened children, maybe not. It would probably earn a PG rating.』
(One of the Best of Universials Monsters.) 『I am glad to add this to my collection but at the same time. I was dissapointed by only two of the Talbot Wolfman series. I admit to having never seen the other two movies of this collection. But I look forward to seeing them. I do recommned this collection of any fan of the Classic Horror movies.』
(All time classic!!!) 『Just bought this movie and I am very happy with it. Four movies are included and each one is good. The original Wolfman is my favorite. I would highly reccomend this movie to anyone who likes classic horror films.』
(A Werewolf Collection, yes. The Wolfman Legacy, no.) 『Until now, Universal has done an amazing job with their legacy collections, condensing every Dracula, Frankenstein, Mummy, Invisible Man, and Creature from the Black Lagoon film into single, easily affordable volumes. Unfortunately, the Wolf Man Legacy collection is where that all goes wrong. This volume only contains two of the four Wolf Man films and, in place of the last two installments, includes two Universal werewolf films that have no relationship to the Wolf Man series at all.
The true crime here is that the Larry Talbot Wolf Man series is, undoubtedly, the strongest and most consistent of the Universal monster franchises. It is the only series where the monster is played by the same actor each time, and it's the only series where we actually see that character develop in believable and logical ways with each installment. Larry Talbot begins as a frightened child of a man who has no idea what to do with the cruel fate that has been inflicted upon him. By the time of Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman, he has become a stronger and more resolved character, desperately working in search of a cure. In the two remaining sequels not included in this collection (House of Frankenstein and House of Dracula), this progression goes even farther, ultimately finding Larry as a tragic hero, resigned to work toward killing himself in order to save society. It's rich, character-intensive stuff; the kind of thing you wouldn't normally expect to see in a Universal monster film, let alone a franchise sequel.
House of Frankenstein and House of Dracula are (presumably) not included in this collection because their titles suggest that they are Frankenstein and Dracula films, but this is not the case. The Frankenstein monster plays an entirely insignificant role in House of Frankenstein, being literally reanimated at the very end of the film. House of Dracula, on the other hand, features Dracula prominently throughout the film, but it is still clearly a Larry Talbot story, with Larry playing the central character with whom we identify. More importantly, while both of these films include significant character development for Talbot, they do absolutely nothing to further the stories of Count Dracula nor the Frankenstein monster. These are Wolf Man films, through and through, and they are as important to "the Wolf Man Legacy" as the first Wolf Man film included in this volume.
Well, enough whining. So long as you know that you're going to have to buy two other Legacy collections in order to follow the full Wolf Man story, here's the break down of what IS included here. Despite my low marks for this "Wolf Man Legacy Collection," all of these films are worth a viewing:
*The Wolf Man: The first film in the Larry Talbot series is possibly the least interesting. The action is slow-moving, and Larry is a bit too childish and helpless for my taste. However, Claude Rains plays a wonderfully menacing father and brings tremendously rich conflict and emotion to the story. With his help, The Wolf Man becomes a deeply psychological film, more about the conflicted relationship between prodigal son and estranged father than a blood-thirsty monster that kills people (but don't despair, monster fans! There's plenty of the latter, as well). Viewed in this light, the ending of the film is stunning in its significance.
*Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man: Possibly the best of the Wolf Man films. Here, the focus is still fixed entirely on Larry as he becomes a darker, more tragic figure, mature beyond his years, and bearing a heavy weight about him. Cheney rises to the occasion nicely, and the plot (which is far more busy and exciting than in the first film) certainly meets him part way.
*She-Wolf of London: Though the film begins as if continuing from a previous story ("The Allenby curse had almost been forgotten..."), it is entirely original and has no relationship to any other Universal werewolf picture. It's an unusual film in that the focus is neither on action nor monster make-up. In fact, you never actually SEE the She-Wolf at all. However, this slow-moving film filled with two-dimensional arch-types does one fascinating thing -- it leaves us doubting. The original plan for the first Wolf Man film was that they were never going to show the werewolf. They wanted to keep you guessing as to whether Larry really was transforming or was actually losing his mind. She-Wolf of London runs with that idea, keeping you guessing about June Lockhart's supposed transformations, and the revelation at the end is quite brilliant. If you pay careful attention, you'll probably see it coming.
*Werewolf of London: Universal's first werewolf film, pre-dating The Wolf Man by six years. It's incredibly well cast and features surprisingly strong acting for a monster picture. It also contains a lot of subtlety, such as when a drunk woman at a bar orders drinks for "two ladies" and then comically reveals that she is the two ladies. This tangential episode runs parallel to, and offers thematic insight into, a far darker aspect of the story. There's also some stunning psychological undertones, as the main character's fear and rage about losing his fiance to a former lover seems to take its form in the shape of the werewolf. It's a highly intelligent and complex script, far more than you might bargain for in a Universal monster film. Really, all that weighs the film down is the werewolf, himself. He's less of a monster, and more of an ill-tempered hairy man in a three piece suit who attacks people. He can be knocked out with a blow to the head and killed with a bullet. Theater-goers of the time complained that the film was too much like the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mister Hyde (that film had been in theaters only a few years earlier). They were certainly on to something.
So, all in all, this is a collection of excellent werewolf films, but it loses major marks for not being the full "Wolfman Legacy." I recommend purchasing this set. You will enjoy it. But the Larry Talbot story does not end here. There's so much more worth seeing in House of Frankenstein and House of Dracula, but you'll have to shell out another $45.98 for the Frankenstein and Dracula Legacy Collections in order to find this out for yourself.』
(WEREWOLF FILMS!!!!!) 『This set has great prints and I had no problems with the discs. It was great having Universal's werewolf films in one set. Good extras.』 『For the first time ever, the original The Wolf Man film comes to DVD in this extraordinary Legacy Collection. Included in the collection is the original classic, starring the renowned Lon Chaney Jr., and three timeless sequels, featuring legendary actor Bela Lugosi and others. These are the landmark films that inspired an entire genre of movies and continue to be major influences on motion pictures to this day.』
price：$5.95
Sony Pictures
Usually ships in 24 hours Core2Duoノートレビュー 's review (Maybe not entirely Bram's, but an excellent adaptation...) 『I was excited back in the day when this film was released; one of my best friends and I were ardent horror fans back then, and had both often talked of someone doing "Dracula" as it was written...I had seen Franco's "Count Dracula" on late-night television, but was anxious to see a big budget, and hopefully even more faithful, adaptation of Stoker's work.
I wasn't disappointed, per se, although I did have a major issue (more on that in a minute), but overall, I very, very much enjoyed the movie. The pageantry and scope of the scenery was marvelous. I was spellbound by the cinematography, and the eerie shadows and unearthly feel of the film, especially the sequences in Castle Dracula. I was a little put off by the red, Oriental-appearing garb that the Count wore in the beginning (although I understood the symbolism), but all in all Coppola's style and techniques made the film a very well-woven tapestry of dread and gothic style.
As far as performances go, I thought all of the acting was very well done (although I'm not a fan of Keanu Reeves' wooden style), but the standout to me was Anthony Hopkins. I dare say that his portrayal of Professor Van Helsing is the DEFINITIVE version...I take nothing from Peter Cushing, but from the book, I always pictured him as more of a swashbuckling, mystical man, one who spoke his mind and was perhaps a bit irreverent in his conviction...in short, EXACTLY as Hopkins performed him.
Now, for my issue: I was disappointed with the whole "reincarnation of lost love" theme that Coppola went with. Not only is this an old trick, but had no place in the novel at all. The only love story in the book is the love of the men who would sacrifice all to save a virtuous woman from the blackest of evil. I had looked forward to a monstrous and menacing Dracula as he was in Stoker's story, and while Oldman did a brilliant job, I was chagrined at the character being so sympathetic and played as a romantic lead. Whereas it did the movie in and of itself justice, to proclaim to be "Bram Stoker's Dracula", the addition of this element flew in the face of that claim. While I know this was done to draw a larger audience, the movie could have been as well done and beautiful without this contrivance.
A very good movie, in every way, and I highly recommend it...would have been a five-star rating if not for that one glaring departure from the story.
』
("The blood is life . . . and it shall be mine.") 『The original novel by Bram Stoker is definitely the ultimate vampire story. And this film is the definite adaptation. Dracula is everything that you can ever find in a tale about vampires. The gothic settings, the excellent performances (even Keanu does a good job here!), the blood, the music, the pacing, the cinematography, the dark humor, I mean everything about it is done right. Don't get me wrong about the legendary original 1931 film; it's a classic and still stands on its own. But I'm more for the remake. It has big-time actors such as Gary Oldman playing Dracula himself, Anthony Hopkins as Van Helsing, and Winona Ryder as Mina. Francis Ford Coppola has created another masterpiece, even though it isn't even in the same league as The Godfather trilogy and Apocalypse Now. Avoid Twilight as much as possible: Bram Stoker's Dracula is the one that must be watched (and read).』
(Awesome visuals ....but .....) 『This movie has some of the best horror cinematography I have ever seen. (And I have seen them all). It shows photography work that has never been seen before- nor since. This is by far the best Dracula "visual" ever! My main complaint is the story is mostly a visual and lacks certain elements of the acting style that we have been accustomed to in the 21st century. For example when Johnathan Harker spends all the time in Draculas castle, he sees strange things and he does not react to them. From mirrors breaking, to seeing Dracula climbing the castle walls and the weird shadow play - Harker acts like nothing is out of the ordinary. That is by far the films worst downfall. THe story line is pretty much the basic Bram Stoker story. But I will emphasize- the visuals are stunning and horrifying in this movie!』
(What Makes It Better) 『I have seen the movie so I don't need to read a synopsis about it. What I want to know is what is included on the Collector's Edition. What is on the 2 disc set and is this version better than the original DVD which I own. Is it worth buying the Collector's Edition? Is there a featured commentary, deleted scenes, etc? What makes this better than the original?
*I am rating the movie, not the Collector's Edition because I do not own the Collector's Edition*』
(Great Cast and production for Dracula fans!) 『A classic film for all lovers of Dracula with a much loved cast. One to keep in your library for a dark dreary night. There have been many Dracula films made and this is one that I would recommend if you are a fan of this famous tale.』 『Movie DVD』 『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』
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 -- -
>,Kenneth Tobey,Margaret Sheridan,Robert Cornthwaite,Douglas Spencer,James R. Young
