The Road Warrior (1982) Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)I'm saying "finally" because we've finally received a version of the Road Warrior that looks outstanding! The picture looks the best I've ever seen and while the sound isn't as great in terms of bass reproduction, it still sounds very clear, just a tiny bit lackluster. Several of the scenes have a bit of softness to them probably due to age but I'd say about 95% of the film looks crystal clear. There aren't many extras other than an introduction by film critic Leonard Maltin and a filmmaker commentary. A bit lacking in the extras department but the commentary is informative enough for film enthusiasts and fans of the film. It'd be nice to get a retrospective documentary one day on this classic.
At the end of the day, the movie is delivered in an above average presentation and definitely worth a peek in HD.

Click Here to see more reviews about: The Road Warrior (1982)

In a post-nuclear war world, Gibson plays Max, a lone adventurer who drives the roads of outback Australia in an endless search for gasoline. His opponents include Lord Humungus, and they battle over a tiny band of civilized survivors and their horde of fuel.Genre: Feature Film-Action/AdventureRating: RRelease Date: 3-FEB-2004Media Type: DVD

Get 33% OFF

Click here for more information about The Road Warrior (1982)

Mel Gibson's Apocalypto (Widescreen Edition) (2006) Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)Even with all the controversy surrounding Mel Gibson last year (and doesn't it seem as if each new week brings another celebrity meltdown?), I still looked forward to seeing "Apocalypto." Why? If for no other reason--the subject matter, subtitles, and lack of star power made it a bold choice for a major studio release. Films of this nature generally go into limited distribution to develop an audience and critical word of mouth before expanding, if they ever do. But with Gibson at the helm, "Apocalypto" debuted with much fanfare and backing just in time to be considered for 2006's Academy Awards. For some reason, though, I still missed "Apocalypto" at the theaters. I have heard every description imaginable from those that have seen the film--from the "best movie ever" to "excessively violent and disturbing." And while I wouldn't go to either of those extremes, "Apocalypto" is certainly an accomplished adventure picture.

Set in ancient Mayan times, "Apocalypto" is essentially the harrowing journey of one man, a youth named Jaguar Paw (a convincing Rudy Youngblood). Living a simple and isolated existence, his tribe are very at home within the forest. One day, the unthinkable happens. They are attacked by another group with apparent intentions of enslaving whomever they don't kill. Youngblood's wife and son are stranded in an underground well, many others are murdered, and Youngblood is among a dozen or so who are rounded up and marched out in bondage. The subsequent journey leads to a fantastical temple sequence, where it becomes clear that the prisoners are not to become slaves--but sacrifices. The remainder of the film deals with how Youngblood can escape this situation. The temple scenes feature a cast of thousands, ritualistic and brutal slayings, and a mob mania that is terrifying and believable. Racing against the clock to save his wife, Youngblood must escape back through the jungle--where all he has to help him are his cunning and an almost spiritual connection to his surroundings. The action is practically nonstop, it's inventive, and it is beautifully staged. Much of "Apocalypto," therefore, is absolutely riveting and wildly entertaining.

For the purists who will debate the film's historical accuracy, I will neither deny or confirm the legitimacy of the events that transpire within "Apocalypto." While there do seem to be some liberties taken with the historical timeline (as evidenced by a surprise in the ending--which I enjoyed despite its implausibility), I really don't think that this film aspires to be a "historical document." Gibson has made an adventure story using a Mayan backdrop. The feel and look of his picture stay as valid as possible to the timeframe, however, I never interpreted this picture as a "true" story. Guess what? Fictional liberties are taken in every motion picture. Otherwise every motion picture would be a documentary--and even documentaries have an angle or slant which make them less than "true" in many cases. "Apocalypto," at heart, is an effective action picture that makes interesting use of its Mayan setting.

I guess "Apocalypto" is not for the squeamish--however, the violence depicted is by no means unusual by modern film standards. You can see much worse in today's "torture" cinema, those films that pass for horror with current audiences. I suppose what makes "Apocalypto" more vivid is that the violence is in a believable context. There are some beheadings and some hunting scenes, but the brutality is intrinsic to the story "Apocalypto" is telling. I don't believe serious minded filmgoers will be put off by seeing some savagery depicted in a film about ancient Mayan cultures--it's not as if this is a Merchant/Ivory production with tea parties and witty banter.

I do recommend "Apocalypto." Beautifully filmed, the technical merits of the film are beyond reproach. The cinematography, score, and editing all enhance this exciting tale. I imagine these elements really shone bright for those who saw this on the big screen. A great action picture that is for adults--check it out. KGHarris, 03/07.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Mel Gibson's Apocalypto (Widescreen Edition) (2006)

From Mel Gibson, director of THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST and the Academy Award®-winning BRAVEHEART (Best Director, Best Picture, 1995) comes the thrilling historical epic APOCALYPTO. This intense, nonstop action-adventure transports you to an ancient South American civilization, for an experience unlike anything you’ve ever known. In the twilight of the mysterious Mayan culture, young Jaguar Paw is captured and taken to the great Mayan city where he faces a harrowing end. Driven by the power of his love for his wife and son, he makes an adrenaline-soaked, heart-racing escape to rescue them and ultimately save his way of life. Filled with unrelenting action and stunning cinematography, APOCALYPTO is an enthralling and unforgettable film experience.'

Get 37% OFF

Click here for more information about Mel Gibson's Apocalypto (Widescreen Edition) (2006)

Signs (Vista Series) (2002) Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)War of the Worlds had great special effects but drove me crazy with bad character development and irritating, disrespectful kids. I can understand why they were like that, but it grated on me throughout the movie.
Signs, on the otherhand, went the opposite way. Very little special effects, but far better character development. You cared about the people so that when they were under threat, you wanted to jump into the movie and protect them. The overall theme of the movie is that there is a reason for everything--even disabilities and tragedy. This is a very difficult concept to portray and I have to hand it to writer/director Shyamalan for giving us something different than the average "scary UFO" action flick. This movie had true substance and ventured into topics and subjects that the typical Hollywood movie lacks.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Signs (Vista Series) (2002)

From M. Night Shyamalan, the writer/director of THE SIXTH SENSE and UNBREAKABLE, comes the story of the Hess family in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, who wake up one morning to find a 500-foot crop circle in their backyard. Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) and his family are told extraterrestrials are responsible for the sign in their field. They watch, with growing dread, the news of crop circles being found all over the world. SIGNS is the emotional story of one family on one farm as they encounter the terrifying last moments of life as the world is being invaded. "It's easy for a filmmaker to blow up the world -- but what Shyamalan does is much riskier. He tries to blow our minds. I was engaged by every inch of SIGNS." - Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper.

Get 51% OFF

Click here for more information about Signs (Vista Series) (2002)

Hamlet (1991) Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)Once again, I'd like to give a half-star rating, but alas . . .
As my by-line indicates, I am a former high school teacher. Without exception, this is the version of Hamlet that is a class-room favorite. (I show 2 others: Branaugh (2nd place) and the film starring Ethan Hawke (everyone hates it).) It is accessible to younger viewers and is just a beautiful film all around.
The filming, camera work and sets are impeccable. One is instantly transported into the world these characters inhabit. As to the script, it IS heavily edited; however, most of what is omitted (see note below) is "shown" to the audience through visual media. This isn't a "filmed version of the play"; it is a film based on the play. In that framework, it is quite well done. I particularly like the beginning scenes that make Hamlet's description of his mother - "Like Niobe, all tears" - come to life.
The acting, to my thinking, is superb. The emphasis here is on Hamlet's relationship to his mother, Gertrude. That comes through quite clearly. Gibson's Hamlet comes across as a soldier - a man of action - who agonizes over the eternal consequences of his acts. He is believable in the role, masterful in some ways. Likewise the supporting cast. Helena Bonham-Carter and Glenn Close provide particularly vibrant portrayals of their characters.
So, why not 5 stars? Without the "Fortinbras" subplot, some of the urgency in the play seems missing. While definitely a secondary story-line, it provides a framework that adds tension to the play as a whole as the war is waged both outside the castle walls and within.
Overall, this production gets an A. Very accessible. Very easily understood. And haunting in its own way.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Hamlet (1991)

Treachery.Madness. Murder.The story of Hamlet has been told for 400 years...but it's never been told like this!Mel Gibson (the Mad Max and Lethal Weapon films) takes on his richest part to date, the title role in a dynamic new version of Shakespeare's Hamlet.Directed by Franco Zeffirelli (Romeo and Juliet, Jesus of Nazareth), the location-shot production has a sumptuous look that won Academy Award nominations for Art Direction and Costume Design.Gibson plays the prince of medieval-era Denmark, who senses treachery behind his royal father's death.Glenn Close (Fatal Attraction, Dangerous Liaisons) plays Hamlet's mother Gertrude, all too dangerously entangled in that treachery.A brilliant supporting cast, including Alan Bates as Claudius, Paul Scofield as the ghost of Hamlet's father, Ian Holm as Polonius and Helena Bonham-Carter as Ophelia, adds its powerful presence to this immortal tale of high adventure and evil deeds.Big, bold and heroic, this is a vivid and virile Hamlet for the modern age and all time.

Get 60% OFF

Click here for more information about Hamlet (1991)

We Were Soldiers (Widescreen Edition) (2002) Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)I live with a Vietnam Vet who served in the late 1960s with 1st Cav. Medivac. During service he earned two Purple Hearts, the Distinguished Flying Cross, and the Air Medal. Since WE WERE SOLDIERS concerns the 1st Cav., Randy wanted to see it. I reluctantly agreed; I am not partial to war films and I dislike Mel Gibson, and Randy is very hard on Vietnam War films. He dismisses PLATOON as a Hollywood 8x10 glossy; says APOCALYPSE NOW is an interesting movie that captures the paranoia, but all the technical details are wrong; and describes DEER HUNTER as excellent in its depiction of the strangeness of coming home but so full of plot holes that he can hardly endure it. And about one and all he says: "It wasn't like that."
He was silent through the film, and when we left the theatre I asked what he thought. He said, "They finally got it. That's what it was like. All the details are right. The actors were just like the men I knew. They looked like that and they talked like that. And the army wives too, they really were like that, at least every one I ever knew." The he was silent for a long time. At last he said, "You remember the scene where the guy tries to pick up a burn victim by the legs and all the skin slides off? Something like that happened to me once. It was at a helicopter crash. I went to pick him up and all the skin just slid right off. It looked just like that, too. I've never told any one about it."
In most respects WE WERE SOLDIERS is a war movie plain and simple. There are several moments when the film relates the war to the politics and social movements that swirled about it, and the near destruction of the 1st. Cav.'s 7th Battalion at Ia Drang clearly arises from the top brass' foolish decision to send the 7th into an obvious ambush--but the film is not so much interested in what was going on at home or at the army's top as it is in what was actually occurring on the ground. And in this it is extremely meticulous, detailed, and often horrifically successful. Neither Randy nor I--nor any one in the theatre I could see--was bored by or dismissive of the film. It grabs you and it grabs you hard, and I can easily say that it is one of the finest war movies I have ever seen, far superior to the likes of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, which seems quite tame in comparison.
Perhaps the single most impressive thing about the film is that it never casts its characters in a heroic light; they are simply soldiers who have been sent to do a job, and they do it knowing the risks, and they do it well in spite of the odds. Mel Gibson, although I generally despise him as both an actor and a human being, is very, very good as commanding officer Hal Moore, and he is equaled by Sam Elliot, Greg Kinnear, Chris Klein, and every other actor on the battlefield. The supporting female cast, seen early in the film and in shorter scenes showing the home front as the battle rages, is also particularly fine, with Julie Moore able to convey in glance what most actresses could not communicate in five pages of dialogue. The script, direction, cinematography, and special effects are sharp, fast, and possess a "you are there" quality that is very powerful.
Randy did have a criticism. "I don't think there would be time for casualty telegrams to actually get home while the battle was going on," he said. "After all, it only lasted three days." I myself had a criticism; there were points in the film when I found the use of a very modernistic, new-agey piece of music to be intrusive and out of place. And we both felt that a scene near the end of the movie, when a Vietnamese commander comments on the battle, to be improbable and faintly absurd. But these are nit-picky quibbles. WE WERE SOLDIERS is a damn fine movie. I'll give Randy, who served two tours of duty in Vietnam, the last word: "It may not be 'the' Vietnam movie. I don't think there could ever be 'the' Vietnam movie. But they get everything right. That's how it looked and sounded, and that's what I saw, and this is the best movie about Vietnam I've ever seen."

Click Here to see more reviews about: We Were Soldiers (Widescreen Edition) (2002)

WE WERE SOLDIERS - DVD Movie

Get 27% OFF

Click here for more information about We Were Soldiers (Widescreen Edition) (2002)

Edge of Darkness (2009) Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)"Edge of Darkness was a sensation when it first aired on British television in 1985. Aired on PBS in the United States, it was a dark, brooding thriller that seemed destined for a big-screen version that would be found lacking in ways big and small. However, Mel Gibson's 2010 version of the story still provides a lot of the sadness, bitterness, and intrigue with some changes that while they do necessarily improve the story, they don't damage it, either.
Gibson plays Tom Craven (played as Ron Craven by Bob Peck in the original), a widowed Boston Homicide detective eagerly awaiting the visit of his only child Emma, who works for a research facility, Northmoor. Soon into the visit, Craven sees that his daughter is very ill. Just as he is taking her to the hospital, she is shot and killed. Being a police officer, Craven immediately assumes that the bullet was meant for him, but upon investigating further, he soon learns that she was involved in the illegal entry of Northmoor by a protest group looking for evidence of wrongdoing by the corporation. A conspiracy begins to surround Craven that includes Northmoor, a US senator, and a shadowy government fixer named Jedburgh, played by Roy Winstone.
Gibson is always in his element in revenge thrillers, and Edge of Darkness is no exception. His tears, anger, rage, and righteous indignation strike the right notes at the right time, and he is ably supported by an excellent script and solid supporting cast. Again, a few details have been changed, but the general story remains bleak with perhaps a little more Hollywood hope and optimism added for good measure.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Edge of Darkness (2009)

The bullet that killed his daughter was meant for Boston cop Thomas Craven. That’s what police brass and Craven himself think, but that’s not what the investigation finds. Clue after clue and witness after witness, the search leads him into a shadowy realm where money and political intrigue intersect. If Craven wasn’t a target before, he--and anyone linked to his inquiry--now is. Mel Gibson stars in his first screen lead in eight years, making Craven’s grief palpable and his quest for payback stone-cold and relentless. Martin Campbell (Casino Royale) directs from a screenplay co-written by The Departed’s William Monahan. Gibson is back, taking us to the edge…and into the sinister darkness.

Get 45% OFF

Click here for more information about Edge of Darkness (2009)