Reviews

John Wayne was not born to be a Director. and it shows. I don't know if and why he did not proposed this to his friend John Ford. Maybe he did, and Ford rejected. John Wayne projected himself as the Gallant hero in some scenes with a beautiful Mexican widow. He then sends her to safety, without even a kiss. This love story ends there. For the major part the plot is faithful to History. But at the end, the horror actions that Santa Ana's troops committed, is not shown. War is rarely pictured in Hollywood movies. But in this case John Wayne did it as he wanted. After all, he was also the Producer. The music is also Romantic. This movie should have been directed by Sam Peckinpah.

But this is not an Opera filmed on a theater. It is a movie. As such the scenes are not of a theatrical production and many are in exteriors. You will not see the Orchestra pit nor the Maestro.

This requires singers that are also good actors. Pavarotti, not always a good actor in the stage, comes out superb, but the best acting performance is Ingvar Wixell, as Rigoletto.

The female roles are very inferior. Edita Gruberova is totally visually inadequate for the role of Gilda, She looks like an old witch, and totally ruins all her scenes. Madallena is a bit more credible as a "putanna", with some feelings.

This movie is a miscast for both Signoret and Delon. I can understand that Signoret, needed the money and took this option. THere is nothing wrong with that. As for Alain Delon, who performed in "Cercle Rouge" made in the previous year, by Jean-Pierre Melville. This is an almost a replay. And a bad one. Mr. Pierre Grasnier Deferre is a second (if not third) rate French Director. I never read the novel by Simenon. I do not believe he is the culprit, but I admit I can be wrong. You want more lines. Here They are. Octavia Piccolo has a child and breast feeds him. The movie shows Virgin nipples. Pierre Grasnier Defferre never knew a virgin. Maybe he likes widows. Nothing wrong.

Vincente Minnelli made some of the best musical movies ever. He also fathered LIsa Minnelli. He was a womanizer of a peculiar type, one that loved women of a stronger personality than His own. In the Musical this is an advantage, The vast majority of Musical are a deserved homage to females. They always win.. REgarding the melodramas is another story. Considering just two, "The Bad and the Beautiful" and "Two weeks in another Town" they show week Men dominated by stronger Women. I cannot understand why Kirk Douglas accepts to be dominated By ex-wife Cyd Charisse and Edward G. Robinson by a nagging bitch Claire Trevor.

The recently deceased Gore Vidal would certainly provide an explanation, but he was homosexual. I do nor believe Vincente Minelli was one, even if Wikipedia makes some allusions to that.

Minelly was of Solar sign Pisces. In my small experience as Astrologer, all Pisces men are great bachelor Artists (e.g. Ravel) or servants to strong women. Mala Sorte...

This is an absolute cinema masterpiece. It is almost silent. The actors could be anyone Buddhist. No words are needed to express any feelings, just image. And very beautiful, at that. Violence when it rarely occurs, is felt, not graphically shown. This film can have many layers of interpretation. Mine is that human beings always return to their mistakes, if discipline and education are not enforced thru the whole life. That is the failure of the Rousseau based Democratic system. The Western civilization will soon collapse. The Budist system has more chances of survival, just because it is close to Nature. The fact that it was made in Korea with German Production support, perhaps financial tell it all. The Sons of Jeovah, should watch this and stop killing their brothers.

It is is Blu-Ray. Not perfect, but 80% superior to the umpteen USA DVD VERSIONS. I own two of those which like all goo were inexpensive, but not free..In the USA "public domain" means BS. That is why Criterion Collection has very few Americam films, but to be fair nor the main reason... I ignore and prefer not to refer to this version. Just tell you that the source was "Paramount France". Do your navigation...

It is is Blu-Ray. Not perfect, but 80% superior to the umpteen USA DVD VERSIONS. I own two of those which like all goo were inexpensive, but not free..In the USA "public domain" means BS. That is why Criterion Collection has very few Americam films, but to be fair nor the main reason... I ignore and prefer not to refer to this version. Just tell

Some people, think this is a Romantic Movie. They are right. Others think it is political. They are also right. I think otherwise: This movie is about the resilience of ASiatic Peoples, their capacity to suffer adversity, and ultimately their domination of our STUPID WESTERB WORLD. Sidartha Gautama will will win over your Semitic GODS, because he was just a Man. THere is a superiority of Asiatic RTeligions over Meddle Esteran one which our Chtistians adopted . I Have nothing else to say. Tell. The Movie BluRay version from STudio Canal is slightly superior to the DVD version. But no worth the extra cost, Some people, think this is a Romantic Movie. They are right. Others think it is political. They are also right. I think otherwise: This movie is about the resilience of ASiatic Peoples, their capacity to suffer adversity, and ultimately their domination of our STUPID WESTERB WORLD. Sidartha Gautama will will win over your Semitic GODS, because he was just a Man. THere is a superiority of Asiatic RTeligions over Meddle Esteran one which our Chtistians adopted . I Have nothing else to say. Tell. The Movie BluRay version from STudio Canal is slightly superior to the DVD version. But no worth the extra cost,

Did You ever asked yourself, why Alfred Hitchcock never got an Oscar? If he deserved one, and in my opinion he did, it certainly was not for this one movie. This is a Cary Grant and Grace Kelly showpiece. A very bad one, for both. It is fully artificial and the Oscar, if any, should go to dressmaker Edith Evans. Hitch never won as Oscar, because he was not a Jew. He was a Roman Catholic. American Federal Government and the American Constitution pretend to allow equal rights to every religion. It is false. America and above all Hollywood cinema are in the hands of Jewish persons, mostly producers., even today. Just look at Murdoch. And Spielberg... Alfred Hitchcock was initially trained in Cinema Techniques in Germany. He was heavily influenced by German Expressionism in his movies made in England before he went to Hollywood.

Mr. Ridley Scott is a practical man. Most , if not all English Men are a practical people. He is quite good when addressing current affairs of the World. It is totally wrong when the subject is the very far past, that his Roman Empire History and Middle age Europe. To be specific I consider Gladiator a failure. and Kingdom of Heaven a near-failure. They are both "movies for kids". I hope that this gentleman, will not be given financial support from the banks, to make more "historical action movies". There are many older good ones from the past like "Sparctacus" an "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". This is not an appraisal of Mr. Ridley Scott's over all work. He is a Great director and I like many of his movies, that deal with modern subjects. Just refrain to try "History" again. If Mr. Ridley Scott, attempts to do it again I think I have the right to say he is making the equivalent of "Propaganda" movies. For whom?. Maybe just Himself. Looks like he was not admitted to same public school.

I can see that this movie, is, in some aspects a precursor to Sam Peckinpahn's Wild Bunch. The basic plot is the same. A bunch of professional gunfighters take a job for money and end up loosing. In "Wild Bunch" they die with honor, if one can speak of Honor after a carnificine. Richards Brooks was the wrong man to direct this. A New York Jew will never understand the "Wild West". Peckinpnh had Indian ascendants and so did Anthony Man. What saves this Film is the Cinematography of master "Conrad Hall". a specialist of dark scenes in Technicolor. Claudia Cardinale is miscast as a "mexican". She does her best, but is does not fit. Peckinpah did not cast a main female role in Wild Bunch and he new exactly why.. He new the History, no need to romanticize it.

This movie Is a kind of Softened "Wild Bunch". Even if the references to the History of Mexico differ by a few decades, the main theme is the same. The Americans, more or less outlaws, side with the Native Mexicans, for a price, in Gold. Against the Mexican Spanish landlords and their corrupted politicians.

I think that the Title is Bad, since Sister Sara owns only one Mule at the beginning and trades it for a quite small donkey. The nice beast never utters a Sound. Perhaps he was underage and virgin.

This movie introduces a woman in the plot and it is perhaps its best aspect. She plays one role for almost the whole movie and changes roles at the end.

A very unrealistic Western (or Tex-Mex), pleasant to watch, but it has nothing to do with Masterpieces like the Wild Bunch.

I have seen this movie at least 5 times, none in a theatre. Since the movie is mostly dark I decided to see it in BluRay. It is still dark, but a bit more detailed on a BDP-83 and Kuro TV. Cinema is the "Art of Movement", "Theatre is the Art of words", someone qualified wrote. Masters of Cinema never forgot this. Even Stanley Kubrick in "Barry Lyndon" a slow paced film, never forgot that. His scenes are individually kind of slow, but there are so many, your forget it's slow.

Michael Cimino is not a Cinema man. He takes 3 hours to tell a story, when at most 2 was enough. I can see that David Lean, a great master, faced an identical problem with "Doctor Jivago" a slow-paced novel,like most Russian Romantic and post-Romantic literature. He managed to escape and made a cinematic version. Michael Cimino is slow, his films are boring. What makes this film watchable are just the Great male Actors and Meryl Streep.

I actually bought this thing to test if the BluRay disk (region B only, thanks FOX) would play in a region-freed DVD. It does. Yesterday I went through it all. It is a Pain. Roger Ebert was right, I only read him yesterday, it is a remake of "Gone with the Wind". A very bad one. Remaking classical movies, today 2011 is plain silly. The values are not the same, the morals have gone, the Actors and Actresses are plain crap, the script is silly and sometimes violates the History. I would not be surprised if General Douglas McArthur would have Baz Luhrman sent to the Galleys.. Australian cinema does not exist .. I actually bought this thing to test if the BluRay disk (region B only, thanks FOX) would play in a region-freed DVD. It does. Yesterday I went through it all. It is a Pain. Roger Ebert was right, I only read him yesterday, it is a remake of "Gone with the Wind". A very bad one. Remaking classical movies, today 2011 is plain silly. The values are not the same, the morals have gone, the Actors and Actresses are plain crap, the script is silly and sometimes violates the History. I would not be surprised if General Douglas McArthur would have Baz Luhrman sent to the Galleys.. Australian cinema dose not exist ..

First of all, apologies to Mr. Charles Dickens, for borrowing a title..

This movie, which i Like very much (one should never say he loves a movie, love belongs to the relation between humans of opposite sexes, not to works of art, or even God). This Movie basically, tells the same story as RIFIFI. THey are both spoken in French and acted by Frenchmen (and French Women, of course) Cercle Rouge was directed by a Frenchman (actually Alsatian) with Great French Actors (Delon, Bourvil, Périer). RIFIFI was directed by the American Jules Dassin with a Belgian actor (Jean Servais, some French, mostly the female roles, and himself plays an Italian (César, the man who breaks all safes, as Julius Caesar conquered most of Europe, both are betrayed by women). To keep it simple, which one is the best? RIFIFI, of course. It's 5 times more human, depicts Paris more correctly. I first visited Paris in January 1966. Melville with his Americam Automobiles and Jazz Bands in Cabarets, look like an idiot. Of course, he never was. Just the wrong man in the wrong place. After all his name was Grumbach..

Honour is more often associated with Military and Political duties. But, In the Middle Age and early REnaissance in Europe and UK it was associated with Fidelity to one's belief, or in case or Religious Orders to their Statutes.

This is the movie, that started it all. Some others like "The Man for all Seasons" might be more persuasive, just because they talk more.

The point is "Are Powell/Pressburger "ENGLISH MOVIES". My opinion is they are not. THey are Universal and certainly against the thoughts or the Upperclass Britons, who are mostly Thieves...

This one is a masterpiece. THere is almost no need to talk...

The Star is Gable. Cannot plays a British seaman.Looks stupid The is the worst film I saw where Charles Laughton cannot act. Probably because the Stupid director Frank (?) Whats's is name cannot direct.. The story is abridged. The Historical fact that Bligh tried and failed to pass Cape Horn, is omitted. Zero for the screenplay.

Marlon Brando's version of 1962 is overall superior, not for Marlon that play his usual vanity, but because Lewis Milestones knew what he was doing, Trevor Howard is a more credible Bligh.

Above all a film that takes place mostly at sea, must be in color.

This one is for anacrophiles..

This is good movie about Human Relationships based on Sex. It seems that, nowadays human relationships are based in Money or in Sex, Sometimes both. To me, it means, that the "so called" Artists, are no longer able to create "Works of Art". God's solution is to burn those Bastards. Since "Sodom & Gomorrah", thru the Inquisition, there is a need to "PURGE" humanity from "bad thought". This is best done by fire. And Lars Von Trier is my first candidate. Not that he is the worse, by far, but because he attempts to give "cultural credibility" to what is an "old cinema GENRE", Horror.

Horror Movies have always existed. They were designed to frigthen people in "order to behave = become normal". This movie purposes the Opposite. Go to Hell, Lars..

This film is very strange. It's form contradicts the the story all the time. The beautiful scenery of Australian wilderness and its native inhabitants honorable behave, minimizes the drama of two children lost in it. Of particular significance is the scene where the dead Father is shown dead hanging of a tree, which the children either do not see or do not react. It is a major omission..

Like Roussau, it's a charlatan'n work. With a big difference. Nicholas Roeg, at the time was a great cinematographer, and a bad director. Later on , he improved, but let's nor give this idealist's work, more than he deserves...

That is what Mr. Spielberg has been doing since Jaws (1975). The "Indiana Jones's" series has become from bad to worse. THe Latest one is simply ridiculous.

Spielberg is a semi-cultured individual in American terms. In Europan Academia he is a CLOWN. "Paglaccio" in Italian and other Latin based languages.

He re-invents culture of Europe, without ever reading Saint-Paul, Cervantes, or Gordon-Childe.

As all Jews, before and after him all he cares is to make money. That is not a fault, per Se. But he is at the service of the Jewish community, whose aim is to destroy the European Civilization..

This is one of the movies (not many) where the remake "Dangerous Liaisons" of Stephen Frears wins by a large margin.

First of all those movie had one Great Actress in Jeanne Moreau. Bur ir as an incompetent Director in Roger VAdim and some miscasts like Gérard Philippe as Valmont. Perhaps the main culprit is "Roger Vailland". I'm am very fond of "Vailland",love is novels (namely "Drôle de Jeu", but I've read them when I was too young. Nowadays I believe that is is the wrong kind of scriptwriter. Also Roger Vadim did not care for literature. Ask Brigite Bardot. This is a semi-failure. See it only id you are a fan of Jeanne Moreau. There is more eroticism in "Journal d'une Femme de Chambre" by Luis Buñuel than here, about "boudain". "morcilla" or just plain English "sausage". The Anglo-Saxons cannot make sausages and the current laws forbid to to it properly..

According to "Lucien Rebatet" in his "Histoire de la Musique" (Robert Lafont, BOUQUINS 1973 page 338) Beethoven's character was not very compatible with women. He had quite a number of "Platonic Passions" with female members of the "Vienese Aristocracy" to whom he dedicated some "sonatas". But Musicians , even composers did not qualify for Husbands of "Fine Ladies". Haydn was a "servant" of Prinz Von Esterhazy, Mozart died from drink or Poison and Bethoven was according to Rebatet a frequent customer of "street prostitutes" in Vienna. A British biographer, Newman says that Beethoven contracted syphilis, before he was 40. That he became deaf because of that, is possible, but not certain.

The Ninth Symphony was premiered on May 7, 1824 in the Kärntnertortheater in Vienna, along with the Consecration of the House Overture and the first three parts of the Missa Solemnis. This was the composer's first on-stage appearance in twelve years; the hall was packed. Although the performance was directed by Michael Umlauf the theater's Kapellmeister, Beethoven shared the stage with him quiet.

So what remains of this "Female Fantasy". Ed Harris interpretation and characterization are quite good, but too linear, based on the Painting by Ferninand Waldmüller date 1823. I have it in front of me. It shows a man that despises (perhaps hates) the World. With good reason.

I do not know which one was first released earlier in 1970 . Cannon for Cordoba is an "Europen Western" It was made in Spain. This means this is fairly inferior to Sergio Leone's so-called #Western Spaghetti and to the Real American Masterpieces of John Ford, Sam Peckinpah, Howard Hugues,John Sturges and Anthony Mann, in my order of merit. This order is not to be interpreted as all John Ford Westerns are better than all by Sam Peckipahn's. I think IMDb's 100 Sort them out all pretty well.

The worse about this firm is the Casting. George Peppard is fit for a sergeant's role, Raff Valone for a "Maffia Capo" and Giovanna Ralli to a "puttana" in "Piazza Vennezia" in the sixty's in Rome.

As most as you know William Wyler was a Jew Born in Austria. He tried hard to understand the American mentality. if such thing exists. The Americans liked that and gave him 4 Oscars. But his view of the West it not the standard view. Why?

1 - The hero is not a hot-headed, trigger fast American of the westerns...HE is someone like British Navy's Admiral Nelson, with the exception that Nelson did not went ashore into the desert of Egypt, because his crew of sailors would die of disease or Napoleon's army.. This man is a strategist. Most American's (even Today, Warren Buffett excepted) are not.

2-It shows that Americans, have no moral values.. This is illustrated mainly by the opportunistic acts of Pat Terril (Carrol Baker, very well directed) and the sensible,strong and resistant behaviour of Julie Maragon (Jean Simmons) which is a grand-dougther of a Spaniard).

3 - So that no doubts are left, Wyler ends the movie with an Englishman, a Spanish descendant woman and a Mexican humble servant as winners.

Rightly so, Mr Wyler. Many Americans are trash...Even today...

And, as such, the script cannot be left on the hands on two women.

Now, I'm willingly admit that a single woman would do better than two...

The movie lacks a tight narrative flow. There are too may detours like the Indian's party, which seem to be there to enliven the trivial story. This does not work, at all.

It is a pity that great actors like Uma Thurmann and others are wasted in such films.

I'm absolutely convinced that American viewer's are fed up with such trivia. It's just for Adolescents...