Reviews

Born (in 1959) and raised in Los Angeles, I am always interested in what was going on in other parts of the city without my knowledge during the years I was growing up in the San Gabriel Valley suburbs. This was a very well done documentary and I applaud the efforts of everyone involved.

It is not easy to understand growing up without any hope for success or advancement in life, but that seems to be a main theme of this film.

So sad to see that many of the residents from these cities have never seen the Pacific ocean, even though they are merely 10 miles away, becuase they feel more secure in remaining in their neighborhood.

The film showed authentic grade school pictures of children from these neighborhoods, which really broke my heart, seeing how they started out just like all other little kids, but then their lives take a turn toward violence and hopelessness.

The persons interviewed offered a lot of honest assessments as to why things are the way they are, but there were actually many factors offered in the film.

I enjoyed the film's perspective of the history of the black family in American and their migration from the south to throughout the United States following WWII.

The film toughed on the epidemic of fatherlessness, which many consider to be a major reason for their conditions and plights.

The film also talked about the lack of jobs (for example, the GM plant located in South Gate closed in 1982) as a reason for a lot of the poverty.

The film also touched on the problems of drugs, and the reason so many men are in prison for non-violent crimes.

While the film also interviewed left-wing social and political activist, Tom Hayden, it completely remained neutral in its politics and refused to lay blame on any actual policy. Which may or may not have contributed to the rise in gang activity.

One very powerful story featured the death of a young man who was in town to visit a relative. He believed that he should be able to walk any streets within the United States of America, and refused to believe he could be in any danger. Very tragic story.

Kudos to the film makers of this documentary for providing a thoughtful insight as to the conditions that have caused so much sadness to so many people.

I can't improve on the.13 preceding reviews and their recaps of the episode, but I will offer some personal thoughts. True, as already stated, there is no explanation as to how Salvadore Ross has acquired this ability to trade and later buy his desired human characteristics, but this is the Twilight Zone. We don't need to know. That's why it's science fiction.

I'm always impressed by how so many veteran actors really respected Rod Serling and put their hearts into their work for him. Don Gordon is perfectly cast as the uneducated, working class, manners-challenged, cynical type who has his heart set on winning over the lovely Leah (Gail Kobe). No mention is made as to how they met, but as she's a social worker of some sort, I always assumed they met in such a capacity, like maybe he was working off community hours where she was working. When the episode opens, we learn that they had been dating for a little long, and that she had already broken it off. But she should have known better and never gotten involved with someone so obviously below her standards. What's immediately noticeable is his poor grammar and his lack of manners by the way he treats her and her wheel-chair bound father, well played by the great Vaughn Taylor. The old man in the hospital room is played superbly by J. Pat O'Malley.

After Ross trades his youth to the mega-wealthy but elderly Mr Halpert, he begins selling his years to the young men who work at the swanky hotel where he now lives, in order to become young again. This usually happens over night, gaining a year of youth at a time, except for the morbid scene in elevator where he gains 10 years of youth by the end of the elevator ride. This was a little far fetched and out of character, but it was creepy as intended.

Sal returns to seek out Leah at her home, and while waiting for her to return, insults her father, calling him a "loser." Definitely not the way to win friends and influence people. But he is now well dressed and his speaking with proper English. What's amazing to me is when he's asked by Mr Maitlin if he loves his daughter, why does he not answer "yes?" Seems to me any schmuck seeking to win over a daughter would easily lie.

A great episode, one I enjoy watching over and over again.

The problem with a gangster film featuring Robert DeNiro is the tendency to expect something along the lines of "Goodfellas" or "Casino" or "The Godfather," but you have forget those classics to watch this with an open mind, This is the brainchild of Chazz Palminteri and Robert DeNiro, the latter in the director's chair, and is the story of a bus-driver father trying to raise his son with the American values of hard work, self pride and honesty in a neighborhood where the underground gangsters run a lot of things and have a lot of money. Little Calogero, later "C" witnesses the neighborhood godfather, "Sonny" kill someone and refuses to identify him to the police, after which Sonny takes him under his wing and takes a liking to him as his own in order to teach him his own ways and thinking.

"The working man is a sucker," his son learns from Sonny, while his dad has to teach him that the working man is the true hero by taking care of his family and never has to look over his shoulder.

Little "C" participates in the gangsters' crapshoot game garners a lot of money in tips, which his father finds, and gives it back to Sonny, even to the dismay of his wife, as they are poor and could really use the money.

The music entries are executed superbly! Lorenzo (DeNiro) listens to the jazz station on his portable radio, which would have better to have used actual recordings from the '60s Blue Note and Prestige library, instead of using newer recordings made to sound vintage. The soundtrack had no trouble getting the licensing permission to use original '50s and '60s pop recordings, so why not use original jazz recordings? But in the scene on the bus where he first sees his love interest and can't take his eyes off her, they segue from some smooth jazz from the bus driver's radio, to Wilson Pickett's "Ninety-Nine and a Half," which is blasting from the local record shop when they reach the black neighborhood. Later, when C is getting ready for his date with his new love (played by the lovelyTaral Hicks), he looks into the mirror and snaps his fingers to kick off the drums of "Baby, I Need Your Loving" by the Four Tops into the next scene. I love that kind of editing and splicingI In spite of the violent scenes, the biker scene in the bar, and the Italian youngsters' rage over their black peers riding their bikes through their neighborhood and then later paying for it with their lives, the movie has many touching moments and good morals to teach. No, don't expect a Scorcese knock off, but enjoy it for what it is and not for what you were hoping for.

Seinfeld at its peak. Al shows start slow, peak, and then run out of ideas to keep them sustainable, but in 1994 this show was hot, the perfect combination of writing and situations.

The gang heads for the ritzy Hamptons for a weekend to see their friends' recently born baby and to enjoy the sand and surf. George heads out there with a date, who is evidently not committed as a "girlfriend" and George naturally jumps to the assumption that this overnighter will automatically move the friendship to consummation. WRONG!!! Never make such an assumption or you'll get your feelings crushed. Keep it as friends and you'll be okay, even if she decides to walk around topless around your friends.

Elaine quickly falls for the good looks of their hosts' pediatrician and is just as quickly disappointed when he uses the word "breathtaking" to describe her, but also uses the same adjective to describe the hosts' baby, which we do not get to see, but who is evidently homely for a baby.

"A little too much chlorine in that gene pool." What a great line.

Kramer goes to the beach and poaches one of the lobster traps and becomes a hero, that is until their host finds out about it and reports him to the local authorities, which wins Kramer some well deserved community hours.

Jerry's girlfriend Rachel obviously does not like George from the get-go and is not very friendly toward him, which sets the scene for the events to come. George is terribly upset that Jerry and Kramer got to see Jane topless while he was gone to pick up tomatoes. He definitely should have waited. In typical childish fashion, he now wants to see Rachel topless. "The punishment should fit the crime." Yeah, right. He tries walking in on her while she's changing but misses, but then the tables are turned when Rachel accidently walks in on him while he's getting out of his wet swim trunks, she finds him in a shrunken state, and giggles as she apologizes. George is paralyzed with embarrassment. "I was in the pool, I was in the pool!" She then evidently mentions it to Jane, who then happens to finds some reason to go back on home. Of course, George wants to believe it was due to the "shrinkage" factor. Again, he should not have wanted to get serious way too soon.

George, in his own immature mind, gets even by preparing eggs for breakfast for everyone, and sneaks in some lobster into the mix, knowing Rachel only eats kosher meals. That was a real cheap shot, to hurt someone and make them go against their religious vows without their knowing.

Truly one of the classic episodes.

The Flintstones went through the same fate as most other shows. Season 1, the artwork was a little raw and characters are still being developed. By Season 3, the show the show has found its stride, but by Season 6, the writers were clearly running out of ideas, the artwork was different, even their personalities had changed somewhat. This episode was outright silly, with Wilma's ex-boyfriend who calls on her, who is perfect in every way, and makes Fred's extremely jealous. The episode does imply infidelity, may be inappropriate for a family audience but this was 1966 and times were changing. There were still some memorable episodes during their final seasons, such as the upcoming "Dripper" episode, but it was mostly hit or miss during their final years.

This ain't McGyver. Maybe McGyver in name only. MINO. Richard Dean Anderson was McGyver. The reason we liked McGyver was because he was a.devout bachelor, free and independent, and worked alone. The girls watched him weekly because he was forever available, the guys because he was a crime fighting superhero. It was a formula that worked. (Remember Knight Rider with David Hasselhoff?) With the exception of the name, and the little narrations, this rehashing of the old show bears little resemblance to the original. RD Anderson's McGyver was humble, down to earth, gracious, polite and likable, and the show was not just another "A-Team, Mission:Impossible, Leverage" team collaboration.

Today they are equipped with the latest and greatest crime fighting, detecting, technological, face recognition computer devices imaginable, which I find fascinating, but all in all, they really should have named it something else.

I caught the reruns of this show during the early '70s on the local UHF channel in Los Angeles. I was in junior high and KHJ-FM became KRTH-FM with a format of purely 1954- 1964 rock and pop hits. I was addicted to anything on TV that reflected the fabulous '50s; cars, fashion, and Highway Patrol was on top of the list. The plots weren't the greatest, but we got to watch the seedy side of life lose to the side of law and order. Familiar faces like Clint Eastwood, Leonard Nimoy, Robert Conrad and Ed Nelson made early appearances in their careers, very cool GM and Ford classic convertibles with yellow California license plates (although the CALIFORNIA was taped over, maybe so that no viewers across the nation would feel left out), but the brawny Broderick Crawford with his "2150-by" always got his man (or woman, as there were several episodes featuring a plot with delinquent women. The DVD collection is out, a very worthwhile investment for those weekend family home marathons.

Good comedy is based on good writing but Larry and Jerry really IMO had a knack for keeping an eye open and finding humor in every day situations ("nothing" situations) and bringing them out to the public. Everyone can relate, and this is the same with the characters. We, especially the baby boomers all "know someone like that," we say. But Seinfeld can make the littlest things or remarks funny, and that's because they're true. Many women have no girl buddies, and Kramer points it out so matter-of-factly as only he can do so perfectly. The world's collide theory bears true for so many people, especially insecure, neurotic men with domineering girlfriends/wives. Then there's Ramon who, like Kenny Bania, longs to have Jerry as a friend after they run into each other (with Kramer) at the theater. Jerry immediately tries to discourage him, even telling Kramer to lean in and pretend they're talking so that Ramon will keep on walking. Jerry perhaps perceives the two as having nothing in common, and it's confirmed when they ride the subway and Ramon seems to be bent on talking constantly about his experiences while working as a pool guy. Later, when Ramon almost drowns after Newman cannonball's into the pool, Seinfeld and Kramer, true to shallow and selfish form, refuse to give Ramon mouth-to-mouth and get banned from the health club. George, meanwhile on the other end of the script, is upset that Elaine and his fiancé have become friends and the usual foursome have become a fivesome, which squeezes George out. George is quite miserable in this episode, but only because Susan has entered his sacred sanctuary of Jerry, Kramer, and Elaine, and he doesn't know how to act. It's as if his personality must change in order for him to adapt to his life with Susan vs, his life with his friends, and he is unable to do that. Luckily, Susan is unable to adapt to the Jerry-Elaine-Kramer world after she goes to the movies with Jerry and Elaine and annoy Susan by talking all through it. But Susan then expresses her displeasure with the way they go to Jerry's apartment and just talk, and then they go out to eat and just talk... and in a succinct nutshell summarizes what makes the Seinfeld show so successful. Excellent.

How sad, by 1958 the Three Stooges were really on their last legs, and this was so disturbing to watch, I felt so bad for the boys! And I thought Cuckoo on a Choo Choo was awful! And it's not because of Joe Besser, some of their films with him were pretty funny. But this one is over the top, overacting, exaggerated, but not really funny, seemed more like just a vehicle to introduce the latest future starlet under contract to the studio. Never heard from poor Fifi again. Love you guys, but it was definitely time to hang it up and wait for your cartoon series..

Gripping episode with a disturbing climax and then a happy ending. Not just another based on the ancient three wishes, this one is set in mid-century and really makes you think. What would I do if I won the lottery? This episode is played so well by veteran actors Luther Adler and Vivi Janiss, who really play their parts to perfection as husband and wife owners of a curio shop on the brink of bankruptcy, and yet the proprietor Arthur Castle can't help taking in worthless items from the poor, desperate people of the local neighborhood, much to his wife's disappointment, but it does shine a light into his sweet, sympathetic nature. From a worthless wine bottle pours out smoke and with it, a dapper genie (love his vest!) played by Joseph Ruskin, who didn't usually play these kinds of characters, and brings an eeriness to role as he explains the three wishes contract. Maybe he represents temptation, I don't know. But just for the sake of argument and to prove the genie is real, they ask for something simple; the mending of the unsightly cracked window in their front display case. When this is done, they next ask for a ton of money and unselfishly give a ton of it away to the poor neighbors, but without considering the visitation from the taxman (Olan Soule, another legendary character actor who's appeared in a billion TV shows). Now they owe a ton of money to the government, which they no longer have and now have to cancel their trip to Europe. The third wish, which Mr Castle carefully considers to make sure there are no negative consequences ("Consequences, Mr Castle?" asks the genie with a devilish grin). The rest you have to see, it's pretty gruesome. Wish number four brings them back to where they started, having now realized that their sweet, little old failing curio shop doesn't look that bad after all. It's sweet that Mrs Castle points out how they came out ahead, having no longer to look at that ugly swirl of cracked glass on their display window. For a moment you rejoice with them, until Mr Castle accidentally hits the glass with his broom in exactly the same place, same swirl--- back to where they started, but now they are able to laugh together about it after having suffered through the consequences of three wishes. A great life's lesson.

I always liked that line from the real estate agent, he uses it repetitively and it's so antiquated today. Episode shoulda been titled, "You can go home again." But wow, Phyllis Thaxter worked a lot during this era, which explains why she plays her part to perfection. So where were we? We label our leading man a momma's boy but isn't he just a product of his environment? He seems to have been raised without a Dad, or without siblings, which are enormous crosses to bear. He is truly unwilling or maybe unable to detach from the wonderful times of growing up spoiled. He truly is not healthy husband material except for women who forever need to be a mommy figure to their mates, much less willing to wait 12+ years for it. 12 years! He obviously is educated enough to hold a job but you'd think he was about to come into an inheritance! My favorite part of the episode was when big Alex actually shows some backbone and declares his change of mind in selling the house. He was finally starting to talk like a man! And doncha just love the look on the realtor's face? Great early American interior furnishings and appliances are pleasing to the eye but the episode took a mean turn when little Alex angrily tells his soon-to-be ex-wife, "Go away, lady, we no longer need you!" True, she should have chosen more carefully and made wiser life's choices but she (or any woman) didn't deserve to be treated like that. He could have said it kinder without the episode losing its point. I don't know, I could be wrong.

I'm not a follower of trends and I hadn't watched sitcoms since the '70s, so my first watched episode of Seinfeld was not until the 5th season--- The Dinner Party, and only because my late girlfriend wanted to watch it, but in all honesty, I liked it immediately. I'd never seen a sitcom based on such random, loose, situations, lines, quotes, and silly dialogue. I.e. "You like saying Gor-tex, don't you?" or "You're getting to be a little annoying chore yourself," and the scene at the newsstand was hilarious, with the attendant: "Keep going..." Very original sitcom, and clearly aimed at the baby boomer generation, without a doubt. Maybe this is why it was so successful, being aimed at such a huge demographic and references to things only baby boomers would get: (GEORGE: How could I possibly interfere? JERRY: Isn't that what Jack Ruby said?): . But oh, the revolving topics: single guys, dating, relationships, the challenges, the struggles, the conflicts, and the insecurities, all relatable to this generation and something everyone could identify with. We all have a little of each character in all of us. Kramer's simplicity and blatant honesty, George's neurotic insecurities, Jerry was the straight guy with all the zaniness around him, but with his own quirks as well, etc, My only criticism with the show was there is no way in real life someone looking and behaving as shallow as George would ever attract such a bevy of beautiful girls, but hey, great job people. The reruns will go on forever, like I Love Lucy.

Perry Mason came on last night at 10'30 as usual and lo and behold, there was Gary Lockwood playing the role of a boxer in "The Case of the Playboy Pugilist." Wait a minute, was he an amateur boxer before he got into acting? Because I recalled seeing him as boxer Jimmy Spencer in this Starsky & Hutch episode from season 3, "The Heavyweight." Good story, good plot about gangsters, smuggling, fight fixing, and doing the right thing. Here, Hutch shows the true passion and dedication of a straight cop, more than usual, while Starsky spends most of the episode trying to date a kind of pretty but very ditzy blonde stewardess. An undercover cop is killed on the docks warehouse after he discovers some smuggling going on and Spencer (while working on the docks for sleazy boxing promotor and well-connected gangster Haley Gavin) witnesses it all. S & H get undercover jobs as dock workers and soon realize something shady going on. Spencer is ordered by Gavin to throw his next fight but when he instead knocks out his opponent, he immediately finds himself confronted by Gavin's gorilla henchmen. S & H try to convince Spencer into testifying against Gavin but is too scared. But when Spencer's best friend and manager, Jeeter (well played by Sandford & Son veteran, Whitman Mayo) sells him out to Gavin, Spencer decides he's had enough and resolves to meet Gavin and his gorillas face to face. S & H arrive just in time to avert the ambush and Spencer gratefully decides to testify against Gavin. Exciting and suspenseful episode from the elusive 3rd season.

Only took a few episodes, and I'd seen enough. It's like L.A. Law office culture revisited in fake 1960's American business culture where the producers aim to draw a picture of every person's fantasy. It's really a romance novel, with wealthy eye candy for the women viewers, scantily clad shapely secretaries for the men, in a world where money and sex are everything, but at least it ultimately concludes by showing how miserable everyone is. It's extremely deceptive in its depiction of showing all persons as rude, crude, politically incorrect and with absolutely no self control of their language, much less their hormones. The women are portrayed as feminists who are justified to cheat on their mates, the men portrayed as money grubbing bigots who voted for Goldwater. Nothing new or surprising here. The '60s wardrobes and cars (the cars are more 1950s and are out of place in a well-to-do 1968 suburbia) are novel if a little too cliché, the references to the products of yesteryear are a nice touch, but not enough to save this schlock soap opera unless you really have no life and nothing else to do or watch.

Pretty cool episode, a little confusing to someone like me who really has no idea how bail bond companies work but anyhow.. As far as I can tell, this crooked company bail bond company has the hammerlocks on some poor stuttering arsonist who wants out. The company is run by the once beautiful Lola Albright, and her dimwit accomplice (Ramon Bieri), who murders the poor guy and then has to continue setting fires to keep S&H thinking he's still alive, so he keeps them on a wild goose chase. Our heroes eventually figure it out and the villains are eventually brought to justice. The hardest part was seeing the gorgeous jazz vocalist Lola Albright as a criminal, as she has always played the sweet and wholesome types (most fondly remembered as Peter Gunn's girlfriend, Edie on the 1950s TV series) and I did not even recognize her here because of her mean nature. Also appearing in this episode is the very beautiful Sherry Jackson, one of my favorite pretty girls from the 60s era (i.e. The Twilight Zone and Batman) and also Doodles Weaver, the vocalist/comedian whose version of "Eleanor Rigby" used to get regular airplay by Dr. Demento. (YouTube it, you'll enjoy it.) All in all an okay episode, not their best but still okay.

2 out of 10 because I don't give out 1's.

Nothing new here, except to sadly learn the level of absolute contempt, hatred and loathing that Mr. Peele must harbor for whites. The movie starts out okay with this very loving couple planning to head out to the country to meet her folks and family for the first time.

Honestly, one gets the impression that the writer/director has never set foot in a "white" household, and in his tunnel vision, Caucasians don't know how to act, behave, or how to treat a black gentleman who enters their home, even though he is dating their daughter, and in spite of the fact that they are seemingly traditional liberal parents who "would have voted for Obama a third term."

So our writer has now introduced us to his perception of a white family who doesn't know what to say or how to act, and then we have a big get together at the house where all white people don't know what to say to a stranger, so they bring up Tiger Woods because they are so shallow and have nothing else to say. Even the black servants are portrayed in a negative light, maybe to show the writer's contempt for black folks who allow themselves to be employed by white folks? Im not sure.

Later, the Sci Fi angle becomes more evident, reminding me of the Twilight Zone episode, "The Lateness of the Hour" where robotics are employed, here through hypnotism, and then the horror of the white family's intention of switching out body parts to create perfect human beings.

Don't waste your time, or your money. Gotta run!

Growing up in Los Angeles, Tower Records was the one stop megastore to hit for the latest LP's, imports, posters etc. It definitely has its place in the lexicon of California culture, and the Sunset Boulevard store had a nice selection of indie punk rock 45s during the late 70s where you could stop in after a show at the Whisky a-go-go and find the latest vinyl.

I don't know how much truth there truly is in the story offered here, although the cover notes state that it was not the internet that brought about this company's demise. Sorry, I find that very hard to believe.

While other reviewers have noted greed and price fixing was responsible, ultimately it was the internet, and digital technology and the obsoleting of the cassette and, in one word, progress. The founder Mr. Solomon remained mistakenly sold on the fact the buyers would always want to have a library collection of music in their homes in the form of vinyl LP's boxed sets, CDs and the like, but this would not apply to later generation of buyers with their new gadgets i.e. iphones, ipads, e-pods, a-frames, tampads, etc etc ad nauseum.

And then add Napster, Kazaa and all the other "wares" to the mix, the writing was on the wall. They were nice store personnel and more often knew their stuff, styles, genres, and history, but it just couldn't last without a product to sell. Much in the same way that X-rated theaters went the way of all flesh with the boom of the videocassette and the DVD, technology eventually trumped it all.

Nevertheless, they remain a wonderful memory in the annuls of history and made a difference in the lives of so many music fans during the earlier days of rock and roll and they should be proud.

Actually, pretty good.. I usually hold so much disdain for all Hollywood movie portrayals, whether they be jazz, doo-wop, rhythm and blues.. I always find them so over the top, ridiculous, more than often inaccurate both chronologically and factually. I thought Bird and Round Midnight were quite disappointing, but this montage of the life of Miles Davis was done artistically well. It's not a biography in the traditional sense with a beginning, a middle, and an ending, but rather selected incidents from the trumpeter's life with flashbacks-- a montage, as it were. Excellent performances, particularly by Cheadle, and especially impressive was the fact that Mr. Cheadle took the time to learn the actual trumpet fingerings and give true realism to this work, as a special treat to the trumpeters in the audience. Worth seeing a least once, maybe twice...

The movie in a nutshell: parents and adults are stupid and clueless, while the kids are bright, intelligent and oh, so enlightened when it comes to technology and saving the planet! Get the picture? Fair acting, well financed, effects are cool, but obviously a "Disney" film advertised as "for kids" but just more of the same "save the planet" left wing rhetoric that has come to represent most Hollywood drivel today. Even breaking and entering is presented as holy and justified if the means are to delay that evil, capitalistic progress! Aren't kids preached to enough in schools about how there is no God and it is all up to us to save the world? Trust me on this one, save your bread!

704 Hauser was born during the rise of the 90s conservative era, and while left wing activist producer Norman Lear sought to perhaps sway some ratings by offering a very rare but somewhat honest glimpse of a conservative character on TV, Lear's liberal leanings overrode his ability to give a sincere portrayal of such and the show went down in flames after a mere handful of epidodes.

Unlike All in the Family, where the blue collar union Democrat was always wrong and portrayed as an ignorant, bigoted veteran fighting against the social changes taking place around him while such arbiters of such change were always correct and common sensical, 704 is the complete opposite, with the head of the household as the hero who is correct in his beliefs that things haven't improved, while his consetvative Republican son is now the one out of touch.

Some things will never change in Hollywood, which is its goal and lifelong ambition.

I didn't know what to make of this little film when I first saw it during my freshman year of college but i was glad I had no previous knowledge about it nor it's tragic ending. Today I enjoy the campy feel of the production, typical of the late 60s early 70s dramatic stories with no music soundtrack, very dry, almost like a play. Well directed and fine acting, but we never know where the story is heading, especially when Tessie jokingly encourages her husband to hurry for his drawing. It is only after she discovers that her family has drawn the short straw as it were, which causes her to protest, that we learn the fate of the lottery to be of a negative consequence.

Today I interpret the premise of Shirley Jackson's story to be based on her own cynical observations of 20th century life in America. She seems to come across as a bohemian writer ahead of her time, possibly a Marxist with an ax to grind against the conformity and social mores of the post war culture, or against the nuclear family, or perhaps against Christianity, to depict this little village as having lost its sense of values and accept the murder of one of their own as commonplace, year after year. (Tessie was no doubt among the stone hurlers 365 days earlier, which is why her vehement protesting went largely ignored, especially since such squawking was undoubtedly a normal, annual occurrence). I only hope the fact that schools have deemed this movie noteworthy for educational consumption for decades is not a sign of how deep and malignant the hatred for America has become.

Entertaining movie that is worth watching again and again, especially for the climatic comeuppance finale... Good performances by Harrison Ford, Sigourney Weaver as the back stabbing conniving boss, and Melanie Griffith, smart but naive in the ways of this fictional corporate world.

Still, most of us wonder why women like our heroine continually choose low life degenerate losers the likes of those portrayed in this film by Alec Baldwin--- selfish, demanding, abusive, unfaithful... I mean, is it for the female viewers? Is Nick the type of guy most women generally fall for and would like to see as the boyfriend?

So anyways, Tess comes up with a brilliant plan to get a large corporation to acquire a radio station, shares it with her boss who promptly steals it with the intention of selling as her own, the truth eventually comes out and our villainous boss is hung out to dry, and Harrison Ford and Melanie Griffith live happily ever actor.