The Thing (1982)

Overview:-

An American scientific expedition to the frozen wastes of the Antarctic is interrupted by a group of seemingly mad Norwegians pursuing and shooting a dog. The helicopter pursuing the dog explodes, eventually leaving no explanation for the chase. During the night, the dog mutates and attacks other dogs in the cage and members of the team that investigate. The team soon realizes that an alien life-form with the ability to take over other bodies is on the loose and they don't know who may already have been taken over.

IMBD Rating:8.2

Review:

This is another one of those films that I remember staying up late to watch on TV, scaring the crap out of myself at the impressionable age of 12 or so and dooming myself thereafter to a life of horror movie obsession. This is a GREAT movie, and stands as living proof that there were indeed realistic effects before CGI.

Set on an isolated base in Antarctica, this version seems almost to pick up where the original version (The Thing From Another World) left off. The American scientists discover a decimated Norwegian base some miles distant. Everyone is dead, and only the half charred remains of some unidentifiable thing left to smolder outside the compound might offer any answers to what may have happened. The Thing is brought back to the American base and, too late, the scientists realize that it is alive and lethal. The Thing thaws out and is off, not only killing anyone and anything that crosses Its path, but also absorbing them, making Itself into whoever and whatever it wants. The film then turns into a brilliant paranoia piece. Everyone is suspect, anyone can be The Thing, and no one trusts anyone anymore. Gone is the strength and security found when human beings band together in spite of their differences to battle a monster. The group splinters and fear rules supreme. Who is the Thing?

The gore effects here are absolutely amazing and messily realistic. I could have done without the dogs head splitting open like a banana peel, but that's just the animal lover in me being picky: kill all the humans you want, but leave the kitties and puppies alone. Sanity and reason disintegrate rapidly as, one by one, the humans are taken over by the shapeshifting alien. The power of this film lies in its paranoia, and although I liked the original version, I prefer this one; the real threat lies within, and is scarier for the fact that it cannot be seen or easily detected. When it is forced out of hiding, it's wrath is huge and the results are horrific.

This is one of Carpenters best films, right up there with The Fog and Halloween. All of the actors give strong, realistic performances and the special effects are so powerful that they stand as their own main character. This film has something for any lover of the horror genre. Don't miss it.

Evil Dead II

Overview:-

A young man, named Ash, takes his girlfriend Linda to a secluded cabin in the woods where he plays back a professor's tape recorded recitation of passages from the Book of the Dead. The spell calls up an evil force from the woods which turns Linda into a monstrous Deadite, and threatens to do the same to Ash. When the professor's daughter and her entourage show up at the cabin, the night turns into a non-stop, grotesquely comic battle with chainsaw and shotgun on one side, demon horde and flying eyeball on the other.

IMBD Rating:7.8

Review:

Evil Dead II: Dead by Dawn is the sequel to the ultimate experience in grueling terror. Evil Dead II is the definitive cult flick and perhaps my favorite horror film (top five at least). Bruce Campbell takes on the role of Ash once again in this hilariously horrific sequel to a legendary movie. Few sequels live up to the original and fewer still surpass it. This is one of those rare instances. This movie is out of this world. Sam Raimi is a genius with a camera and has gone on to create some damn fine films. He deserves every amount of success he has gained. The script is inventive, highly original, and funny as all hell. It's a mix of horror, laughs, and gore; or splatstick as Campbell calls it. Once again, Campbell's facial expressions alone are worth the price of admission. If that doesn't get you the laughing deer head will. Evil Dead II: Dead By Dawn is a true horror masterpiece. A completely original concept, some screwy camera angles, and one Bruce Campbell make for an entertaining combination. If you don't like it, "I'll swallow your soul, I'll swallow your soul."

The Evil Dead (1981)

Overview:-

As a vacation, five friends travel to a small cabin in a deserted jungle. When their first target has been to reach peace, they should fight restlessly as they find themselves surrounded by an evil force that turns its victims into heartless monsters.

IMBD Rating:7.6

Review:

It's the early 80's, what do you expect? This is a scary scary film. And I
think I know why films now a days can't hold a candle to films like Halloween and Evil Dead. And that is because a photo copy is never as good as the original. That is the bottom line. Directors don't care about a lot of the material that they are filming today, especially when it comes to horror films and that is because they don't write their own stories. They do someone elses work. But not Evil Dead. This was Raimi's baby from the outset. When films like the two mentioned were filmed they were filmed by two directors that were complete unknowns. They had no pressure to make a great film and they did it on an incredibly low budget. Halloween was made for $150,000 and Evil Dead for $50 000. So what that meant is that the directors could stick to their visions but they had to find innovative ways to do so. Their budgets didn't allow a heap of special effects so they had to rely on what they knew. And that was, how to create atmosphere using the camera. And Evil Dead is one of the best at doing that. There is one scene in this film that I will never forget and that is one of the early scenes where the cast arrives at the cabin. Here we see a long shot of the cabin and it has very eerie music playing. This shows the cabin as being menacing. It lets you know that there is evil in that cabin. And that we are in for a hell of a ride.

Sam Raimi made a masterpiece here that I believe stands the test of time. You can put this film up against any of today's so called horror films and I
guarantee you this scares you more. Raimi cares about his movie and he does everything to make you feel the terror that the cabin people feel. We are scared and disgusted at what happens when one of the women goes outside alone at night and meets a tree that does unspeakable things. And when the book is first introduced.... that is horror movie history there. What a brilliant concept. A book that is evil. I have often wondered about such books. We hear about them all the time in movies about ancient Egypt and ancient times. But here we have a book that has weird incantations from another world and another language, and you just know that as soon as some idiot utters the words that they are not supposed to say, well they won't be around much longer.

The Evil Dead is a miracle. It was made on a rock bottom budget yet it is scarier than any Hollywood movie that is made for 20 million could ever hope to be. If you want to truly experience a frightening experience, rent this film, it knows what it wants to say. And it knows how to make you afraid. So be afraid. Be very afraid. You may never look at the forest the same again.

MAZE RUNNER:THE SCORCH TRIALS

Storyline:-

In this next chapter of the epic “Maze Runner” saga, Thomas (Dylan O’Brien) and his fellow Gladers face their greatest challenge yet: searching for clues about the mysterious and powerful organization known as WCKD. Their journey takes them to the Scorch, a desolate landscape filled with unimaginable obstacles. Teaming up with resistance fighters, the Gladers take on WCKD’s vastly superior forces and uncover its shocking plans for them all. 

Initial release: September 18, 2015 (USA)
Director: Wes Ball
Running time: 2h 12m
Film series: Maze Runner
Adapted from: The Scorch Trials
    

Review:





Well well, The Scorch Trials. What a great movie!


From beginning to end, I was on the edge of my seat. Unlike the first, there's a lot more violence and death in this movie, and the Cranks are OH SO HORRIFYING!


And as you may have expected, along with the Cranks comes lots of JUMP SCARES!


This movie is super intense and action-packed that you won't want to look away for a moment. Also, there's a single scene about 35 minutes into the movie that shocked me. It wasn't meant to be a plot twist, but the way they pulled it off was incredible. Giving that away would be sad, so I want you to see it for yourself.


Let's just say that it involves an quiet, emotional scene with a gun and a slowly growing infection through someone's body. Moving on...


The thing I dislike is the lack of character development in the new characters introduced. Here's some random kid shown near the beginning, then when he only appears in the background and basically says nothing, I'm like 'Wait, who is he again?' when he finally begins to speak.


The first movie was all about the action, but this one is all about the action and the PLOT. Oh yes, there is a plot twist near the end I didn't see coming, and it kind of involves a familiar character.


So much happens in this movie that leaves your mind blown, and it leaves you off with a sort of cliffhanger. It will leave you saying 'The game is truly on...' except the game will be on in 2017. Shame.


Overall, I say IGNORE THE CRITICS! They see this as Young Adult, which technically it is, but it's more of a Young Adult horror movie! It's certainly interesting.

Aliens (1986)

Overview:-

Fifty seven years after Ellen Ripley survived her disastrous ordeal, her escape vessel is recovered after drifting across the galaxy as she slept in cryogenic stasis. Back on earth, nobody believed her story about the "Aliens" on the planet LV-426. After the "Company" orders the colony on LV-426 to investigate, however, all communication with the colony is lost. The Company enlists Ripley to aid a team of tough, rugged space marines on a rescue mission to the now partially terraformed planet to find out if there are aliens or survivors. As the mission unfolds, Ripley will be forced to come to grips with her worst nightmare, but even as she does, she finds that the worst is yet to come.

IMBD Rating:8.4

Review:

ALIENS really does have it all. Perfect direction. Beautiful cinematography. Intense characters. Big guns. Action. Heroism. Courage. Battles. Friendship. Bravery. It is certainly the BEST sequel ever made in movie history, and one of the GREATEST MOVIES EVER MADE.

At its core is Lt. Ellen Ripley (played by the badass Sigourney Weaver), a warrant officer, and tough as nails. Her character is one of the greatest heroines of all time. Sigourney really does pull it off. No one else could have done it like her. Ripley's maternal connection with the young girl Newt is amazing to watch...but the ultimate scene is her final battle with the galaxy's most deadly creature - set to a pulsing military score (James Horner delivers in a big way!). Quite possibly my favorite fight scene of all time.

There's not really much else to say - just go watch the movie on DVD, and you will not be let down. You're in for a wild ride!!!

ALIENS: THIS TIME, IT'S WAR

Terminator 2:Judgment Day (1991)

Overview:-

Almost 10 years have passed since the first cyborg called The Terminator tried to kill Sarah Connor and her unborn son, John Connor. John Connor, the future leader of the human resistance, is now a healthy young boy. However another Terminator is sent back through time called the T-1000, which is more advanced and more powerful than its predecessor. The Mission: to kill John Connor when he's still a child. However, Sarah and John do not have to face this threat of a Terminator alone. Another Terminator is also sent back through time. The mission: to protect John and Sarah Connor at all costs. The battle for tomorrow has begun...

IMBD Rating:8.5

Review:

A Terminator(Arnold Schwarzenegger) was sent from the future to kill the unborn son of Sarah Connor(Linda Hamilton) in the original. Now, that Terminator has been sent back again but with a different assignment: Protect John Connor. John Connor(Edward Furlong) is now about 10 years of age and must evade a new Terminator sent to kill him;The T-1000(Robert Patrick). Sarah, John, and The Terminator journey together on their quest to stop Judgement Day, with a trailing, shape-shifting Termiantor trailing from behind.

This is the greatest of the Terminator trilogy. I have watched three times in the past year and have not found anything that Cameron could have improved on. The move is a masterpiece in every aspect of film. Schwarzenegger's acting might not be incredible but this is the perfect role for him. He isn't supposed to show emotion or feelings. He is a machine. I hate almost every one of his movies besides this trilogy because he is a horrible actor but he works perfectly into this role.

The special effects are incredible beyond belief. The shape-shifting T-1000 is some of the greatest animation I have witnessed in cinema history. It absolutely blew my mind when I first experienced this visual extravaganza. The animation looked so real(remembering this was a good ten years). The movie included fast-paced action along with some clever sci-fi drama/horror. The idea of a vast army of machines taking over the world after sending off warheads to every major city should be scary enough. But the T-1000 has very little lines and is just creepy enough to make twitch when you see him.

Sci-fi movies can rarely be made in such way that can be looked at as works of art. This is one of the few exceptions. The prediction of judgment day with Hamilton watching a playground full of kids be burnt to the ground is an absolute brilliant portrayal of Armageddon. The theme that men will destroy themselves is also shown throughout the movie also and is even said by The Terminator" It's in your nature to destroy yourselves". This brings the movie to a whole new level of sci-fi.

Overall, Termiantor II: Judgement Day is an absolute must see classic. If you have not seen it, buy it! Because once you have seen it, you will want to do so anyways. It is fast paced and highly enjoyable for just about every audience.

I highly recommend this movie.

The Terminator (1984)

Overview:-

A cyborg is sent from the future on a deadly mission. He has to kill Sarah Connor, a young woman whose life will have a great significance in years to come. Sarah has only one protector - Kyle Reese - also sent from the future. The Terminator uses his exceptional intelligence and strength to find Sarah, but is there any way to stop the seemingly indestructible cyborg ?

IMBD Rating:8.1

Review:-

Rarely has a film so frightened an audience as "The Terminator." After its release in 1984, the extremely low-budget sci-fi actioner broke box office records, and gave audiences something more to fear. Through the years, there have been stories of nature's beasts, of creatures from another world, and so on and so forth. "Jaws" was terrifying because it seemed so possible. And if "Jaws" is terrifying, "The Terminator" is horrific. The realization of this hit-man machine dawned on everyone watching the film. In a time of exceeding technology, how long will it be before man is overtaken by the very things he created? And that is what is particularly scary about a film like "The Terminator."

In "The Terminator," Arnold plays a cyborg, Cyberdyne system model 101, a T800, whatever that means. He has been sent back in time to assassinate the soon-to-be-mother of the future world leader, John Connor (who battles the machines in the future and leads an uprising). If Connor is killed, then there will be no one to oppose the machines of the future, and they will triumph. This would be pretty bad. So the future John Connor has sent a protector back in time, to help save his mother. Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn) tells Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) about the machine that is trying to kill her. "It can't be bargained with, it can't feel pain or mercy, and it will stop at absolutely nothing until you are dead!" Talk about a bad day.

The Terminator hunts them down time after time, including the famous police station scene, where Arnie says, "I'll be back," and returns moments later, crashing through the wall in a car. He then takes on a whole squad of cops, but don't worry, Sarah and Reese escape slightly unscathed.

There are countless classic scenes in "The Terminator." You will see them spoofed your entire life. From the image of the Terminator, to the lines they speak, to the scenes they act out. Everything is spoofed. And the film is worthy of its fame.

On the special edition "T2" DVD (the second one), there is an on-set documentary for the making of the "Terminator 2" 3-D ride at Universal Studios. As the camera moves around, it shows Cameron detailing what he wants in this scene. Some guy suggests something else, and Cameron gets a tone. "No, no, that won't work. You do it like this - we come off here, he walks around..." etc. The point is, he's a perfectionist, and a demanding director. Some directors are a bit too easy, and don't really care where their films are going. But James Cameron seems to have a clear vision of what he wants, and he goes around making sure it gets done exactly the way he wants it to be done. And it shows in his work. It's hard to find any mistakes in a James Cameron film. And it's even harder to find plot holes.

Some people say "Terminator 2 - Judgment Day" is better than the original. It's hard to choose, because the two films are very different. I view "The Terminator" as more of a deep, intellectually-consuming, dark thriller. I view "Judgment Day" as an action film, with a more or less recycled plot.

The plot is still good, but it's still the same, too.) It's hard to choose a favorite because they are so different. On "T2" the budget is ten times larger, probably even more than that. But if you want a horror/thriller, "The Terminator" is better for you. If you want special-effects and a really fun time, see "T2." They're both excellent films.

"The Terminator" is a great movie. It is one of my favorites; it is terrifying, horrifying, and 100 % entertaining. And unlike a lot of other cheap actioners out there, "The Terminator" has some thought put into its plot, and that is what separates it from the rest of its kind.

Predator (1987)

Overview:-

A team of special force ops, led by a tough but fair soldier, Major "Dutch" Schaefer, are ordered in to assist CIA man, George Dillon, on a rescue mission for potential survivors of a Helicopter downed over remote South American jungle. Not long after they land, Dutch and his team discover that they have been sent in under false pretenses. This deception turns out to be the least of their worries though, when they find themselves being methodically hunted by something not of this world.

IMBD Rating:7.8

Review:-

Predator is the classic action film. What makes it so unique is that the story starts off as a simple but exhilarating rescue mission; but then it suddenly switches gears and becomes a fight for survival for everyone involved. The genius of that! The cast is wonderful; Arnold as Dutch was very convincing and commanding, yet humbled and low-key in his performance. The only way you would know that he's the star is that his face is on the cover, he's the leader of the group, and he survives at the end. He was 'one of the crew' instead of a one-man wrecking machine like in so many of his other films; that was very nice to see. Carl Weathers turns in a good performance as Dillon, as does Bill Duke as Mac, Jesse Ventura as Blain and Sonny Landham as Billy. The whole cast worked very well together. 


The one thing that still astonishes me to this day, 16 years later, is indeed the Predator. The special effects in this film was very much ahead of its time, the camouflage was pure genius. I still can't believe my eyes when I see the camouflage effects; it blows me away that even now in 2003 it could sit alongside the FX seen in TODAY'S films with no shame. I'm waiting for Fox to put out a special edition DVD with behind the scenes footage explaining how the Predator was done; from the effects with its sight and the beautiful camouflage, to the suit. I caught a little snippet of a behind the scenes feature on AMC or Bravo, and ever since I've been anticipating its inclusion on a new DVD (WHAT'S TAKING SO LONG?!??!) 


Predator is evidence of how action films should be done. A great story and relentless action, all progressing the story along. A timeless classic, one of the best films of all time.

RoboCop 2 (1990)

Overview:-

After a successful deployment of the Robocop Law Enforcement unit, OCP sees its goal of urban pacification come closer and closer, but as this develops, a new narcotic known as "Nuke" invades the streets led by God-delirious leader Cane. As this menace grows, it may prove to be too much for Murphy to handle. OCP tries to replicate the success of the first unit, but ends up with failed prototypes with suicidal issues... until Dr. Faxx, a scientist straying away from OCP's path, uses Cane as the new subject for the Robocop 2 project, a living God.

IMBD Rating:5.7

Review:

"RoboCop 2" , the sequel to 1987's ultra-violent "RoboCop", is not quite up to par with its predecessor. The film still manages to entertain on a large level. I know that a lot of people do not like this movie, but I personally think it is still pretty good. I'm not writing a review of this movie, I am just expressing my thoughts on it.

First off, this movie is a lot more violent than the first "RoboCop". You get scenes of bloody shootings, grisly scenes of torture, and a surgery which I'd rather let you see for yourself than describe here. Paul Verhoeven does not return to shock his audience with graphic violence and ultra dark humor, which has since become trademark in his films. The director this time is Irvin Kershner, who made "The Empire Strikes Back" nearly ten years before this movie. Kershner seems to focus a lot more on action, rather than story. 

Second, the movie's villain, Cain (Tom Noonan), to me is a direct opposite of Clarence Boddicker (the villain from the first film who was played by Kurtwood Smith). Cain enjoys giving people pleasure (through his highly addictive designer drug called Nuke) while Boddicker was a sadist who took pleasure in the death and suffering of others. (Though after Cain's "transformation", none of this really matters). 

Lastly, this movie does not exploit children. The kid in this movie, Hob (played by Garbriel Damon) is Cain's twelve year-old side kick. He is a violent, foul-mouthed little child who runs errands for Cain. The writers for this movie did this intentionally, to show that crime holds no age barrier. Regardless of age, crime is crime. 

Like I said, "RoboCop 2" is not trying to be better than its predecessor, it's just trying to be something different.

RoboCop (1987)

Overview:-

Detroit - in the future - is crime-ridden and run by a massive company. The company has developed a huge crime-fighting robot, which unfortunately develops a rather dangerous glitch. The company sees a way to get back in favor with the public when policeman Alex Murphy is killed by a street gang. Murphy's body is reconstructed within a steel shell and called RoboCop. RoboCop is very successful against criminals and becomes a target of supervillian Boddicker.

IMBD Rating:7.5

Review:

The success of this movie can be credited to one man; Paul Verhoeven. His special touch of violence, gore and social satire make the movie more than just your average B-movie, with a lame title and simple story and characters. Yes, without Verhoeven this movie seriously would had been nothing more like another B-movie on par with science-fiction/action movies like "Timecop" and Albert Pyun movies.

The main story of "RoboCop" itself is simply and not that complex, however Verhoeven manages to put many different layers for the story as well as the characters in the movie. The social satire in the movie works out brilliantly and is what makes the movie perhaps more entertaining than thrilling or tense. Especially those typical Verhoeven news sketches are brilliant! But also those who will not be able to understand or fully appreciate the social satire elements in the movie, will have plenty to enjoy while watching this. The action itself is top-class and the characters are fun as well as cool. RoboCop himself looks awesome, both in his movements and the way his costume looks. Oh and of course I may not forget his awesome gun!

The movie is not only filled with some typical Verhoeven social satire elements but also with some trademark Verhoeven gore and violence. The way Murphy gets killed is very graphic and disturbing. But as always in most Verhoeven movies is the case, the violence is so over-the-top that it's not really shocking to look at but almost more comical like because it's just so over-the-top. Especially what happens to Emil at the end, the gore is way over-the-top there and I absolutely love it!

In a movie like this the characters are also always important. Especially the villains and yes, "RoboCop" has some highly entertaining and good villains. The group of Clarence, Leon, Joe and Steve are a bunch of entertaining, charismatic stereotypical villains. But also the more educated villains like Dick Jones (Ronny Cox) and Bob Morton (a very young Miguel Ferrer) who also isn't a very nice person. But also the mechanical villain ED-209 is extremely cool and dangerous looking. The stop-motion effects for him are of course heavily outdated this days but it takes away nothing of his threatening appearance. All of the character are entertaining and well developed. Characters also worth mentioning are The Old Man (Dan O'Herlihy) who plays the president of OCP and you can tell by his face gestures that he's not very pleased with the direction Dick Jones is heading towards with the company and Johnson who is always smiling. And of course let's not forget Bixby "I'd buy that for a dollar!" Snyder, he's a real classic! They should given that guy a real show on TV.

Also the musical score by Basil Poledouris is what helps to make this movie a very memorable one. Poledouris delivers one of his best works. When will he finally get some more attention from the big awards? He has made some great stuff but he rarely has won anything of importance with it. A bit of a disgrace for such a wonderful composer.

All in all this is a brilliantly entertaining science-fiction/action movie that simply is perfect in every way, mainly thanks to Verhoeven his input.

The Ten Commandments (1956)

Overview:-

To escape the edict of Egypt's Pharoah, Rameses I, condemning all newborn Hebrew males, the infant Moses is set adrift on the Nile in a reed basket. Saved by the pharaoh's daughter Bithiah, he is adopted by her and brought up in the court of her brother, Pharaoh Seti. Moses gains Seti's favor and the love of the throne princess Nefertiri, as well as the hatred of Seti's son, Rameses. When his Hebrew heritage is revealed, Moses is cast out of Egypt, and makes his way across the desert where he marries, has a son and is commanded by God to return to Egypt to free the Hebrews from slavery. In Egypt, Moses' fiercest enemy proves to be not Rameses, but someone near to him who can 'harden his heart'.

IMBD Rating:8.2

Review:-

It doesn't get any better than this. You can count on this perennial favorite to show up every Easter just as you can count on "A Christmas Carol" during the yuletide season. The daddy of all contemporary religious instruction, 1956's "The Ten Commandments" is blockbuster spiritual entertainment in every way, shape and form, as Cecil B. DeMille depicts the life of Moses from his birth to slavery to Mt. Sinai in grandiose, reverential style. And what a life!

This was the first movie I ever saw at the drive-in. I was only 6 at the time but I can remember the neighbors taking me to see this, snuggled up in pajamas and stuffed in the back seat. The parting of the Red Sea waters, the turning of the staff to a viperous snake, the green-colored pestilence of death seeping into the homes of every first-born, the creation of the tablets, the burning bush, the booming narrative. I sat in absolute silence and wonderment. This is my first remembrance of any kind of movie-making and the Oscar-winning visual effects and vivid pageantry are still pretty amazing, even by today's standards.

Charlton Heston, the icon of biblical story-telling, still towers over anybody who has ever TRIED to played Moses – before or since. Stalwart and stoic to a fault, he possess THE look...cut out of pages of my old religious instructions book....the look that radiates magnificence and glory...the look of a man who has definitely seen God. His commanding stature and voice with its slow, deliberate intonation is eerie and unmatched. Yul Brynner portrays Ramses II as if he were the King of Siam in Egyptian pants. Nobody poses or plays majestic like Yul. He's forceful, regal, imperious...everything a biblical foe should be. Anne Baxter as the tempting Nefretiri, Queen of Egypt, borders on total camp in her role, her stylized line readings and breathy allure is laughable now, with posturings and reaction shots not seen since Theda Bara. But who cares? Baxter provides the most fun and its her florid scenes that I now look most forward to – whether she's throwing herself at the totally disinterested Moses or verbally sparring with Ramses, slyly pushing his emotional buttons. She alone puts the "k" in kitsch. The rest of the huge cast is appropriately stiff and solemn.

DeMille's 1923 original version of "The Ten Commandments" is hardly subtle as well, but still impressive and certainly worth a look. In the 1956 remake, DeMille organizes a cavalcade of thousands to lend authenticity to the massive exodus scenes, while the ultimate picture-perfect frame for me is the three beautiful slave extras posing exotically and dramatically on a rock in front of a vivid blue-gray backdrop of furious, threatening clouds as Moses parts the sea. That vision alone is one for the books.

Whenever I am tempted to break a commandment or embrace that golden calf, I know I'll always have to answer to Charlton – glaring down from Mt. Sinai ready to throw those heavy tablets at me for my transgression. Charlton not only sets you straight, he makes you BELIEVE!

The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957)

Overview:-

The film deals with the situation of British prisoners of war during World War II who are ordered to build a bridge to accommodate the Burma-Siam railway. Their instinct is to sabotage the bridge but, under the leadership of Colonel Nicholson, they are persuaded that the bridge should be constructed as a symbol of British morale, spirit and dignity in adverse circumstances. At first, the prisoners admire Nicholson when he bravely endures torture rather than compromise his principles for the benefit of the Japanese commandant Saito. He is an honorable but arrogant man, who is slowly revealed to be a deluded obsessive. He convinces himself that the bridge is a monument to British character, but actually is a monument to himself, and his insistence on its construction becomes a subtle form of collaboration with the enemy. Unknown to him, the Allies have sent a mission into the jungle, led by Warden and an American, Shears, to blow up the bridge.

IMBD Rating:8.2

Review:-

First off, what is so amazing about this film is that, for the time that it was made, how modern it looks. David Lean certainly had the eye of any modern director and managed to direct a visual masterpiece at a time when many films were still being shot in black and white.

William Holden gives one of his finest performances as a cynic of warfare , citing for us the insanity and absurdity that the combatants often convey. And he hates the war, but he cannot avoid been thrown back into it again and again. We wish he could stay on the beach with his nurse lover, but he is a man destined for a tragic doom for his country, whether he wants to or not.

Alec Guiness also delivers a fine performance as a bold general whose own pride is, at the same time, his most noble quality as well as his greatest fault. He is uncompromising, yet when the Japanese submit to his demands, he begins overseeing the construction of the bridge with great esteem. Eventually, for him, the bridge becomes a manifestation of his belief of the superiority of the British Army, which he follows like a religion. And in putting all his pride into this bridge, he loses sight of even the British's own true agenda. Truly, his sense of overwhelming honor is, at the same time, his downfall in a descent to a loss of morality, and a sense of good and evil. 

And yes, by the end of this film, we learn a great lesson of the horrors of war. Not only does it take the lives of many good men, but the utter failure and despair that accompany it make it an unbearable existence. And this message has only recently been re-evaluated with the also-brilliant masterpiece "Saving Private Ryan." But, keep in mind that it took forty years to regain the power that this film inspired so long ago.

The Enemy Below (1957)

Overview:-

During World War II, the USS Haynes, an American destroyer escort discovers a German U-boat in the South Atlantic. A deadly duel between the two ships ensues, and Captain Murrell must draw upon all his experience to defeat the equally experienced German commander.

IMBD Rating:7.6

Review:-

"The Enemy Below" released in 1957, was one of those films directed by Dick Powell, and starring Robert Mitchum, that sparked with genuine realism and utmost attention to detail. This film also showed the harsh realities in war, and the dedication that men on both sides of the conflict can give to the task appointed. Mitchum plays the commander of a US Naval vessel that has the task of seeking out and destroying enemy submarines; having just recently lost one command, he is going to make sure such doesn't happen twice. The renowned German actor, Curt Jurgens, portrays the submarine commander whose presence has been detected by Mitchum's destroyer, and the chase is on.

Both commanders, Mitchum and Jurgens, in their characters, reveal that each was firm in their beliefs toward their respective countries. While Jurgens is not a gung-ho Nazi, he does have a firm dedication to his fatherland, and what it was before the war. Mitchum has the same firm devotion to his country, and what he is doing is the right course to bring a successful ending to the war, ultimately. There is a lot of verbal discussion during the course of the film, who is right, why are we engaged in this action, etc., but both commanders are desperately trying to out think and outmaneuver the other.

There were several good movies made during the 50s, this film, "The Enemy Below",and "Run Silent, Run Deep" come to mind, and are certainly worth a view. This film does give a look at both sides involved in the type of chase done here.

Star Wars (1977)

Overview:-

     STAR WAR is a story of young young boy from Tatooine sets out on an adventure with an old Jedi named Obi-Wan Kenobi as his mentor to save Princess Leia from the ruthless Darth Vader and Destroy the Death Star built by the Empire which has the power to destroy the entire galaxy.

IMBD Rating:8.7

Review:

Star Wars made epic fantasy real. For a generation of people it has defined what the cinema experience is meant to be. Today it is probable that pc games will offer a deeper and more satisfying entertainment solution, but for pure visual and aural pleasure, mixed with basic emotional manipulation, there has never and will never be a better example of Classic Cinema than when Star Wars appeared over 25 years ago. When you think of Star Wars, you must remember what else was happening at the time. In America, the war in Vietnam had been lost. In the U.K economic disaster was occurring(a 3 day working week, and the army collecting rubbish). It was almost like the two most technically advanced countries in the world were going backwards. Star wars let everybody escape from that reality and reach for a future that was uncertain but ultimately good.                 

                
The cast of characters includes some of the coolest, funniest, and most tragic in film, and the actors who play them fit seamlessly into this new universe. Alec Guiness is flawless as Obi-Wan Kenobi, a Jedi on the run from the evil Empire. Harrison Ford is awesome as Han Solo, a smuggler and thief who helps the gang rescue the princess. But the my favorite character of all time is Darth Vader. Not only is he the coolest bad guy, but we learn in later films why he is evil and start to feel sympathetic for him. Not to mention that badass booming voice that can make ordering a pizza sound threatening.This was not only the beginning of the best movie series ever, but it was the beginning of my love for movies. George Lucas is a genius for being able to come up with a great story and an incredible backdrop for what was supposed to be a flop, but turned into one of the best films ever.

This is a Classic Hollywood Movie and beginning of Star Wars Series.

Gone with the Wind (1939)

Overview:-

Scarlett is a woman who can deal with a nation at war, Atlanta burning, the Union Army carrying off everything from her beloved Tara, the carpetbaggers who arrive after the war. Scarlett is beautiful. She has vitality. But Ashley, the man she has wanted for so long, is going to marry his placid cousin, Melanie. Mammy warns Scarlett to behave herself at the party at Twelve Oaks. There is a new man there that day, the day the Civil War begins. Rhett Butler. Scarlett does not know he is in the room when she pleads with Ashley to choose her instead of Melanie.

IMBD Rating:8.2

Review:-

The setting is a Georgia plantation. The year is 1861, and sixteen-year-old Scarlett O'Hara is infatuated with the blond, drowsy-eyed Ashley Wilkes - the problem is, Ashley plans to marry another woman. Little matter that every other man in the county is courting Scarlett and that a charming scoundrel named Rhett Butler is staring at her with questionable intent - she cares only for Ashley.

Suddenly, the Civil War brakes out, changing the fates and fortunes of all. Scarlett, clever, manipulative, and charming, proves an adept survivor - but what will she have to do to survive? And will she ever learn whom it is that she really loves?GWTW is one of the most meticulously cast films ever; with the possible exception of Leslie Howard as Ashley (in his forties, rather old to be playing a man half that age), every role was perfectly assigned. After you watch Vivien Leigh you will be unable to imagine anyone else playing Scarlett, and Hattie McDaniel's strong, unforgettable performance as "Mammy" netted her an academy award (the first for an African-American actor).
                       
GWTW's backdrop is the gruesome Civil War, and in the end this film is the story a woman and a civilization (the Old South) going through a war that will not leave either of them unchanged.The cinematography is beautiful, memorable. Gone With the Wind was shot entirely in gorgeous technicolor; the scene of the fire in Atlanta required the use of all eight technicolor cameras in existence at the time.The pragmatic may think Gone with the Wind overly dramatic; the restless may find it too long; the action-stimulated, too subtle. None of this, however, detracts from the fact that GWTW retains a lasting appeal as one of the crowning cinematic achievements of the 20th century. Those who see its ending as depressing - tragic, even - perhaps miss the point - which Scarlett O'Hara makes in her very last instant with us, tear-stained eyes uplifted in a sudden, curious burst of hope beneath all the turmoil; that .. . "After all, tomorrow is another day."
              
Did you like Gone with the wind?

Tabu: A Story of the South Seas (1931)

Overview:-

In his final film, F.W. Murnau presents the tale of two young lovers on the idyllic island of Bora Bora in the South Pacific. Their life is shattered when the old warrior declares the girl to be the Chosen Maid and it is forbidden for any man to even look upon her. Refusing to accept a life apart, they run off to another island, one that is decadent and westernized. The boy works as a pearl diver but not quite understanding the concept of money, is soon in debt. When the old warrior tracks them down they again plan to run away but in a desperate attempt to pay off his debts, the boy dives for pearls in shark-infested waters. The boy is successful but fate seems determined to keep the two lovers apart.

IMBD Rating:7.6

Review:

          A tale of forbidden love, TABU is best-remembered today as legendary German director FW Murnau's last film - he was killed in a car accident only one week before its New York premiere. Murnau had been working in Hollywood since the mid-1920s, and had already directed several films in the United States, but of these, only the famous SUNRISE (1927) was a success. By 1930, Murnau had become tired of the Hollywood system and was thinking about returning to Germany, but a timely introduction to Robert F. Flaherty - at that time famous as the director of the classic documentary NANOOK OF THE NORTH - sparked an ill-fated collaboration that resulted in this gorgeous, hypnotic and unforgettable film.

                  At first, Murnau and Flaherty intended to produce a "Nanook-style" documentary of Tahiti and its people, but several problems intervened: Flaherty and Murnau turned out to have radically different ideas about film-making in general and this project in particular; Flaherty's skills as a cinematographer were not up to the task and another DP had to be called in; and Flaherty's working relationship with the domineering Murnau fell apart when - instead of being co-director as the two had agreed - Flaherty found himself spending most of his time in the lab developing Muranu's film. Only one scene directed by Flaherty remains in TABU - the opening spearfishing sequence - and sad to say, the quality of this scene is no match for Murnau's exquisite footage. In addition, Flaherty decided that he hated the story - he found it too Westernized and fairy-tale-like. After a period of mutual discontent, Murnau bought out Flaherty, sent the entire Hollywood crew back to California, and took over the project completely - even training Tahitian natives in film-making techniques so he could employ the locals as his crew. With the exception of Anne Chevalier - a local French/Tahitian woman whom Murnau discovered performing in a bar in Bora Bora - the entire cast and crew save Murnau and his cinematographer was made up of nonprofessionals.

               The film which resulted from this choice is a unique hybrid of documentary and fiction, with a mythic, fantasmatic air about it that is very hard to define - there is no other movie like TABU. Certainly, the fact that we are watching actual Tahitian natives going about their daily business rather than professional actors lends the film a patina of authenticity and realism which makes it impossible to categorize TABU as some sort of Western-colonial-white people's fantasy of the South Seas - in fact, the film's depiction of tribal culture is quite complex and thought-provoking, as we will see...

                  The plot of TABU is diagramatically simple - the idyllic lives of a Bora Bora fisherman (called Matahi) and his beloved, Reri (Anne Chevalier) are destroyed when tribal elders decree that Reri is so perfect a specimen of local womanhood that the gods have selected her for the honor of becoming their sacrificial victim. Reri immediately becomes TABU - forbidden - to Matahi as she must come before the gods untouched by man. Not surprisingly, Matahi disagrees with the gods' choice. He kidnaps Reri and the two flee to a neighboring island where they believe they will be safe. Unfortunately, this particular island has been taken over by Western civilization and thus the innocent Matahi and Reri have to navigate some very unfamiliar and peculiar customs - like debt and credit. Matahi begins working as a pearl diver, but he is unable to understand money (or handle liquor) and is threatened with violence when he cannot repay a debt. The couple flee once more, desperate for a safe haven, but they do not find one. Matahi and Reri's lives become more and more insecure and in due course of time, the tribal elders track them down anyway. Realizing that the only choice they have is to return to the world they know, Reri resigns herself to her fate, but will Matahi accept the inevitable? 

                A mere plot-summary cannot fully express what TABU is like as a visual and intellectual experience. The film's treatment of native culture is extremely complex - unlike the "noble savage" cliche so popular among Western audiences and seen most recently in AVATAR, Murnau's Bora Bora seems like Eden on the surface, but is governed by a rigid code of conduct which squashes individuality and personality. Matahi and Reri's innocent love is doomed from the beginning, as they are caught between two worlds and unable to find a place in either. Ultimately, the beauty and simplicity of tribal life in Bora Bora - so seductive to the eye and ear in the first part of the film - is shown to be a soul-destroying deathtrap governed by superstition and groupthink. Of course, Murnau depicts the Western system as being no better - European civilization is shown as not much more than drunken, greedy, exploitative artifice out to rape the entire world for a fast buck. TABU is in many ways a terrifying film, where pure love is doomed in the face of money and authority, and even the gorgeous purity of the Tahitian Islands seems tainted by human greed and foolishness. This masterpiece will haunt you for a long time after you have seen it, partly because of the riveting story, and partly because of the exquisite cinematography by Floyd Crosby, who deservedly won an Academy Award for his efforts. Do not miss this legendary masterwork of cinema!