A great book adaptation

I am normally disappointed at movie adaptations from books. They are usually too short or too long, and it always feels like something crucial is missing.
This movie changed my mind completely. If you love the book, then it is safe to say you will love this movie.
Salander comes to life in Noomi Rapace as the distant girl who you do not know how to describe, but that contains all those characteristics of human nature that scare you and endear you at the same time.
Michael Nyqvist is fantastic as Blomkvist, the frustrated journalist that is lost in a world of intrigue, and who, only with the help of our strange heroine, can find its way back.
I loved it. I loved the dark nature of the film, the precise way in which the director captured the every mood of the book and the way in which it still surprised me even tough I read the book only a month prior.

Meet the Gang!

After seeing the 3rd Toy Story it rekindled the desire to see the first episodes where the gang all meet up with each other. Toy Story trilogy have great storylines to help small children up to adults understand the differences making friends and overcoming issues that cross our lives in the real world too. Great packaging, great quality film, wonderful story.

scorsese scores again!

This film is very good. Scorsese shows that not only his gangster movies are good, but also his ability for other genres. The ending was a bit predictable, but still a very good film. I will highly recommend this film.

Great Stuff!!!!

I was dubious about this, an American playing Sherlock Holmes and Jude Law as a sidekick. I was pleasantly surprised, Robert Downey jnr is brilliant, hes eccentric to the point of lunacy...really well acted and Jude Law is a stiff efficient Watson (and both are easy on the eye) The glumness of London is captured brilliantly, the storyline seems absurd at one point until it becomes more clear. Everything does the ledgend of Sherlock holmes justice (they have actioned it up a bit, but thats hollywood)

All the classic elements in one film

1. Yes, it does crib from Gladiators and King Arthur but without the benefit of large budgets.

2. No, it is not historically accurate.

3. Yes, it has all the gore of a horror movie in places, but close-quarter battles with swords are gruesome.

Having got these points out of the way and assuming you are watching the film for purely entertainment purposes rather than to produce a historically accurate essay, it certainly has many high points. From watching the Roman legion marching through the forests to the survivors fighting a desperate rear-guard action, the film has a rollercoaster feel to it in places and certainly makes you want to 'fight through' to the end of the film.

Definately worth the investment in time and money, especially as (in the words of another review) it is better than King Arthur.

Terrific

For almost a decade, Islamic Extremism, and the events which it has caused, have dominated the headlines of the British newspapers. With the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks, the subject has become very real to many people which has led to many to incline that the comedy"Four Lions", directed by Chris Morris and telling the story of four would-be suicide bombers, should therefore be banned. Similarly to the recently released"The Killer Inside Me", which too has had calls for it to be banned due to its focus on domestic violence,"Four Lions" taboo subject has gained it more publicity than its independent 2.5 million budget would usually warrant.

The criticisms of"The Killer Inside Me" stem not from the subject matter itself but how it is displayed. While the film presents violence against both sexes it is the striking difference between the two which has caused controversy with violence towards women seen as protracted, glorified and bordering on pornographic compared to the sporadic and swift representation of violence against men with one death not even shown on screen. In contrast the debate concerning"Four Lions" seems to be solely about the appropriateness of the subject matter which does not seem as valid an argument if it is dealt with in a suitable manner. It's comedic element however, is causing many people to fearful that this is not the case. .

Thankfully the tone of the film is spot on as the comedy is steered away from the actual act of terrorism leaving it clear at which points the audience is supposed to laugh. The comedy comes from the inability of the characters to create a successful terrorist operation in the same way, for example, Basil Fawlty's inability to run a hotel. All the main leads give terrific comic performances, in particular Kayvan Novak who plays the easily led Waj, symbolizing the confusement about Jihad-ism by needing an explanation, in a recurring gag, through the analogy that it is like skipping the queue for Alton Towers.

The film is incredibly funny in parts, which makes the saddening and brutal seriousness of the denouement even more shocking. If the film has caused controversy, it was not intentional with the point of the film to tackle, through comedy, the ridiculous nature of the ideology of Islamic Extremism rather than laugh at the events it creates. Specific focus is on hypocritical nature of the four main characters, as they show off western ideals while claiming to fight those who do the same. At one point the lead character Omar is seen arguing with his brother to become more relaxed on the ideas towards women. The characters are not to be hated but are instead to be empathized with as they are being led by higher powers to believe an ideology they do neither believe or truly follow. The film is not once offensive to either the religion of Islam or the people of Britain who may have suffered from such events. Every taboo subject needs tackling though art and culture, whether it is domestic violence, the holocaust or Islamic extremism and"Four Lions" is successful in tackling this latter issue in a way which is both responsible and incredibly funny.

Up is Fantastic

The DVD of UP is fantastic for both children and adults ... I loved it so much I purchased two copies to give one to a friend...

Get it you won't be dissappointed.

David H.

Nanny McPhee & The Big Bang video

I would recommend this first class video to anyone and to all ages.

elementry my dear Watson !

I almost hate everything the BBC does including Dr Who.And had no intention of watching this!A member of the family said they wanted to check it out.And i said dont bother everything the BBC makes is rubbish.Having missed the first episode i found it on BBC I PLAYER ,And decided i d sit there for the first 5 minutes just to say i told you so.Well what happened next,Sherlock is the best new show i ve seen all year,from the lead actor to the writing to the cinematography it all is perfect.

The show only had a 3 episode run.To judge peoples reaction,everyone seems to love it including me!

The BBC must make more,considering the cliff hanger we where left on!

The game is afoot !

subtitles

Can anyone tell me, as it is not mentioned in the product review, whether these DVDs ate subtitled or not?
I need to know if there are English subtitles or subtitles for the hard of hearing.
Thank you anyone who could reply.

The first film was bad enough, then they did it again

I waited for this to come out on DVD. That was a wasted wait.
The lightening theif was the same story, better done and not so much fuss about it.

Great season of Greys, emotional finale

Grey's has somewhat lost the spark it once had, but that doesn't mean this season isn't bad.

If you like Greys 1-4, you'll like this.

The main negative is how George is barely included in any storyline. At all. It's bad, really.

But it has an amazingly emotional finale.

Dexter comes very close to danger...

...in this third season. As in the other series, the lead actors are magnificent and utterly convincing. Dexter's new opponent - Miguel - is as frightening as he should be. The emphasis is very much on the main characters now, and I found the dialogue of the supporting characters rather bland and uninteresting, which was a pity. But that is the only flaw I could find. I enjoyed it just as much as the first two series.

Hot Gossip? Not Quite...

When Season 3 began in the UK I felt a certain degree of trepidation. The Second Season was brilliant, but it also raised the stakes for the show creatively, and with the start of college, I wasn't sure how it was going to work out. My fears were confirmed from the beginning, which was rather disappointing, and the following episodes weren't much better to be honest. I think this is due to the unneccessary introduction of secondary characters which takes the focus away from the cast, such as Olivia (Hilary Duff), and the irritating Georgina (Michelle Trachtenberg). The problem with these characters is that they are only there to add arbitrary drama which the show doesn't really need. Apart from that, the transition from high school to college is a rocky one, for the audience and the characters. It's only when the writers step away from the college scene and back into familiar territory that the show finally gets back into the swing of things again, such as Chuck dealing with the anniversary of his father's death in 'The Dearly Debarted'. Undoubtedly one of 'Gossip Girl's' most interesting characters, Chuck has a lot to deal with this season: the apparent reappearance of his mother (whom he believed had died giving birth to him), the possibility of losing his father's empire to his evil Uncle Jack, and his insecurity that he isn't living up to his father's expectations. Naturally, 'Gossip Girl' is a show about secrets and nothing is ever what it seems to be.

Relationships-wise, much of the 'hot' scenes have shifted from Chuck and Blair to Upper East Side's newest reigning prince and princess, Serena and Nate. But if you thought any hope of Jenny and Nate maybe getting together died sometime last season, you would be wrong. Nate continues to play knight in shining armour to damsel in distress Jenny whenever the situation arises; saving her from a potentially dangerous party scene and advising her against losing her virginity to dubious new boyfriend Damien:"You're a really special girl Jenny, and you deserve a guy who sees that...you deserve a guy who's gonna be there in the morning." As for Chuck and Blair, we watch as they go from being a solid couple to hitting rock bottom. But every scene they share, no matter how heartbreaking or romantic is simply mesmerising to watch. I've been a big fan of Chuck and Blair from Season One, but what I found slightly disconcerting this time round was that the writers didn't seem to know what to do with them once they had become a couple, which may have influenced their decision to break them up lest their relationship became too pedestrian. But even if Chuck and Blair are one of TV's ill-fated couples who will never stay together for very long, or whose chemistry seems to work better apart rather than as a conventional couple, I still favour them over Serena and Nate ("Your biggest concern has been whose hair is shinier," says Chuck), and Dan and Vanessa. Dan and Vanessa look like a match made in eHarmony heaven, but for some reason, they just do not work. I don't know why, but they just don't. Maybe they are too alike. It's a relationship that makes perfect sense on paper, but on screen, I'm afraid they are bland, and therefore boring to watch. I don't even know if Vanessa has been well established as a character on her own. She seems strangely detached from the rest of the group and it seems that the only way she can be integrated as one of them - and thus have a story - is by being in a relationship with one of the guys.

Three characters that really annoyed me this season were Serena, Jenny and Lily. Serena's unwavering loyalty to her father grated on my nerves, as did her refusal to try and see things from her friends perspectives. I didn't understand why Serena sided so quickly with her father against Rufus, when her father hadn't been around for years and had done nothing except show up again to earn her support or trust. Any sympathy I once had for Jenny dissolved completely. I'm afraid that by the end of the season, I just didn't like her - whereas Blair can be manipulative and still convey emotion, Jenny does not, and comes across as aloof and cold-hearted. Lily on the other hand, irritated me by failing to see that her ex-husband was up to no good, and was trying to cause a wedge between her and Rufus.

Overall, I'm not sure how I feel about this season. When the writing is strong, it all comes together, but much of 'Gossip Girl' depends on strong and likeable characters and the relationships they have. When these elements don't deliver, then I don't feel suitably engaged with the show. There are some good moments but...unlike the previous two seasons, I'm not sure if I'll be buying this one.

Excellent Feelgood Movie

It is not very often that a movie like this comes along - but when it does it is truely inspiring. Sandra Bullock is amazing and the whole film will leave you feeling very warm - top marks......

Historically inept

This is one of my favourite periods in history and the decision to set the film at the time of the French Dauphin's invasion of England of 1215 seemed inspired as this is such a little known event in our history where it is generally assumed that 1066 was the last time the country was invaded by the French. Usually I find Russell Crowe's hisotrical films to be great entertainment but this is strewn with so many mistakes, the landing craft being amongst the least ridiculous! The fact that Robin was shown to be a Yorkshireman as is the case of in original"Gest" seemed hopeful yet the character seems moroseful - about as exciting as a swashbuckling Michael Parkinson!
This film's failure is a shame as the context of the film started with alot of promise given the demise of Richard I is pretty accurate. However....


1. Early 13th century Nottingham is portrayed as a rustic village.
2. When Robin arrives at the Tower of London, the South Bank is shown as dense woodland. Somehow they have forgotten to include the then thriving settlement of Southwick which would have been dominated by the Bishop of Winchester's palace.

3. King Richard was succeeded by John in 1199 yet the film immediately conflates this with the Magna Carta which was not signed until 1215. Sixteen years of history are conveniently missing!

4. At one of the court scenes, John's mother Eleanor of Acquitaine is present. I believe at the time of John's coronation she was in France but as she died in 1204, she did not live long enough to see the signing of the Magna Carta. By 1199 she was alreay 77. On top of this, she makes a speach about John subjugating her fellow Englishmen although I would have thought that her name would have been a give away. She wasn't English but came from the South West of France. This is not a comment that she would have made !

5. The final battle scene sees John join forces with the barons with the common goal of defeating the invading French army who I believe actuaslly landed at Dover and not on a beach. In fact, the barons invited the French over as they wanted to get rid of John and such an alliance with the king (with whom they were effectively at war) never happened. The French seiged castles such as Dover and Odiham but only returned when John died prematurely and the barons realised that they were better off with placing John's son Henry III on the throne who they could manipulate since he was still a minor.

6. The Magna Carta is portrayed as a Northern revolt in this film whereas it was effectively a means by which the barons sought to minimalise the power of the king for their own benefit as opposed to anything more ultruistic.

I am sure that there are plenty more howlers in this film but much of this could have been rectified by decent research. Whilst I applaud the film makers for resurrecting a negelected and complex period in our history, this film could have been much better. The version with Errol Flynn still remains the best piece of cinema and the most in keeping with the folklore. A decent, accurate, historical Robin Hood film has yet to be made and the fact that this film is so tedious and lacking in excitement means that one star is generous.

My favourite film

I'm a 40 year old woman, I love Twilight and since seeing the film I have read all of the books and love them. Robert Pattinson is a fabulous actor and this film is so atmospheric. I love everything about it and have bought the musical score and soundtrack as well. I am trying to convert everyone I know to the Twilight saga, it isn't just for teenagers!!

Momentum rips off UK buyers

I actually enjoyed most of this film. However my poor rating is for the UK Blu-ray disc which contains almost none of the extras that the US Blu-ray has. Specifically it is missing:

- A Conversation with Channing Tatum, Amanda Seyfried and Lasse Hallstrom
- Transforming Charleston
- Military in Movies: Dear John's Military Advisors
- Mr. Tyree, The Mule, and Benny Dietz
- The Story of Braeden Reed

I was particularly interested to hear about Braeden Reed, the young lad who is actually autistic for real, and not an actor, but there's nothing about him on the UK release.

I am disgusted by the Momentum rip off, and have now ordered a copy of the US Zone A BD. (Warning, the US release is zone-locked to Zone A, so you need a suitable player like the region/zone-free Oppo to play it.)

Boring until the last 15 minutes

Every one will watch this films regardless of critism but here goes..

The story is overly long and drawn out. Not very much happens until the final 15 minutes. 'Twilight New Moon' had a budget of $50 Million yet the special FXs are poor. I watched 'Galaxy Quest' the other night and its CGI was far more impressive. I've given a 1 star rating because I want the series to improve and all the Twi-hard fans are encouraging the film makers to be lazy and dish out below par productions.

Put more effort into the production values and add a little more tension/action into the films otherwise the only reason for making the feature films is to earn a few hundred million dollars for what is really a made for TV film. 1 * for ripping off the public, grrrr!

I won't lie to you, this is immense

Just about the funniest series ever on TV - not just funny, but touching moments too, and no canned laughter.