bekayess

I have to disagree with the previous poster...this is a typical LUCY SHOW episode, with the usual jokes and such, and several times I did laugh at Lucy's, Viv's or Joan's jokes. Joan is not "in a fog" and she does not "slur" her speech. She appears quite cognizant throughout the show, and Lucy (the perfect hostess as the star) defers to Joan when appropriate. I am not a Crawford fan (I actually think Bette Davis is the better talent), but I find it too sad that Joan Crawford's personal problems in her later years have influenced IMDb posters to make such negative comments about her. She may not have been perfect, and maybe she was a real bitch, but she WAS a star for five decades and she deserves at least a little respect for that!

...of time (mine) and talent (the actors) Some very talented actors were involved, but they were given BAD material, BAD direction and BAD production values. I think there was an attempt by the director/writer to be "artistic" - with the weird footage like dogs f**king during the rape, etc., overall this is dull, boring and a blot on the careers of everyone involved. And I wasted my money on the DVD/BD version. AVOID IT, if you can! I have nothing more to say about this movie, and i detest the 10 line minimum for comments, so I will repeat myself: time and talent (the actors) Some very talented actors were involved, but they were given BAD material, BAD direction and BAD production values. And I wasted my money on the DVD/BD version. AVOID IT, if you can!

An almost scene-by-scene remake of the original classic film, this version (like the PSYCHO remake) is totally useless, and should never have been made. 20th should have re-issued the original. One or two deaths are slightly re-thought here, but over all this is the 1976 film with new actors, and none of them stars; except for Mia Farrow, who is enjoyable, but who doesn't come across nearly as evil as Billie Whitelaw, in the same role in the original. Right down to the ending, it is a ripoff...not needed and poorly executed. Ah well, 20th must have needed the money very much to make this film. What's next in remakes? "Gone with the Wind?" "Hush, Hush Sweet Charlotte?" "All About Eve?" "Singing in the Rain?" "The Exorcist?" Comments?

Okay, so the new HOUSE OF WAX has some really impossible stuff happening (like the title itself which refers to a real HOW), but in spirit if pays great tribute to the two previous films. Not all that bad, in this old-timer's opinion.

Yes, there is the modern slasher type story happening, but at least the "Friday the 13th kids having sex get killed off" is not the motive here.

Effect are good, and remind me of the first time I saw those wax figures melting in the Vincent Price version.

All in all, a nice modern addition to the genre

This movie just reinforces the current belief, in our new, "enlightened" century, that it is all right with the perverts...excuse me, I mean the conservative right--to show a heterosexual white man in a movie enjoying sex, and such films will get a PG-13 or R rating, but a straight woman...or two women...or two men...doing the same in a film will get an NC-17. What's more, violence with blood, guts and gore can get a PG-13. So the message is: it's all right to kill a (female, lesbian or gay) cop, but don't let her/him enjoy her/his husband/partner f**king her/him. . .

What a f'ed up society we live in in the "good ol' US of A!

..but--sadly--we're still dealing with the same issues of hatred, bigotry and inequality more than 35 years after Stonewall.

If more people from the so-called Christian right would/could see this movie (among others) with an open mind, maybe they would see that gays are not their enemies, or threats to their children, husbands, wives and marriages.

Too bad that won't happen.

BUT--maybe if Obama or Hillery become President in 2008...well, then, maybe those who are afraid of homos (and women and blacks) will finally come around and welcome us into this world.

End of comment.

I could enjoy this show (and many others from the 50s and 60s--maybe the 70s and beyond) if that stupid laugh track was not there. Why did the networks think that we at home would not laugh at funny lines, unless they knew that the writers couldn't write humor? Many of the lines in this show are funny, and should be without a canned laugh track. I think of THE CAROL BURNETT SHOW, with a live audience: if a joke fell flat, the cast would try to make it work, but at least the audience's reaction was real and not canned. In particular, I recall Carol's comment in THE LITTLE FOXIES spoof, after Vicki Lawrence's character (Birdie) has just been shot: "Bye bye Birdie." The joke sailed over the audiences' collective heads and Carol made a priceless facial gesture that commented on the audience. All without a laugh track. Canned laughed = boredom. Thank goodness we don't have too much of that today, and more shows are taped or filmed in front of live audiences. (Or are they?)

Okay, so after watching about 10 episodes of this series, most in the new season, I am SOOOOOO tired of seeing blood and guts (i.e., human intestines) being pulled out of a human being and shoved into my face--and the face being chopped off by an animal trap, as in PELTS. Gore has its place, but this show is more gore than substance. Although some of the shows have been quite good, most have tried to gross us out, and even then they use the old tried-and-true plots--going back to the old Universal horrors--but without style or intelligence or artistry. At least TALES FROM THE CRYPT on HBO--well, in the old days when it was on, I guess) was more about style than grossness. Mind you, I am not squeamish..but this show isn't even close to the class of TFTC and other horror/suspense shows of the past. Bad TV is bad TV.

I saw this way back in 1969 when it first aired, and I saw it as a plain old ghost story, since I knew nothing of the Cold War when I was 12 years old. But...seen today, I think that maybe we could have a really cool horror movie with the Ghosts of all of our American Heroes who have died while fighting in Iraq coming back to haunt and terrify George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condi Rice ... and all of their peers and cohorts who put our American Heroes in Iraq in the first place--all because George W Bush had to prove himself to his old man since Saddam tried to kill the older Bush.

Now that's a movie I would pay to see!!!

I first saw this film in 1971, when I was 13, and upon the original release to theaters. Not having seen it since then, and all these many years later, I wondered when it might be re-released on home video. I shouldn't have bothered waiting! Having just watched it, I now find it is boring, and low budget crap, with obvious ties to the original 1968 NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. It tries to be a vampire movie, but the vampires are far too subtle, and more censored than the 1931 Dracula. No wonder it took 35 years for a re-release, on DVD. Who cares about this stupid, not-scary movie. Not me! Next stop for my DVD: eBay! And it will be cheap! BTW--better ton watch any number of films form this period, like HOUSE OF DARK SHADOWS, NIGHT OF DARK SHADOWS, GHOST STORY...etc.

"Carrie" is a modern classic--okay, so it's 30 years old--and many recent horror films could take a few lessons from the story, style and substance of this wonderful adaptation of the Stephen King novel. The actors are all excellent, and the effects--pre-CGI--hold up today. Yes, there are deaths, but it is not about a bunch of teens who are picked off by some silly villain in a hockey mask, or with razors for fingers, or even Michael Myers in his mask. Every character has a believable motivation for his/her actions, given each character's background, history and involvement with Carrie. And again, the actors all give stunning, believable performances. "Carrie" is a masterpiece of horror films. And Carrie herself, the victim, is totally believable - and we empathize with her.

This Paramount version/ripoff of OKLAHOMA!/ANNIE GET YOUR GUN/CALAMITY JANE isn't all that unusual or innovative. The marketing and intro comments may be there to salvage what is really a pretty bad movie musical western shot on a soundstage and like a live TV show. I don't find the use of the background cyclorama, lit in various scenes with yellow, or pink, or red, or....all that innovative. As noted, it looks more to me like a movie that was produced on a TV budget: All soundstage, with minimal sets backed by the lighted cycs! (Compare to NEW FACES (OF 1952). The actors come off reasonably well, though. And this style was much better realized when Paramount shot LI'L ABNER in 1959. Of couorse, this movie suggests the often repeated question: "what were they thinking?"

The homophobes and bible-thumpers who have trashed this film should just get over themselves and keep their bigoted opinions private. BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN is a beautiful film of unrequited love in another era--an era that was caused by those same bigoted homophobes and bible-thumpers who are portrayed in another great film, GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK. Bravos to the cast and director of BROKEBACK. And to those of you who are so prejudiced against gays, please take a really hard look at your own life--maybe you're a gay person like Ennis, whose parents--or religion--taught you all the awful beliefs that you'll be teaching your own children.

Don't know what "innocent" version of ONCE UPON A MATTRESS you saw in your youth, but this version is even more sanitized than the Broadway show or either of the 2 TV versions.

Your problem with "Pre-marital sex": Larken and Harry in the B'way show and 1972 TV version were not married. In the 1964 TV version, they were secretly married to appease the censors.

"Emphasis on the wedding night sex": the "Man To Man Talk" song between the King and Dauntless also was in the B'way show, and the 1972 TV version.

"Latent homosexuality": Not a part of the B'way show nor the TV versions, but, hey, what planet are you living on? "Will and Grace" airs in the so-called "family hour" on NBC. And Gay people have always been a part of the entertainment industry. Carol Burnett, on her classic TV variety show, often brought on guest stars who were suspected by the general public to be "known-homosexuals." (I can recall my rather naive mother telling me more than 35 years ago that Rock Hudson was gay.) Carol brought stars like Rock, Jim Nabors, Roddy McDowall, Nancy Walker, and many others onto her show. Carol was and is, in many ways, and honorary "friend of Dorothy." And don't let's talk about Bob Mackie. . .perhaps the greatest costumer designer ever!!!

I'm surprised you didn't mention the quasi-incestuous relationship between Agravain and Dauntless, something glossed over in this PC/2005 conservative version. In the original play and 1964 and 1972 TV version the Queen--after manhandling and promising Dauntless that she knows best--actually says (in an aside to the audience) "Oh, God, if I were only 20 years younger." (MY ASIDE: I once saw a production of BRIGADOON at a Christian High School where the 2nd act nightclub scene was changed to a COFFEE SHOP!!! My, how the times have regressed from enlightenment to close-mindedness.

BTW--I did like this version, but the earlier versions were better.

POSSIBLE SPOILER--but I doubt it.

Miss Bankhead is wonderful and wonderfully over-the-top as the religious fanatic with a few skeletons in her closet. We don't know for certain Mrs. Trefoile's youthful indiscretions, but certainly her son fell victim to her in his childhood, and that probably caused his death and helped to cause her to "find the lord." Anyone who thinks the religious right is just a bunch of harmless bible-thumpers should look into this mirror of that warped group. Mrs. Trefoile is right up there with Helen (as in "What The Matter With. . ."), Mrs. White (as in Carrie's mom) and the "Reverend" Trask of DARK SHADOWS--not to mention a few million American voters who helped put a certain shrub into the White House for a second term.

Until tonight, I had not seen this charming film since it was first released in 1987--at that time I was 30. Now I'm quite a few years older [you do the math--:)]. . .I'm not easily brought to tears, not at weddings, not at funerals, not by sad movies. But the beauty of the final moments with the Misses Davis and Gish caused me to tear up and cry like a baby. How wonderful it is to see these two ladies--plus Mr. Price and Ms. Southern--give such moving and real performances, well past the years when most people have retired and decided it was time to sit around and wait for death. If just one person of my age--or any age, older or younger--sees this film and changes a defeatist attitude, then the actors and writer have done their job.

I know my attitude is changed. . .

. . .and can anyone truly doubt that there are powers in our country today who would try to destroy, through hate, fear and religious righteousness, many of their fellow Americans simply because we don't believe in their god and bible and president? Hitler destroyed jews, gypsies and homosexuals; these so-called christians in America who supported George W. Bush would like to do the same. Maybe some of those folks who compared "King George" to Hitler weren't too far off the mark. Just watch and listen to this film and the similarities will become painfully obvious. I only hope my fellow Americans will wake and take action against "W" and his administration in 2008--and please let's hope he doesn't do anything worse than he has already done to harm this great nation.

The production values of this TV musical are just too strange for words. If you've seen it, you know what I mean.

But Lee Remick is fun and sexy as Lola, and she sings quite well (if you've heard her in FOLLIES or ANYONE CAN WHISTLE, I'm sure you'll agree). Jerry Lanning, likewise (and he has a nice sexy bare chest, esp. for a 1960s leading man). Phil Silvers, though, bores me as the Devil, while Jim Backus makes the most of his role as the coach. And Linda Lavin shines as Gloria. Fran Allison (of Kukla, Fran and... ) unfortunately misses the mark as Joe's wife.

This is a 60's rarity that has to be seen to be believed--but don't look for it on DVD anytime soon...

This version is closer to the Broadway show than Carol's 1972 TV production--and its a better show than the '72 version. Carol is perfect as Winnifred, and the rest of the cast are also in top form. Elliot Gould is a nice surprise in his role, and Jane White is absolutely WONDERFUL. Shani Wallis and Bill Hayes are fun, and the chorus is very good, too. The only weaknesses are replacing the original Spanish PANIC with a newly composed dance number (who actually wrote this music, anyway?--its not nearly as fun as that from the B'way show)and taking out HAPPILY EVER AFTER and replacing it with a love song for Carol. The love song doesn't fit at all. . .otherwise, this is a great TV production from the 1960s and it should be released on DVD for all to enjoy.

Quick evaluation: this movie does reflect my experiences of the past 25 years. As a nearing-50 gay man, I can relate to nearly all the principal characters, both personally and as they relate to my friends and acquaintances. Yes, at various times in my life I've been the cute, promiscuous one; the lonely one; the gym bunny (no drugs, though); the (self-perceived) ugly one. . .all those have helped me to become a better, more self-actualized person. Seems there are too many self-loathing queens commenting negatively on this film here. . .maybe they can't see themselves in the characters, but if they were to be honest, they'd realize that they do indeed exist in one or more of these characters.

I enjoyed the film, laughed a little, cried a little. As I said, "been there, done that."

Though the video technology may be dated, this classic musical play, now on DVD, is the best version of Sondheim's most important and polished work on Broadway. If you've never seen SWEENEY TODD, then you must buy this DVD. I saw this production in November 1980 at Kennedy Center in Washington--and fell in love with a pre-"Murder She Wrote" Angela Lansbury. Subsequently, I tried to find any and all of her work, among them: MOVIES: "The Harvey Girls," "The Picture of Dorian Gray," "Manchurian Candidate"; CDs: "Mame," "Dear World," and "Gypsy"; and many more. The rest of the cast is flawless, too. All in all, this wonderful DVD gives us the definitive version of Sondheim's opera!

And I'm being polite, here. . .I've much stronger words to use for this awful mess of a film. The hype was so great when it came into theaters, and I am SOOOO glad I chose to stay away. . . and wait until it was on video. But I was a sap to buy it on DVD.

The premise has been done before--so much better in so many movies.

All I can say is. . .

eBay! Item for Sale. (I'm sure there's another sucker out there willing to buy it from me.)

Rob Marshall's film adaptation of CHICAGO is brilliant, and so true to the spirit of the original 1975 Broadway show (with appropriate changes made for the MTV generation). The cast--principals and chorus--are ALL EXCELLENT. Any poster who has bashed this film version (including those who claim the original show was a BAD Broadway musical) are showing their ignorance of advances in the form (both on stage and on film), and are surely still living in the era of ROSE MARIE and THE STUDENT PRINCE! In addition to American vaudeville and burlesque, CHICAGO's Broadway lineage includes Rodgers' and Hammerstein's 1947 show ALLEGRO, Hal Prince's production of CABARET, and the Prince/Sondheim show FOLLIES.

If you don't "get it," that's your problem!

CHICAGO is a modern-day classic and well-deserving of its Oscars!!

But one must consider its time period. 1933. Not a really sophisticated period in our history, nor particularly graphic. But the cast does a wonderful job, and the script is good--again, considering the year it was made. One cannot compare this movie to anything made even at the end of the 30s (SON OF FRANKENTSTEIN, for example.) It's a product of its time, and it succeeds as such. For my taste, it is far superior to any number of the no-plot slasher pics made in the past 25 years, the original HALLOWEEN being the exception. MYSTERY is not for everyone--but for fans of genre films of years past, this one ranks right up there with FRANKENSTEIN, KING KONG, and DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE--all of the same era.

. . .as the FAB 5 prove.

What a great show! The five guys who do the "make-overs" should prove to the rest of America (the right-wingers, religious-right-ers, ex-gays', et al) that we're not perverts and bitchy queens--well, maybe some of are queens, but we're not all bitchy.

The 5 show great care and affection for their "victims," and I don't mean that they want to take them to bed. The only concern is to make the makeover guy happy and successful.

Thanks, Bravo, for this ground-breaking new "reality" show.