MaxPlumm

*Possible spoilers ahead-you've been warned!*

Typical Oliver Stone conspiracy gobbledygook. But I would expect nothing less from a positive biographer of Fidel Castro. Three hours of "power mad", "Blew up Cambodia", "certifiably insane", Evil Nixon (TM).

I do not know what film some other reviewers were watching, but it certainly was not the same one I saw. The film is three hours in duration, and yet manages to only pack about five minutes of fact into its content. There is absolutely no historical perspective or context given to any of Nixon's decisions, the worst example of which was the film's depiction of the bombing campaign against the Khmer Rouge and North Vietnamese army in Cambodia. Showing a callous Nixon and stock footage of bombs dropping hardly does that involved and complex issue justice, and merely serves to stereotype Nixon further.

The scene towards the end of the film where Kissinger and Haig await Nixon's signature on his resignation letter is perhaps even more absurd. To even remotely suggest, as this scene does, that Nixon considered imposing martial law to retain his grip on power simply ignores all reality. This was the same man who chose not to challenge the 1960 election, and more importantly, resigned the presidency before there was ever even an impeachment trial in the Senate. Hardly the moves someone supposedly as "power mad" as Nixon should've made.

This does not even address Stone's hopelessly absurd theories regarding the 18 1/2 minute gap or the director's sad obsession with the Kennedy assassination. Perhaps Stone could do himself and all of us a favor by ceasing to relive and rewrite the tortured 1960s and instead make a film about Cambodia under Pol Pot, whose victory Evil Nixon's (TM) bombing campaign was attempting to prevent. It Stone is truly interested in informing his audience about tragedy and injustice, there is not a more worthy subject.

*Possible spoilers*

The Killing Fields attempts to tell the story of the Cambodian holocaust through its two main characters, NY Times journalist Sidney Schanberg and Cambodian Dith Pran. Unfortunately, the film only succeeds in telling Schanberg's view of the Cambodian Holocaust.

As mentioned by a previous reviewer, Pol Pot, the architect of the tragedy, is not mentioned once. Schanberg's unwillingness to see the Khmer Rouge for what they really were is briefly touched on, but that is excused by the journalist attempting to blame the holocaust on the Nixon Administration and their bombing campaign. While it can be argued that there may have been more humane ways to attempt to prevent the Communist takeover, realistically there weren't any other options available to the Nixon administration given the legislative handicaps placed on them by the Congress regarding action in Cambodia. It would've been nice to see that point addressed, as it would have been nice for the film to acknowledge that four days before the Khmer Rouge victory, Schanberg wrote a column for the NY Times entitled, "Indochina without Americans: For most, a better life." The horrors being committed by the Khmer Rouge in eastern Cambodia had been reported by refugees for well over a year by that point, and yet Schanberg and the Times refused to acknowledge it.

It is bad enough that this film perpetuates the canard that the Americans were to blame for the holocaust because of their bombing campaign. What is absolutely unacceptable is that while passing judgment on US policy, this film never once brings up, let alone finds fault with, the North Vietnamese policies in Cambodia. It was under the auspices of the North Vietnamese that the Khmer Rouge was founded in 1959. It was in Hanoi that Pol Pot and 30,000 other KR's found sanctuary and training. It was Hanoi that initially violated the neutrality of Cambodia, taxing and conscripting peasants into their cause of conquest. It is the very height of absurdity that this film blames the US while not once mentioning either Pol Pot or the NVA's role in what occurred.

All that being said, the story of the Cambodian holocaust is very important history that should be known by all. It is my hope that this tale will be given more balanced treatment in the future by someone in Hollywood. But given its current aversion to making films about the crimes of Communism or ones with plot, I won't hold my breath.

I enjoy bad movies, because they provide tons of humor in unintentional ways. Ed Wood was particularly talented in this regard, and his Plan 9 and Bride of the Monster are true 'classics'. Sadly, Night of the Ghouls doesn't deliver like his other films did. The only laugh out loud moments are provided by Paul Marco (Kelton the Cop) when he intially visits the Haunted House. Steer clear of this one, and be glad you didn't drop twenty bucks on the

This is a terrible film in every sense of the word. First, it never should have been made, given that the original 1968 Planet of the Apes is one of the best films of all-time. Second, it just plain reeks! The humans talk, have great teeth and their women wear lipstick. So the 'shock' of the Apes meeting a talking human from space is non-existent.

The climatic showdown between man and ape is predictable after the first five minutes, and the film's ending is so nonsensically idiotic it defies description. Avoid at all costs!

This is easily one of my favorite films of all-time. The acting is top-notch, the story is well developed, and the mood is chilling and not unnecessarily gory. If you have not seen this film, GO NOW to the nearest location that rents or sells videotapes/ DVD's and get it.

Oy, I don't know where my friend dug this one up from, but please bury it again. 'Artsy-fartsy crap' is a kind way of describing this goofy train wreck. I was going to give it a 1, but the visuals boosted it to a 2.

This was really a well made film. My friends and I usually gab through most movies, but this one shut us up, which says a lot. Stan Winston did a good job in his directorial debut, as Pumpkinhead will grab your attention and keep it throughout. Henriksen is great as revenge driven Ed Harley, and the monster is anything but your typical 80's horror cheese. Check it out, you won't be disappointed.

From start to finish, this is an engrossing, wonderful film. It is one of the greats, science fiction or otherwise. Heston and McDowall give solid performances, and Maurice Evans is particularly good as Dr. Zaius.

Without question the best in the long series, and it absolutely blows away Tim Burton's horrible 2001 remake