maggie-122

Too slow for video. They could've just posted a photo. The lead reminds me of how stoic Robert Stack was in "The Untouchables".

Fine for insomniacs; this could be better than a sleeping pill.

I saw the first episode and just don't want to waste my time listening to such slow-paced dialogue. On screen and part of the plot, these agent-instructors were boring their student cops and their TV audience at the same time.

Don't let the R rating fool you; it stands for Rousing! If the Golden Girls married Sex and the City, this would be their love child. Michon is amazing as the film's Triple Threat: co-writer, director, and star. Supporting cast is also marvelous, which makes it difficult to single out any one performer but for me, the standout was Dot Marie Jones as Christine. Playing the characters straight was a great decision on the part of director Michon. This is one of the best methods in comedy, leaving pratfalls for the kids ... well, actually, there are pratfalls in this as well, in scenes where pratfalls are unexpectedly funny. (W. Bruce Cameron, co-writer with Michon, and known for "8 Simple Rules ... " as well as "A Dog's Purpose," "A Dog's Journey," and "The Dogs of Christmas" made a cameo appearance in Muffin Top as the plastic surgeon.) Michelle Featherstone's music is terrific, as is Tom Clancy's cinematography, Brian O'Hara's sets, and Yoshio Kohashi's flawless editing. If there's a showing near you, see it. If not, download it.

The film had no plot advancement. So many possibilities, so little follow through. It's hard to believe the story we were ultimately led to was one of the least interesting paths to follow. Why bother with flashbacks when the murder, and the motive for it, were never fully realized? There was no story arc. The film seemed to fragment and dissipate into nothing.

What was the point of Richardson's stalker? Why did the Ontkean character turn her down sexually citing "bad timing" and then suddenly they fall into each other's arms with no idea of what happened in between? There was a lack of continuity, such as Richardson having sex with the stalker guy she seemed to like at one point, and her nightgown is down to her waist with exposed breast, but in the immediately following shot, her nightgown is fully up, straps and all.

What was the Fricker tumor thing all about? It seemed to be a temporary distraction, as were most of the scenes.

However, I did stay awake through this dud of a film and that's saying something.

If you love Mankell's Wallander books, then see the Swedish versions, either with Rolf Lassgard or Kirster Henricksson. They have English subtitles, and the character of Wallander is much better defined and as the books describe.

Branagh is a fine actor, but he's no Wallander. Adding weight, a stubble, and acting depressed does not make Branagh anything like the written Wallander. He doesn't chew the scenery, the scenery chews him.

The drama lacks depth. None of the characters in the British version is worth caring about. The plots, which combine aspects of several Wallander novels, seem weak, especially if you've read or seen the excitement of the Swedish versions (with English subtitles).

Wallander is a great detective and should be seen as interpreted by Lassgard or Henricksson, who have him down magnificently.

Unfortunately, since Branagh has done his Wallanders, Yellow Bird has stopped adding English subtitles to the good Swedish Wallanders, thereby screwing English-speaking fans of the real thing.

This is by far the best-told, best-acted and best-produced of all the many movies about Elizabeth Short's story.

Lucie Arnaz's restrained performance succeeds in presenting Short as a woman of thwarted ambition, floating in a vacuum of failure, just hanging on by a thread. She should have received an Emmy for it.

This version of the Black Dahlia story has more in-depth characterization of Elizabeth Short than other versions, which go more for sensationalism.

I don't understand why "Who Is The Black Dahlia?" isn't out on DVD, especially considering its cult following.

I preferred this version to last year's "Capote," except for the casting of Hope Davis as Slim Keith. It was disconcerting to see a comparatively overweight actress playing the part of the luminous Slim Keith who was given that nick name for obvious reasons, especially in the Twist scene. Slim Keith was a study in grace and beauty. Hope Davis is not.

This is only one of two films where the actual people were much better looking than the actors who portray them. (The other movie was "The Doors," where both Jim Morrison and Pamela Courson, portrayed respectively by Val Kilmer and Meg Ryan, were much more beautiful than the movie's stars.)

Toby Jones' portrayal of Capote in "Infamous" was more nuanced than Phillip Seymour Hoffman's in "Capote," though both are masterful actors. Jones brought forth more of Capote's capricious personality. Dialog was more sparkling in "Infamous," as was Capote's dialog in real life.

It's too bad "Infamous" didn't receive the same media attention as "Capote," as there's nothing wrong with seeing the same period in the life of one of our greatest writers, on the screen twice within an 18 month period.

This has been one of my ten favorite films of all time. I showed a copy of it to the children of friends in Guadalajara. None of the children had ever seen or heard of it. They all loved it, and cheered with joy.

The children asked if they could invite all their friends in for another showing of "The Brave One," so, soon, the entire room was full. Standing room only.

Adults and kids alike saw the faith, hope and inspiration in this outstanding movie.

Some teachers show the film in classes studying other cultures, and it always goes over very big, as it should.

No remake can ever come close to this version..