Reviews written by registered user
|20 reviews in total|
This crude exhibition of zero talent is far worse than most actual porno films. Such films usually are at least somewhat funny. I watched it only because the usually excellent Ray Sharkey was the star. He is the only person in the cast you'll probably recognize. The film is degraded. It is filled with sex shots and sex plot line that don't make sense. It jumps from scene to scene very awkwardly. Sharkey himself shows little of his acting ability. The rest of the cast shows virtually no talent. A horrible movie. A true disappointment for Sharkey fans like me. I don't understand why he made it. Perhaps to give homosexuals some screen time.
I don't think I have ever written in to pan a movie before. This piece
of trash, with zero research, background information, cinematography or
interesting dialog is utterly worthless. The rave comments are
astounding! There is nothing here.....some old guy and a goof ball
saying they killed a bunch of people. Well, maybe they did, and maybe
they didn't. It is not horrifying, it is senseless and boring.
I'll admit I'm only 1/3 the way through the film. I will finish it. But I think it is the worst trash I have ever ever seen.
I cannot fathom the compliments. It could all be made up. True or untrue makes no difference. It is boring and worthless.
That's my only comment. I see that the Susie of the movie was Sonny Bono's 3rd wife. But I swore she was Sarandon throughout the film until I checked IMDb. I'm surprised no one else noted this. Am I blind? Or did Sarandon secretly block this on her resume? I need 10 lines. The rest is filler. I actually enjoyed the movie. But agree with how awful it was. Oh, to be a kid again. Then one could enjoy nonsense thoroughly. I had thought this might be a Cornel Wilde production. He did some pretty seedy films, though some good ones too. I thought Majors had plenty of competition for bad acting in this film. But the color was fine. And there was excitement. Gotta lower your cynicysm.
Chuck Connors and Johnny Crawford are Lucas and Mark McCain is this
excellent half hour western. It was so good they decided to make it a
series. Thus "The Rifleman" was born.
This was far better than any subsequent episode of The Rifleman series, which was a bit too "nice" to be realistic.
I cannot recall if McCain's rifle in this Zane Grey episode had the nifty fast-action features of the series' rifle.
I am surprised that there are no other comments on this generally very good western anthology series on TV. It was certainly a popular feature on Friday nights about 60 years ago.
I believe the host, Dick Powell, left the series to host his own hour long Dick Powell Theater on Tuesday nights. This series of individual one hour dramas basically lasted until Powell's death. All of these shows should be issued on DVD while those of us who liked and would buy them are still alive.
So far no one has mentioned the origin of this show.
The first episode was actually an episode of the weekly series hosted by Dick Powell: Zane Grey Theater. I believe this was a popular Friday night show in around the mid to late '50s. Each show was unrelated to the others. They were just westerns. I have no idea if they were supposed to be based on Zane Grey stories or not.
I know Chuck Connors was the hero and father. He had a son in this episode. I think it was Johnny Crawford, but I'm not sure. I believe he has to kill someone...something he either never did or almost never did on the TV series.
My recollection is that this one episode of Zane Grey was so popular that they decided to make it a series. Thus The Rifleman. It was certainly better than any other Rifleman episode because it was quite an intense drama.
There are no credits given for the song or the singer for the ballad
with which this movie begins, either at the beginning or end of the
film itself or here at IMDb. I assume Paul Dunlop at least wrote it
since he is credited with songs for other western films.
If anyone finds out the name of the singer, please post it. He's not bad.
I'm amazed anyone else saw this. I caught it by accident on the Western Channel (Starz) and surprised that a film boasting Neville Brand, plus other famous character actors like Alan Hale, Jr. and Bruce Bennett would be so unknown.
This movie was much better than I expected. ++++ Jean Peters actually does a passable job as a pirate and does decent work in her sword fights. (To the extent she may have a double doing the action, it's hard to tell...but Peters herself obviously is doing a good deal of it, and doing it well.) ++++ With a good and serious script, this could have been an excellent film. But it's basically cheesy. Still entertaining however. ++++ Not up to a regular Jacques Tournier film, but definitely above a regular Jean Peters film. Color is typical of this '50s time period, ie. too garish and not realistic. The actors for Blackbeard and her first mate and the drunken doctor were good. Louis Jordan was a bit weak. I don't think Debra Paget was right either. But certainly Jean Peters and Debra Paget were probably the two best looking female stars in the '50s.
Now that I've seen the film, I must only vote a 6. Basically, my
problem is that the tripods doing most of the damage are rather
ridiculous. They don't make sense physically and seem to be the result
of a very poor imagination. I expected a LOT better from this movie.
The scenes of destruction are fine. Those running the tripods aren't bad. But if you can't buy the tripods, the whole concept becomes somewhat silly.
Also, the trailers, which were excellent and showed all the suspense you're really going to find in the film, were in bright colors. The film itself is like a washed out version of the trailer. Since the action seemed just as realistic in the trailers, I don't see that the washed out quality was needed. Every epic, sci fi or ancient, uses a tinted lens or off coloring. Haven't any of these geniuses ever seen a David Lean film? Also The Sand Pebbles and Ben Hur and Khartoum and The Wild Bunch, etc. could show realism in bright hues. Looks like a lost art.
Colin weeps across 3 continents. Not for an instant does one get the idea of the brilliance and bold confidence the real Alexander must have had. The battle scenes start well and then turn into MTV-style shaky colors confusing what is happening. There is not a good performance in the film. Philip, Alexander's father, was a brilliant general and king who built up Macedonia to a world power...but the movie shows him as a full time drunk. But wherever we go and whatever he does, Alexander finds occasion to...not exult in his victories, not glory in battle...but weep, and weep some more, and then some more. This is so boring...Troy was a masterpiece compared to this drivel and the actors in that film, like Brad Pitt or not, were excellent in their roles. And oh for a Peter O'Toole as Lawrence or Heston as El Cid or Gibson as Braveheart. Picture any of them weeping throughout their conquests and you get the idea of how horribly hilariously bad this piece of garbage was. (And, except for Natural Born Killers, I normally like Oliver Stone movies.)
I have purchased this item twice, once from Borders and once from an online
DVD seller. Neither time would the DVD play in my machine or anyone else's
machine I tried.
Since my DVD player has never before rejected ANY DVD product, including poorly kept rentals, I must assume that the entire issue of this item is flawed.
Has anyone else experienced this? Has the DVD worked for anyone else?
I am surprized I have not seen any other reports on this problem.
I have also reported this to Amazon, but they seem unwilling to show it.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |