George-C.-Scott Movie Reviews

I wasted some good time watching this movie until the damn awful end. a monkey for christs sakes. man and this is a Edgar Allen Poe story, well I guess why the director felt to do this remake then. Val Kilmer is wasted and so is Scott. ahhhhh. cant believe it was a monkey, I was gonna go for insane patient or something, or some supernatural being of somekind, but a damn monkey. the end was not suspenseful at all when the monkey attacked Kilmer. bahhhhh

George C. Scott does a superb job portraying a recently retired detective who is dissilusioned with his life and sulks in his study playing chess with himself. But a series of grissly murders in town and the subsequent arrest of his daughter's fiance lead him into his own private investigation.

The movie is based on the famous story by Edgar Allen Poe. Like all of Scott's later films, his acting is great, but everything else can't seem to live up to it. Scott has such a great appreciation for the power of words and subtle facial expressions and gestures (he probably aquired this from his theatre training). However, most of the other actors seem plastic and unconvincing. His daughter does a particularly horrible job. She plays her role lik a 1980's teenager living in the 19th century. Val Kilmer (very young looking) does a decent job with his role but nothing spectacular. I think it had to do more with the script than his acting abilities. The ending of the film is very bad. I won't give away any secrets, but the word is "corny". I think a better script and editing would have helped immensly.

Yes it's a monkey!!! Either you were too illiterate or didn't pay attention in school. It's like being disappointed that Romeo and Juliet die at the end of that movie. HELLO!!!!!!!

I wasted some good time watching this movie until the damn awful end. a monkey for christs sakes. man and this is a Edgar Allen Poe story, well I guess why the director felt to do this remake then. Val Kilmer is wasted and so is Scott. ahhhhh. cant believe it was a monkey, I was gonna go for insane patient or something, or some supernatural being of somekind, but a damn monkey. the end was not suspenseful at all when the monkey attacked Kilmer. bahhhhh

George C. Scott does a superb job portraying a recently retired detective who is dissilusioned with his life and sulks in his study playing chess with himself. But a series of grissly murders in town and the subsequent arrest of his daughter's fiance lead him into his own private investigation.

The movie is based on the famous story by Edgar Allen Poe. Like all of Scott's later films, his acting is great, but everything else can't seem to live up to it. Scott has such a great appreciation for the power of words and subtle facial expressions and gestures (he probably aquired this from his theatre training). However, most of the other actors seem plastic and unconvincing. His daughter does a particularly horrible job. She plays her role lik a 1980's teenager living in the 19th century. Val Kilmer (very young looking) does a decent job with his role but nothing spectacular. I think it had to do more with the script than his acting abilities. The ending of the film is very bad. I won't give away any secrets, but the word is "corny". I think a better script and editing would have helped immensly.

Yes it's a monkey!!! Either you were too illiterate or didn't pay attention in school. It's like being disappointed that Romeo and Juliet die at the end of that movie. HELLO!!!!!!!

I wasted some good time watching this movie until the damn awful end. a monkey for christs sakes. man and this is a Edgar Allen Poe story, well I guess why the director felt to do this remake then. Val Kilmer is wasted and so is Scott. ahhhhh. cant believe it was a monkey, I was gonna go for insane patient or something, or some supernatural being of somekind, but a damn monkey. the end was not suspenseful at all when the monkey attacked Kilmer. bahhhhh

George C. Scott does a superb job portraying a recently retired detective who is dissilusioned with his life and sulks in his study playing chess with himself. But a series of grissly murders in town and the subsequent arrest of his daughter's fiance lead him into his own private investigation.

The movie is based on the famous story by Edgar Allen Poe. Like all of Scott's later films, his acting is great, but everything else can't seem to live up to it. Scott has such a great appreciation for the power of words and subtle facial expressions and gestures (he probably aquired this from his theatre training). However, most of the other actors seem plastic and unconvincing. His daughter does a particularly horrible job. She plays her role lik a 1980's teenager living in the 19th century. Val Kilmer (very young looking) does a decent job with his role but nothing spectacular. I think it had to do more with the script than his acting abilities. The ending of the film is very bad. I won't give away any secrets, but the word is "corny". I think a better script and editing would have helped immensly.

Yes it's a monkey!!! Either you were too illiterate or didn't pay attention in school. It's like being disappointed that Romeo and Juliet die at the end of that movie. HELLO!!!!!!!

On the surface this film is about a discovery of a method that can produce cheap gas, and "Big Oil's" attempt to supress that discovery for decades in the name of profits. The Nazi scientists make the discovery and in an attempt for immunity from prosecution they try to trade the secret to the Allies. Instead, an officer deals the information privately and the oil industry spend the next 40 years hiding the secret and [sipping] up the oil profits.

The movie focuses on George C. Scott as the LAPD investigator who is placed on a murder case. Through cryptic clues and some convenient insight the trail leads to Germany (via Italy) and the Los Angeles officer jumps on a plane. Once there he learns of the secret as he finds more people connected in the international conspiracy. The more he learns the closer the danger comes to Scott himself.

The tension of movie relies on the confrontations between Scott and the myriad of talented actors he interviews. If these were better built they could make for a fun movie despite the plot. Unfortunately, almost all the characters lack any conviction. I don't believe that Scott's character cares at all about the oil or murders. He just wants to win and be done with it. The other characters are worse. Most of the characters are murdered just as soon as the plot no longer needs them ... sometimes seconds after Scott is finished interviewing them. Most of them seem to be working for the best accent/foreign language oscar. There are some thick german accents that arent understandable and sections of germen dialog that arent subtitled. Surprisingly, even Sir John Gielgud snarls his way through his dialog. Brando is as usual in his own world. His accent, I can only guess, is supposted to be Southern/Texan? but with his normal lisp doesnt come out too well.

In the end there is nothing special or outstanding about this movie besides the plot, which is unique but suffers from obvious plot devices to manipulate without bothering to construct real characters. Almost as believable as your typical Bond film. There is nothing in this movie you cant find somewhere else (although maybe not altogether) so if these actors are favorites I suggest nearly any other movie. At a minimum rent first. Try JFK, Patton, The Godfather, Julius Caesar, Rocky, The Insider

I liked this movie. Brando and George C. Scott knock heads in this battle between integrity and big money. The world would probably be a lot better off if the "Formula" was being used today. Check this one out I think you will like it if you like dramas.

This semi-historical drama features a young, rail-thin Tyrone Power in his first starring role, as Jonathan Blake, a fictional English entrepreneur who has a rags-to-riches career at the famed Lloyd's insurance company. He is also the (again, fictional) childhood friend of Lord Horatio Nelson, naval hero of the Battle of Trafalgar, where the British turned aside and decisively defeated the combined armada of Napoleonic France and his Spanish allies. Power is attractive, but a bit stiff; the film is surprisingly engaging, though a bit disappointing due to the liberties it takes with history. Mostly, though, this is good, clean fun, classic 'Thirties fluff. Plenty of good character actors, too!

Freddie Bartholomew steals each scene he's in during the first half-hour or so of this lavish production, and then he grows up into Tyrone Power and we forget him until the very last scene.

This was the film that made Tyrone Power a star. With all the costumes and the historical names being used and the moral clash of patriotism and monetary gain, the plot's more than a little leaden at times, and we're left to ponder if the end does in fact justify the means. The plot sometimes lectures, sometimes enlightens, but mostly yawns for two hours.

It takes someone with considerable charm to all but carry such a film, and that's just what Tyrone Power does. The character of Johnathan Blake is that much more likeable and sympathetic because of him. And top it all off with his famous good looks, which the camera made sure to capture, and you have yourself the birth of a star.

This isn't at all one of the best historical movie ever made, but it's worth the viewing for Tyrone Power fans, if only for the close-ups. That's eye candy, to be sure, and then some. Just don't expect a British accent. Nobody's perfect.

I was a little surprised that I actually liked this version of O.T. The costuming was good, in fact much better than I expected. George C. Scott was a bit too likeable as Fagan, and I agree, the rage simply wasn't there.It's a shame since Scott was/is a fine actor. The Jewish sterotyping wasn't as bad as in other films, although the words "dirty Jew" does crop up from time to time. Dickens would later remove a lot of the more offensive slurs in later editions of the book. Tim Curry sleep walked through the whole film. I'm wondering if he really WAS drunk during the taping. His ragged costume and yellowed teeth did little to help. Others have done a much more menacing "Bill Sikes" and it shows. Robert Newton of "Treasure Island" fame and Oliver Reed are among the better performances. For the purist, the basic storyline is intact, but like any true Dickens fan, you find yourself asking, "please sir, I want some more"

This 1982 British TVM of the Charles Dickens classic directed by Clive Donner has a teleplay by James Goldman, unsubtle class distinction between the rich and the poor where the poor are comic grotesques, but also a gentle performance by George C Scott as Fagin.
The David Lean 1948 version presented Alec Guinness' Fagin as both lowlife Jew and malignant old homosexual, with protests by Jewish groups forcing Lean to cut footage in order for his film to be released in America. Scott's own nose probably helps him pass for Jewish, and here he shows sexual interest in Nancy to counterbalance the homosexual subtext of a man who enjoys the company of young boys. However Scott's infamous rage is in check, perhaps because he shares some much tube time with children. If purists may find this Fagin is more likeable than Guinness' that seems hardly important to those interested in witnessing great acting. It's only a pity that Scott is a relatively minor player in the narrative, but even the title boy becomes a relatively minor player in this adaptation!
As Bill Sikes, Tim Curry is rather non-threatening and his dog seems dubbed, but Eileen Atkins as Mrs Mann, the head of the orphanage, gets some laughs from her duplicitous agenda. With Oliver being an Alice in Wonderland blonde and one half expecting the performers to burst into the songs from the musical Oliver! at any moment, the treatment doesn't achieve a semblence of reality until Scott appears, and after that rises and falls. This Oliver is never really in any serious peril, notably not from Bill Sikes, but at least Fagin retains his dignity.

When watching this TV movie, there are blackouts and long pauses between scenes, and the film's heavy hands are so laden with corn that one feels cheated out of the commercials. DA and GCS are dragged through syndicated citcom leftovers in a plot that every viewer knows before watching. Minimal elderly hijinx ensue, and the life's lesson is regurgitated shamelessly. Scott's cliched veediot "mother", a slapstickily inept hitman, and an inexplicable/unexplained mute punk girl provide the gratuitous sideplots. In short, anyone who would like to own this movie should already have taped it of the tele. Lo siento.

Ever wish you could stumble across some unclaimed money and use it to your hearts content. It would be a dream come true, or would it?

"Pals" teams Jack Stobbs (George C. Scott)and Art Riddle (Don Ameche)as two life time buddies who lead good, solid, basic lives. That is until they stumble across a brief case full of money that seems to have no owner.

This hilarious comedy captures the hearts of all would be treausre hunters as the pals pursue their dreams with the purchases of simple things they've always wanted. But little purchases soon fail to satisfy Mr. Stobbs as he desires to join the upper class of society.

Fern Strobbs (Sylvia Sidney), Mr. Stobbs aging mother, captures the heart of viewers with her independent wit and that ability of older people to speak their mind while all others be damned. Along the way to improving their life style, Fern creates a few problems of her own, and manages to pick up a young runaway, Certainty Dowd (Susan Rinell). Certainty's colored hair and brash style delight Fern, but irritate Mr. Stobbs creating a delightful, emotionally charged challenge between Mr. Stobbs and Certainty.

As is often the case when money enters the picture, discontentment sets in as Mr. Riddle becomes disillusioned with the new life style. Sadness enters the picture as this lifelong friendship is put to the test.

Of course, all money has an owner somewhere, and this miraculous find belongs to the mob. While Stobb and Riddle pursue their new wealth, the mob stumbles along on a bumbleing struggle to discover who took their money and where they have gone with it.

The delightful surprise ending will leave the most adventurous dreamer wondering if that briefcase, bag or box of money might be hiding around the next curve waiting for discovery.

"Pals" is an ageless adventure all dreamers can enjoy.

holy shiznay in the pants, this one blows, though Kinski's in it she doesnt save it, but shes hot. its a great, great, great crappy Die Hard tip off as Plummer holds up a skitresort and Griffith(not even close to Willis) is the one man army to take them down. how painstakingly chunky and frunky

This film is awful. I love martial arts and was hoping to find some here. Unfortunately no. Thomas Griffin is a horrible actor. His character in this movie is poorly written - as is the movie itself. Perhaps the only redeeming point of the entire film is christopher plummer as the bad guy. Save your money, there are hundreds of better movies out there, including your neighbors summer vacation movies he's been wanting to show you.

This movie plays out like a very low-rent Diehard. In this case Thomas Ian Griffith is Bruce Willis, Christopher Plummer is Alan Rickman, and Vladimir Kulich (he's the reason that I bothered to watch this film in the first place) is Alexander Gudonov. Instead of a wife, Griffith's character has a brother, sister-in-law, and their newborn child. Nastasja Kinski, the entertainment director at the hotel, turns into a love interest for Griffith's character. Plummer plays a former mob hitman who assembles a band of mercenaries to take over the mountain-top resort where his former mob boss is staying in order to get his hands on a fortune in diamonds belonging to his former boss. In order to cover up their theft, they intend to bring an entire glacial field down on top of the resort to wipe it out. There is a scene in it where Griffith's character is supposed to be making a menacing threat to Plummer, and I swear, Griffith is smirking his way all the way through it. I think that he should go back to the world of soap operas where he came from and maybe get a little more acting experience. The acting in this movie is ... and the storyline is such a lousy ... of Diehard it's hilarious. This movie isn't just bad; it's R-E-A-L-L-Y B-A-D!!! It's the kind of movie that you want to get together with a group of friends to watch so you can sling insults at the screen. It would be perfect for the Mystery Science Theatre 3000 treatment.