Jack-Nicholson Movie Reviews

Another great early Nichols. He was on one mean ... streak I tell ya. Virgina Wolf, the The Graduate, Catch 22, and then this film. Which is: Very well done, Very mature, extremely confident in it's telling, thought provoking, well acted, well written, etc.

Jack Nicholson and Art Garfunkle star as best buds in this story that follows their sexual encounters from college to middle age. That's really it. No other action takes place in this movie that doesn't have something to do with, yup, Carnal Knowledge. Good title too. Don't you think? Just grabs you.

Like Catch 22, which I just saw, this movie is all about great framing and long one takes. Even though this movie takes place almost completely inside and is very much like a play, it is very cinematic. Nichols always has the camera in the right place, or at least an interesting place. The structure of the film is also so interesting. It just pops around from sexaul encounter to sexual encounter. And it addresses the whole spectrum...: first love, to marriage, to adultery, to apathy, to..well, it covers a lot. And though it tends to focus mainly on the negative, which can be a little bleak, it sure is real.

At times it can be a little slow and a little tedious (you sort of feel Nichols getting a little TOO into some of these long takes), but this remains a very good, intelligent, unflinching movie. Check it out.

B, B+

This film tells the truth. Not such an old film, the mature adult situations are still happening today even in this decade. Very controversial film of its time. Almost was not released and could not be shown on Network TV at all. Finally in the mid-1980's it was finally allowed to be shown on the then-independent KTLA Channel 5 Los Angeles tv station. Hard-hitting drama about two male roomates. One man (played by Art Gurfunkel as "Sandy") is more sensitive to woman while the other man played by Jack Nicholson feels so macho he must have more than tweleve women a year. When Art falls in love with Candice Bergen (she plays a virgin) it starts as a good friendship until Jack Nicholson buds in. He secretly makes a phone call to her without Art knowing. Jack dates Candice and she loses her virginity by the macho man who can get any woman he wants anywhere, anyway. (So why, Candice?) When Jack talks about his "girlfriend", Art dos not know it's the same woman he loves. When Candice decides to break it off with Jack, Jack becomes a cad and thinks he can break it off first. Well, Jack now has to keep his mouth shut whenever Art and Candice are in the same room together with him. Jack finally comes to the realization that he is getting older and can't get as many woman as he used to. He feels bad when he sees Candice and Art together (metal break-through finally!) Then, the sizzling Ann-Margret enters the picture. Who becomes the more mature man? Who is given LOVE, not just LUST & LEAVE. Some men will find this film a bit hard to swallow. Some women who see this film will say "AMEN!" by the end of it. There is a lesson to be learned here. Get the message of the film. Carol Kane and Rita Moreno are also in the cast. No special features on this DVD. Wide-Screen and Full-Screen available on either side of DVD.

Mike Nichols was on a roll after "The Graduate" and "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" "Carnal Knowledge" is his most intimate film, and one of the most daring of the 1970s. Its frankness in dealing with young men's sexual psychology has not lost its edge after thirty years. On top of it all, it gives us Nicholson's first truly great performance. The early scenes between him and Garfunkel are fresh and sincere. Spanning some three decades of their friendship, we see how their attitudes towards sex, and women in general, shape their lives. Both actors do a fine job of communicating the gravity of those years, and the most devastating scene is the one where Jack delivers a long and furious tirade at Ann-Margret. "I don't want a job, I want you," she says, to which he replies, "I'm taken...by me!" Brutally honest, yes, but because we've seen what comes before, it's perfectly logical. These men are still affected by the innocence of their younger years, but that innocence is violently clashing with their adult understanding (or lack thereof)--the understanding that the personality is in perpetual motion, and that it becomes difficult to keep up. The movie is often bleak in its settings and its subject matter, but the characters are very real--they challenge you to challenge them. Their dysfunctions may enlighten you, and there is nothing bleak about being enlightened. Oh, and Ann-Margret achieves bombshell status with this movie, playing a woman who at first seems to be the answer to all of Nicholson's fantasies. "Bye Bye Birdie" it ain't.

Another great early Nichols. He was on one mean ... streak I tell ya. Virgina Wolf, the The Graduate, Catch 22, and then this film. Which is: Very well done, Very mature, extremely confident in it's telling, thought provoking, well acted, well written, etc.

Jack Nicholson and Art Garfunkle star as best buds in this story that follows their sexual encounters from college to middle age. That's really it. No other action takes place in this movie that doesn't have something to do with, yup, Carnal Knowledge. Good title too. Don't you think? Just grabs you.

Like Catch 22, which I just saw, this movie is all about great framing and long one takes. Even though this movie takes place almost completely inside and is very much like a play, it is very cinematic. Nichols always has the camera in the right place, or at least an interesting place. The structure of the film is also so interesting. It just pops around from sexaul encounter to sexual encounter. And it addresses the whole spectrum...: first love, to marriage, to adultery, to apathy, to..well, it covers a lot. And though it tends to focus mainly on the negative, which can be a little bleak, it sure is real.

At times it can be a little slow and a little tedious (you sort of feel Nichols getting a little TOO into some of these long takes), but this remains a very good, intelligent, unflinching movie. Check it out.

B, B+

This film tells the truth. Not such an old film, the mature adult situations are still happening today even in this decade. Very controversial film of its time. Almost was not released and could not be shown on Network TV at all. Finally in the mid-1980's it was finally allowed to be shown on the then-independent KTLA Channel 5 Los Angeles tv station. Hard-hitting drama about two male roomates. One man (played by Art Gurfunkel as "Sandy") is more sensitive to woman while the other man played by Jack Nicholson feels so macho he must have more than tweleve women a year. When Art falls in love with Candice Bergen (she plays a virgin) it starts as a good friendship until Jack Nicholson buds in. He secretly makes a phone call to her without Art knowing. Jack dates Candice and she loses her virginity by the macho man who can get any woman he wants anywhere, anyway. (So why, Candice?) When Jack talks about his "girlfriend", Art dos not know it's the same woman he loves. When Candice decides to break it off with Jack, Jack becomes a cad and thinks he can break it off first. Well, Jack now has to keep his mouth shut whenever Art and Candice are in the same room together with him. Jack finally comes to the realization that he is getting older and can't get as many woman as he used to. He feels bad when he sees Candice and Art together (metal break-through finally!) Then, the sizzling Ann-Margret enters the picture. Who becomes the more mature man? Who is given LOVE, not just LUST & LEAVE. Some men will find this film a bit hard to swallow. Some women who see this film will say "AMEN!" by the end of it. There is a lesson to be learned here. Get the message of the film. Carol Kane and Rita Moreno are also in the cast. No special features on this DVD. Wide-Screen and Full-Screen available on either side of DVD.

Mike Nichols was on a roll after "The Graduate" and "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" "Carnal Knowledge" is his most intimate film, and one of the most daring of the 1970s. Its frankness in dealing with young men's sexual psychology has not lost its edge after thirty years. On top of it all, it gives us Nicholson's first truly great performance. The early scenes between him and Garfunkel are fresh and sincere. Spanning some three decades of their friendship, we see how their attitudes towards sex, and women in general, shape their lives. Both actors do a fine job of communicating the gravity of those years, and the most devastating scene is the one where Jack delivers a long and furious tirade at Ann-Margret. "I don't want a job, I want you," she says, to which he replies, "I'm taken...by me!" Brutally honest, yes, but because we've seen what comes before, it's perfectly logical. These men are still affected by the innocence of their younger years, but that innocence is violently clashing with their adult understanding (or lack thereof)--the understanding that the personality is in perpetual motion, and that it becomes difficult to keep up. The movie is often bleak in its settings and its subject matter, but the characters are very real--they challenge you to challenge them. Their dysfunctions may enlighten you, and there is nothing bleak about being enlightened. Oh, and Ann-Margret achieves bombshell status with this movie, playing a woman who at first seems to be the answer to all of Nicholson's fantasies. "Bye Bye Birdie" it ain't.

Unlike Antonioni's two attempts at capturing the personal alienation brought about by the cultural changes of the 60s--Zabriskie Point and Blow-Up--The Passenger is a signficantly more grounded film that focuses as well on alienation, but uses a diversity of foreign cultures to underline one man's alienation from life regardless of location.

The two films prior to The Passenger, also set outside the director's native country, but now obviously dated, tried using specific individual cultural settings (America and England) to highlight the emptiness of human behavior in the face of shallow cultural values. The Passenger is a decidedly more timeless film because instead of focusing on a specific culture, it wisely focuses on an individual, a globe-trotting reporter, whose own focus is on war and revolution in third world nations.

David Locke begins to grow weary of his life that constantly exposes him to the negative forces between and within nations all too common in today's world (another reason this film is still tremendously fresh and powerful today). When another man with a similar appearance suddenly dies in a small remote African village hotel Locke himself is staying in, he assumes the other man's (Robertson's) identity and follows an international trail to keep the appointments in Robertson's little black book. This takes him from Africa to Germany to Spain.

Without giving too much away here, it becomes all too clear that Locke--now Robertson--wants to escape himself. Antonioni, in collaboration with brilliant scripter Mark Peploe, moves us with Locke/Robertson from place to place as he blindly follows his nose, or, more accurately, runs from other noses following him--one of which is his own. Another of them belongs to his wife who begins to believe her husband is still alive somewhere. Still others are those of the police. But the most dangerous noses are those of some of the same people Locke, while a reporter, passively interviewed. Now, as Robertson, his role is not so passive anymore.

In his haste to escape, Locke finds that Robertson was involved in a dangerous business that could result in the ultimate escape. This is a great film that fuses thriller elements with drama that penetrates because we see and understand what Locke thinks and does. Jack Nicholson's portrait of the escapee is right on the money; he sounds, at least half the time, as though he's not really sure that what he's saying is true, or that he can believe it--exactly what someone running from himself would sound like.

Antonioni emphasizes the isolation of people from each other in interesting visual ways. He often shoots scenes with the camera at a noticeable distance from the actors; we are physically removed from the action, and with this distance, there is the distinct feeling of what we see as observers being not really action, but a kind of indistinct or unclear version of action. As well, the camera intermittently closes up on Locke when he is doing nothing, or waiting, or is stuck in a rut (literally, in a sand rut when his vehicle is snagged in the African desert). These close-ups are a very effective counerpart to the distance shots; the first removes us from what could possibly be critical action, and the second hits us in the face with the opposite.

A real shame this is not on DVD. As of this writing (October 2003), the only DVD version is a Japanese Region 2 NTSC disc, very hard to find.

In this highly formal excercise of cinema, Antonioni implements what is known as the, non-subjective or objective camera style, or as Antonioni refered to it, the "wandering camera." In the very first shot of the film, the camera pans across the rural African village and casually picks up Locke. We view Locke in a long shot as he pulls up in a jeep and exits to ask for directions, just then the camera resumes panning into an alleyway, away from the action and away from the protagonist. This technique is applied throughout the picture and raises philosophical and cinematic questions. Whose point of view are we observing? What does it mean to have the camera and the action function as separate entities?

Antonioni, whom I never found to be a "sound concious" director, creatively manipulates sound in this picture. In a startling sequence involving, Locke and Robertson, Locke uses a tape recorder to play back a conversation between the two men while Locke is working on a passport photo. In a single take, the camera again begins to wander away from the recorder unto a patio where we are now physically seeing the two men continuing this conversation. The men enter the house (there is a cut to the door) to have a drink. The camera now pans away back to original table where Locke was seated and there he is, still working on the passport, with the recorder beside him playing the conversation. <

This is my personal favorite Antonioni film and I regared it as his most important and one of the most important pieces of existentialist cinema. If you enjoyed this film try, Memories Of Underdevelopment by Thomas Alea.

This BEAUTIFUL film, about alienation, life in the modern age, and [very timely] trying to function in an alien culture we sinply do not understand.. along with BLOW UP, deserves to be released on DVD. Why has Antonionni been relegated to obscurity? These magnificent films deserve the full restoration treatment. Film lovers everywhere derserve these treasures

Unlike Antonioni's two attempts at capturing the personal alienation brought about by the cultural changes of the 60s--Zabriskie Point and Blow-Up--The Passenger is a signficantly more grounded film that focuses as well on alienation, but uses a diversity of foreign cultures to underline one man's alienation from life regardless of location.

The two films prior to The Passenger, also set outside the director's native country, but now obviously dated, tried using specific individual cultural settings (America and England) to highlight the emptiness of human behavior in the face of shallow cultural values. The Passenger is a decidedly more timeless film because instead of focusing on a specific culture, it wisely focuses on an individual, a globe-trotting reporter, whose own focus is on war and revolution in third world nations.

David Locke begins to grow weary of his life that constantly exposes him to the negative forces between and within nations all too common in today's world (another reason this film is still tremendously fresh and powerful today). When another man with a similar appearance suddenly dies in a small remote African village hotel Locke himself is staying in, he assumes the other man's (Robertson's) identity and follows an international trail to keep the appointments in Robertson's little black book. This takes him from Africa to Germany to Spain.

Without giving too much away here, it becomes all too clear that Locke--now Robertson--wants to escape himself. Antonioni, in collaboration with brilliant scripter Mark Peploe, moves us with Locke/Robertson from place to place as he blindly follows his nose, or, more accurately, runs from other noses following him--one of which is his own. Another of them belongs to his wife who begins to believe her husband is still alive somewhere. Still others are those of the police. But the most dangerous noses are those of some of the same people Locke, while a reporter, passively interviewed. Now, as Robertson, his role is not so passive anymore.

In his haste to escape, Locke finds that Robertson was involved in a dangerous business that could result in the ultimate escape. This is a great film that fuses thriller elements with drama that penetrates because we see and understand what Locke thinks and does. Jack Nicholson's portrait of the escapee is right on the money; he sounds, at least half the time, as though he's not really sure that what he's saying is true, or that he can believe it--exactly what someone running from himself would sound like.

Antonioni emphasizes the isolation of people from each other in interesting visual ways. He often shoots scenes with the camera at a noticeable distance from the actors; we are physically removed from the action, and with this distance, there is the distinct feeling of what we see as observers being not really action, but a kind of indistinct or unclear version of action. As well, the camera intermittently closes up on Locke when he is doing nothing, or waiting, or is stuck in a rut (literally, in a sand rut when his vehicle is snagged in the African desert). These close-ups are a very effective counerpart to the distance shots; the first removes us from what could possibly be critical action, and the second hits us in the face with the opposite.

A real shame this is not on DVD. As of this writing (October 2003), the only DVD version is a Japanese Region 2 NTSC disc, very hard to find.

In this highly formal excercise of cinema, Antonioni implements what is known as the, non-subjective or objective camera style, or as Antonioni refered to it, the "wandering camera." In the very first shot of the film, the camera pans across the rural African village and casually picks up Locke. We view Locke in a long shot as he pulls up in a jeep and exits to ask for directions, just then the camera resumes panning into an alleyway, away from the action and away from the protagonist. This technique is applied throughout the picture and raises philosophical and cinematic questions. Whose point of view are we observing? What does it mean to have the camera and the action function as separate entities?

Antonioni, whom I never found to be a "sound concious" director, creatively manipulates sound in this picture. In a startling sequence involving, Locke and Robertson, Locke uses a tape recorder to play back a conversation between the two men while Locke is working on a passport photo. In a single take, the camera again begins to wander away from the recorder unto a patio where we are now physically seeing the two men continuing this conversation. The men enter the house (there is a cut to the door) to have a drink. The camera now pans away back to original table where Locke was seated and there he is, still working on the passport, with the recorder beside him playing the conversation. <

This is my personal favorite Antonioni film and I regared it as his most important and one of the most important pieces of existentialist cinema. If you enjoyed this film try, Memories Of Underdevelopment by Thomas Alea.

This BEAUTIFUL film, about alienation, life in the modern age, and [very timely] trying to function in an alien culture we sinply do not understand.. along with BLOW UP, deserves to be released on DVD. Why has Antonionni been relegated to obscurity? These magnificent films deserve the full restoration treatment. Film lovers everywhere derserve these treasures

I was in stitches all through this movie. Jack Nicholson was hilarious. It was my oldest brothers dying wish to see this movie. He had seen part of it at my home before his illness. When his health failed he asked to see this movie. My sister-in-law and I searched all over trying to find Fortune to rent but to no avail. This is one of my all time favorite movies!

Fabulous movie! Great comic performances by Beatty & Nicholson & Channing. Nicholson proved he could do ANYTHING, Beatty proved he was a born comedian, Channing proved she could tango with a chicken, Mike Nichols proved he is the greatest farceur of 20th century America. This is a MARVELOUS movie, with elements of Mack Sennett & Howard Hawks & Federico Fellini in it. & HEY , it was written by Carol Eastman who wrote 5 Easy Pieces! I never tire of seeing it. IT'S PURE GENIUS! (I do have to admit that I have a partiality to movies that take place in bungalow courts, too).

I'm so glad that at long last I've finally found this hysterical film! If you like Jack Nicholson, then this film will not let you down. He's a scream, and so is Warren Beatty and Stockard Channing. Nicholson never lets up from the begining of the film until the end. Warning: Your face will be sore afterwards from laughing so hard!

Although this is not a great film it is a lot better than its reputation. Jack Nicholson is excellent and Harvey Keitel is very good. The beautiful and beguiling Mexican actress, Elpidia Carrillo, handles a limited role with enough artistry to make me wonder why I never heard of her before. Turns out she does have a healthy list of credits both internationally and in the US.

The direction by Tony Richardson, who had his heyday in the sixties with films as varied as The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner (1962), Tom Jones (1963), and The Loved One (1965), all adapted from novels, is at times inspired and artistic, and at other times as ordinary as dishwater. I don't think he was able to make up his mind while directing this film about whether he wanted win an award at Cannes or Venice or to just sell some tickets. As it turns out he did neither as well as he might have. Nonetheless as a snapshot of poor Mexican immigrants (and would-be immigrants) as they clash with the border patrol culture twenty-some years ago The Border is definitely worth a look. Particularly vivid is the depiction of the absurdities and hypocrisies among the coyotes, the "wets," the border patrol rank-and-file, the law and the realities of life along both sides of the thin strip separating the promised land from the third world.

Nicholson plays Charlie Smith, a border patrol cop with a trailer trash wife (Valerie Perrine) who yearns to move up to the luxury of duplex living. In particular she wants to move in next door to her high school girlfriend Savannah (Shannon Wilcox) who is married to the "Cat" (Harvey Keitel). Charlie Smith is a bit of an innocent who was satisfied with his trailer home and his sexy, loving, but not overly sharp, wife Mary. When they do pick up and move to Texas he runs headlong into the corrupt lifestyle of the Cat and the cruel realities of his job which consists of arresting illegal immigrants and sending them back to Mexico. Meanwhile Mary isn't just sitting home twiddling her thumbs. Instead she is out buying water beds and dinette sets, overstuffed chairs and sofas, and other knickknacks that put a strain on the couple's budget which leads Charlie into temptation. But when taking kickbacks turns to murder, Charlie draws the line in the sand (literally as it happens) and he and the Cat have a rather rude falling out. Meanwhile Charles spots Carrillo as the lovely Maria with babe in arms and a little brother at her side. Predictably the system cruelly exploits her, bringing Charlie to her rescue.

I think the striking contrast between Charlie's air-headed Mary and the desperate and needy Maria needed to be further explored. As it was played Charlie is just a good joe doing a good deed or two when in fact we know he is much more involved than that. I think the movie would have been improved by making him choose between the two women as he had to make the moral choice between going with the Cat's corruption or going against him.

See this for Jack Nicholson, one of the great actors of our time, who brings subtlety and veracity to a role that could have been ordinary, while giving us only a hint of the commanding and irreverent style that he would adopt in later years.

At one point in his career, not that long ago, Jack Nicholson mentioned that of all the films he'd done, he thought The Border was his best. And he just may be right about that. His performance as a good, simple man who's caught up in the pressures of corruption and material life is perfect. Tony Richardson, director of such diverse films as Blue Sky and Tom Jones, knows how to keep the focus on his characters rather than on the superficial bulls**t that so often marks films these days. The supporting cast includes Harvey Keital, Warren Oates, and Valerie Perrine, and they, along with the remaining cast, are just as great as Nicholson is.

Keitel plays Cat, a fellow border patrol officer and Charlie's (Nicholson's) neighbor and so-called friend. Cat, the C.O. (Oates), a crude lowlife Texan, and a sleazy Mexican are all in on a corrupt scheme to sell wetbacks (Mexican laborers in the U.S.) for profit. When murder becomes part of the mix, Charlie--who had finally agreed to cash in--backs out and the others turn on him. He helps a young Mexican woman whose baby has been snatched and meanwhile tries to put up with his greedy wife (Perrine) who loves material objects more than life itself.

For some very strange reason, this film has sunk so far into the depths of obscurity that no one seems interested in releasing this on DVD. This is a great dramatic work and showcases not only Nicholson himself, but a story that means something, a director who knows how to do what has to be done, and a film whose emphasis is where it should be--on story and characters, not on shallow emotions that can be resolved with the snap of a special effects finger.

Very highly recommended.

Of all Jack Nicholson's finest performances, this is without question the least rarely seen. Although Nicholson can excel at over-the-top performances, in many of his greatest, he goes to the opposite extreme. In this one, he rarely expresses emotion, rarely smiles, and instead communicates a simmering, barely contained rage at life and himself for having settled for being so much less than he ought and would like to be. By the end of the movie, he discovers that he has become a person he really doesn't want to know.

Told parallel to the story of Nicholson's descent into corruption is a Mexican woman who clearly wants to cross the physical borderline (just as Nicholson in the film has clearly crossed the moral borderline) with her baby to try and find a better life for him and her. Over and over we confront her and her trials, until her destiny becomes entwined with Jack Nicholson near the end of the film when he has to decide whether he will help her and run up against the other corrupt cops, or lose whatever tiny bit of self-respect he has left. The quiet, understated dynamic between their two stories is beautifully contrasted with the tawdriness of the lives of the border cops.

There are so many positives about this film: an incredible supporting cast, including Valerie Perrine as Nicholson's grasping, materialistic wife, Harvey Keitel as the corrupt border guard who pulls Nicholson into, and Warren Oates as a thoroughly despicable associate. I am not sure of the name of the young Mexican girl, but I love the innocence and yearning that she manages to project. The soundtrack is extraordinary, with one superb musical sequence after another by Ry Cooder, capped off by Freddy Fender's vocal on the Cooder-written "The Borderline."

The film is somewhat predictable, but, you know, I find that nearly all films are. Was this film does feature is a phenomenal performance by Jack Nicholson as a tortured, conflicted, unhappy man who barely managed to keep from losing all sense of his own worth and manages to salvage his humanity.

Roger Corman vented forth this weird and weirdly funny little movie that became a cult classic the minute it hit theatre screens in the 1960s. The story, of course, has been made famous by the later New York musical and the film it spawned: an incompetent floral shop worker grows a plant so weird looking that it boosts business at his employer's skid-row shop; trouble is, the plant requires regular feeding, and its food of choice is whatever body part happens to be, er, handy!

Mel Welles, who plays Mushnick, is very entertaining, and Jack Nicholson makes his screen debut with a really wild performance as the masochistic dental patient, but for the most part the cast is no-name; likewise the production values are non-existant, and print quality is mediocre at best. The script, however, is rather witty, taking swipes at everything from hypocondria to garden club ladies to television's DRAGNET. The whole thing is extremely uneven, but that's part of the charm. Some viewers will find the joke isn't as funny in execution as it is in concept, and the film tends to drag a bit toward the end, but cult film fans are sure to love it!

Forget the musical, this is the version to see. One of the funniest movies ever made. It proves once again that wit and imagination can overcome any deficiencies in time or budget. Noteworthy for Jack Nicholson's first role and for the always welcome Dick Miller, cast honors must go to Mel Welles as Gravis Mushnick. Every line reading, every facial expression, every gesture is a masterpiece of comic acting. Buy it, rent it, but play it again and again.

Classic Corman Z-grade film about flower shop owner who is forced to feed humans to a plant named Audrey Jr. Hammy performances make this a winner!

Roger Corman vented forth this weird and weirdly funny little movie that became a cult classic the minute it hit theatre screens in the 1960s. The story, of course, has been made famous by the later New York musical and the film it spawned: an incompetent floral shop worker grows a plant so weird looking that it boosts business at his employer's skid-row shop; trouble is, the plant requires regular feeding, and its food of choice is whatever body part happens to be, er, handy!

Mel Welles, who plays Mushnick, is very entertaining, and Jack Nicholson makes his screen debut with a really wild performance as the masochistic dental patient, but for the most part the cast is no-name; likewise the production values are non-existant, and print quality is mediocre at best. The script, however, is rather witty, taking swipes at everything from hypocondria to garden club ladies to television's DRAGNET. The whole thing is extremely uneven, but that's part of the charm. Some viewers will find the joke isn't as funny in execution as it is in concept, and the film tends to drag a bit toward the end, but cult film fans are sure to love it!

Forget the musical, this is the version to see. One of the funniest movies ever made. It proves once again that wit and imagination can overcome any deficiencies in time or budget. Noteworthy for Jack Nicholson's first role and for the always welcome Dick Miller, cast honors must go to Mel Welles as Gravis Mushnick. Every line reading, every facial expression, every gesture is a masterpiece of comic acting. Buy it, rent it, but play it again and again.

Classic Corman Z-grade film about flower shop owner who is forced to feed humans to a plant named Audrey Jr. Hammy performances make this a winner!

It's tough to believe that Stanley Kubrick received a Worst Director Razzie nomination for "The Shining." While "The Shining" may not be given the classic status of some of his other films like "Dr. Strangelove" and "2001", it's actually the least polarizing of this highly-praised and atypical filmmaker's work.

This atmospheric thriller is sure to creep you out with its pacing, eery editing and cinematography (those tracking shots are highly effective), and Jack Nicholson's powerful performance as Jack Torrance. Horror films often tend to divide audiences into genre fans who follow the gore and those who laugh in the face of so-called scares, insisting their own resiliancy to cheap thrills and lamebrain plotting.

Fortunately, "The Shining" doesn't make you take sides, because its chills come from plotting and character study as much as they do from odd sights that will make you jump. It may stray from Stephen King's book and not all of it may make sense, but "The Shining" has so much going for it that you won't mind. It's a gripping and satisfying film experience, and in my opinion, one of the best films of the '80s.

This Warner DVD re-release is definitely the version to get. The fullframe presentation comes at the wishes of Kubrick and the video and audio offer significant improvement over the drab initial release. (Unfortunately, the original Mono audio track has been dropped altogether in favor of an effective 5.1 remix. They could have included both with no problem.)

In the way of extras, there is an engaging half-hour on-set documentary, filmed by Kubrick's daughter Vivian. It provides a candid experience of the film's creation, and interviews with some of the actors. In addition, this DVD re-release includes an audio commentary on the documentary (sort of a "making-of the making-of") by Vivian Kubrick. There's also the spooky trailer, which shows how a movie preview can perfectly pique one's interest in a film, without spoiling (or even saying) much.

This was a spectacular piece of work. It had a chilling soundtrack, and had some very good camera work. In the case of the Shining, a movie has finally exceeded the book upon which it was based. Things that would normally make a movie terrible have made the Shining a spellbinding movie. For example, the dialogue throughout the entire movie seems forced and unnatural. Another example is during an argument between Jack Nicholson (who performs incredibly well throughout the entire movie) and Shelley Duvall, after which Jack storms out of the room and glances at the camera as he goes by. If you're a horror fan, or just into movies, this is definetely one to see again and again and again.

I never read the book "The Shining" but I loved the movie. The story is about Jack Torrance (Nicholeson) and his wife, Wendy, and son Danny who move into a hotel, and weird things start to happen. Danny starts seeing evil things, and Jack starts going crazy, and wants to kill his family! The whole movie is scary and very cool, and I recommend it to Stephen King fans and horror movie fans. :)

The ONLY thing I hate about "The Shining" is Shelly Duvall as Wendy Torrance. She must be one of the worse actresses I've ever seen, next to Britney Spears and Mariah Carrey. I think they should've cast someone else as Wendy Torrance then whiny and pathedic actress Shelly Duvall. :-P

It's tough to believe that Stanley Kubrick received a Worst Director Razzie nomination for "The Shining." While "The Shining" may not be given the classic status of some of his other films like "Dr. Strangelove" and "2001", it's actually the least polarizing of this highly-praised and atypical filmmaker's work.

This atmospheric thriller is sure to creep you out with its pacing, eery editing and cinematography (those tracking shots are highly effective), and Jack Nicholson's powerful performance as Jack Torrance. Horror films often tend to divide audiences into genre fans who follow the gore and those who laugh in the face of so-called scares, insisting their own resiliancy to cheap thrills and lamebrain plotting.

Fortunately, "The Shining" doesn't make you take sides, because its chills come from plotting and character study as much as they do from odd sights that will make you jump. It may stray from Stephen King's book and not all of it may make sense, but "The Shining" has so much going for it that you won't mind. It's a gripping and satisfying film experience, and in my opinion, one of the best films of the '80s.

This Warner DVD re-release is definitely the version to get. The fullframe presentation comes at the wishes of Kubrick and the video and audio offer significant improvement over the drab initial release. (Unfortunately, the original Mono audio track has been dropped altogether in favor of an effective 5.1 remix. They could have included both with no problem.)

In the way of extras, there is an engaging half-hour on-set documentary, filmed by Kubrick's daughter Vivian. It provides a candid experience of the film's creation, and interviews with some of the actors. In addition, this DVD re-release includes an audio commentary on the documentary (sort of a "making-of the making-of") by Vivian Kubrick. There's also the spooky trailer, which shows how a movie preview can perfectly pique one's interest in a film, without spoiling (or even saying) much.

This was a spectacular piece of work. It had a chilling soundtrack, and had some very good camera work. In the case of the Shining, a movie has finally exceeded the book upon which it was based. Things that would normally make a movie terrible have made the Shining a spellbinding movie. For example, the dialogue throughout the entire movie seems forced and unnatural. Another example is during an argument between Jack Nicholson (who performs incredibly well throughout the entire movie) and Shelley Duvall, after which Jack storms out of the room and glances at the camera as he goes by. If you're a horror fan, or just into movies, this is definetely one to see again and again and again.

I never read the book "The Shining" but I loved the movie. The story is about Jack Torrance (Nicholeson) and his wife, Wendy, and son Danny who move into a hotel, and weird things start to happen. Danny starts seeing evil things, and Jack starts going crazy, and wants to kill his family! The whole movie is scary and very cool, and I recommend it to Stephen King fans and horror movie fans. :)

The ONLY thing I hate about "The Shining" is Shelly Duvall as Wendy Torrance. She must be one of the worse actresses I've ever seen, next to Britney Spears and Mariah Carrey. I think they should've cast someone else as Wendy Torrance then whiny and pathedic actress Shelly Duvall. :-P