Roman-Polanski Movie Reviews

A tragic yet ultimately hopeful film (in stark contrast to the unrelentingly bleak "Kanal", or fatalistic "Ashes and Diamonds"), "A Generation" follows a young mans progression from niave lover to hardened fighter through his involvement with a woman and, subsequently, the Polish resistance during WWII. The story is told more lyrically than other Wajda films, but the harsh realities of the protagonists situation are never far from mind. Performances are excellent across the board, and Wajda's direction, as always, subtly indicates what is to come: feelings of claustrophobia and inevitability are less blatant than Kanal, but are there none-the-less, and serve as effective counter points to the couple's love story. Altogether a superb film, and an essential first act for those following the thematic arcs of the trilogy as a whole.

Great documentary on one of the great visionaries of 20th Century cinema. Highly recommended. If you like it, don't miss the short documentary "The World of Kazuo Miyagawa" which is included on the wonderful Criterion DVD of Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon. They are both nearly required viewing for students and serious fans of cinema.

I have seen countless movies and read countless books, and not once I have ever been compelled to write any sort of review for any of them. However, as you may have noticed I have made an exception for this movie, it is a testament to how great I think this movie is.

First of all I urgue you not to read the reviews of this film that give away the ending unless you have already seen the film.

The premise is that a reclusive Author Onof ( Gerad Depardieu ), is being interogated by an unnamed detective ( Roman Polanski) as a possible murder suspect. Through a series of questions the detective finds out Onofs identity as one of the most famous French Authors, in fact, he himself is a huge fan.
THe sequences of events that follow are bizzare, yet wonderfull. The language is pure poetry. And technically speaking the Cinematography and lighting are simply gorgeous.

A bulk of the movie is centered around the Detective questioning Onof, and during this time we learn about his life. These little stories make for some great humanistic moments.

While I dont want to reveal too much, the ending ties in everything, all the loose ends. However, the ending is more than simply that, it has to simply be seen to be appreciated.

My only wish would be that this movie is transfered to DVD. Please someone get this movie transfered to DVD, and with a ton of special features. Even if it has to be Criterion, please make the DVD!!!!!!!!!

I will try to explain in my best english ( I am a french speaking person) the "unreal" issue of the movie "A pure Formality" with Gerard Depardieu and Roman Polansky. It's quite subtle but here what I understood of this story. Onoff is dead. He commit suicide (as we saw him do it) But before he can rest in peace, he has to remember and explain his acts and by the way his life and his identity to the inspector (an allegory for the gardian of The Heavens or any place you think we go after life..). Everything in this story takes place in the afterlife (except for the souvenirs of Onoff - is he On or off ?) . In this film, nobody is real. That's why everything is so strange. That's why the voice of Onoff cannot reach the woman he called at the end. I hope this answer will enlight some of you. .......Jean-Luc Meloche

Without giving it away, I'd just like to say this is a brilliantly constructed film in all aspects from the acting, to the lighting, and especially to the storyline.

The reward comes as the dawn approaches and the pieces of the story fall into place! A great film!

Chinatown is a great story that moves along at a fairy good pace but does stall in parts. The real reason for seeing this film is Polanskis masterpiece direction of noir 30s LA and Jack Nicholsons wise-ass and wonderfully mouthy P.I.

The story is pretty complexed and you will have to stay awake for a lot of it or else it will pass you by because there are lots of plot twists and turns. I had to go back a few scenes now and again to figure out what was going on. Overall it is great entertainment and the dialogue is pretty snappy and on que. You will like and although I would love to give this film full marks it is prolonged in parts and these scenes do break the momentum of the movie.

Good stuff all the same..

In my opinion, CHINATOWN is the last masterpiece presented by polish director Roman Polanski. After this 1973 movie, Polanski will shoot good if not excellent movies that nevertheless won't match such references as REPULSION or CUL-DE-SAC directed in the sixties.

CHINATOWN is the one-time gathering of a director, a producer and a screenwriter who joined for creating a common project. This situation would hardly happen nowadays ; cinema is becoming so dependent on economic issues that movies all look the same and hardly translate into images the genuine vision of a director. Just think that under the severe studio laws of the 30's, 40's and 50's, such talented directors as Alfred Hitchcock, Vincente Minnelli or Fritz Lang were able to create a personal cinematographic world notwithstanding the studio pressures. On the contrary, less than ten american directors in activity can be considered today as authors-directors. And, for the most of them, they are growing very old.

Even if you are not particularly fond of the film noir genre, you cannot neglect CHINATOWN and its story of a private detective Jack " Jake Gittes " Nicholson searching for the truth in a Los Angeles sweating corruption and hidden sins. He will have to face another Hollywood giant - John Huston - before giving up in a pessimist finale à la ... Huston.

A DVD for your library.

About an hour into "Chinatown", Noah Cross (John Huston) says to Jake Gittes (Jack Nicholson), "You may think you know what you're dealing with, but believe me, you don't." Gittes, whose heard this rap before, just smiles. "Why is that funny?" asks Cross. "It's what the D.A. used to tell me about Chinatown." If any exchange defines "Chinatown" the movie then this is it. It's a film where the cliched metaphor of the onion is quite apt: the more layers you peel away, the more layers you find. And the less you're likely to understand. It begins life as a simple detective story, but eventually spins out of control into a web of intrigue (another cliched metaphor) that not only includes the murder of water commissioner Hollis Mulwray, but the entirety of 1930's Los Angeles.

Into this web is sprung Jake Gittes, a man who seems to be a typical film noir detective, but upon closer inspection is much more. Or, as we shall see, much less. I'd argue that Jake is an existential anti-hero, seemingly in control of every situation he enters in to, but ultimately just a pawn on an unfathomable chessboard. Minor notes in the movie confirm this hypothesis. A former client calls Jake on the phone, looking for his discretion. "Are you alone, Mr. Gittes?" she asks. "Isn't everybody?" Jake replies, clowning for his operatives, but saying more than he really intends to. It's not the last time he inadvertently comments on the futility of his existence. "That must really smart," says Yelburton, the deputy water commissioner, regarding Jake's newly bandaged nose. "Only when I breathe," he replies, pointing out the paradox. The bandaged nose also acts like a mask. Whereas Jake starts the movie as a handsome man in a slick suit (this is primetime Nicholson), he is slowly physically destroyed. The bandage is just the icing on the cake; it serves as a mask during the movie's middle third, hiding Jake's face and, at the same time, suppressing his identity. Identity, as an issue, is clouded by the fact that no one he meets can seem to get his name right. Cross, in what may be intentional, keeps calling him "Mr. Gitz" (correctly pronounced, 'Gittes' rhymes with 'kitties'). So not only is he a man with no face, he is a man with no name. Jake Gittes, as he gets deeper and deeper into the mysteries surrounding him, is ceasing to exist.

But that's not to say that he is a cipher of a character. How could he be when played by such a vibrant actor? Nicholson is subdued and cool here, in just the right amounts. He captures Jake's slow decent into near madness perfectly, while always allowing the man some sense of control. Nicholson is always watchable in whatever he does, but this may be his best performance because it asks him to tone down his manic energy, allowing it to bubble over in moments, while alluding to it as subtext in others.

Behind him, the acting is mostly superb. John Huston, in his few brief scenes, makes an indelible mark as the pure face of evil. Huston's deep, gravelly voice and imposing -- even at age 68 -- frame do a lot at conveying the man's power, while his twinkling eyes draw you to him, even though you know better. Although best known as a legendary director, Huston nearly steals the show here. Not faring as well is Faye Dunaway. She plays her femme fatale role with a bit too much iciness, and, in moments, melodrama. Although she holds her own, and portrays great anguish, in the film's climactic confessional scene, for the most part Dunaway isn't up to snuff.

Roman Polanski, who takes a brief but memorable role as the Man With Knife (that's how he's quite functionally billed), directs with his usual visual flare. Shots are composed as reflections in camera lenses or in a car's side mirror. The opening scene begins with a series of photographs detailing one wife's infidelity. Without saying anything, and without showing the audience the room around them, the scene is set perfectly. It's archetypal of how he shoots the rest of the film: with style and subtlety.

Maybe I put too much stock in what William Goldman has to say, but "Chinatown" has to be a frontrunner when tallying up the best screenplays of all time. A good screenplay will have two things going for it: a strong structure (of vital importance always), and interesting dialogue (useful in supporting the structure and in adding colour to the proceedings). Towne gets full marks on both counts. Structurally, it's a dream, a marvelous example of the micro turning into the macro as the web of intrigue broadens exponentially, while maintaining its power on the smaller scale all along. Add to this the crisp, precise dialogue, and you've got a screenplay that's as much fun to listen to as it is to follow. Jake is full of wisecracks and homespun wisdom. When asked about Mulwray's character, Yelburton denies ever hearing him talk about infidelity: "He never even kids about it." "Maybe he takes it very seriously," says Jake. When Cross asks if Lou Escobar, the investigating officer who's handling the Mulwray murder case, is an honest man, Jakes replies, "Far as it goes... of course he has to swim in the same water we all do." On its own this would be a great line, but in "Chinatown", where the water of L.A. plays a major role in the plot, its damn well genius.

"Chinatown" is much more than your average detective story. It's a narrative dripping in character, intrigue, and history. I'd sure like to see just what it was that happened in Chinatown, back in Jake's days on the police force, which made him the cynical sleuth he's become. It'd make a great prequel. As it stands, the movie we've got is a crackerjack yarn, rich enough to demand multiple viewings.

Bad boy Roman Polanski filmed this gorgeous movie with Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway set in Los Angeles during the 30s - it's about water rights for southern California, which is all about money, money, money. One gets the feeling while watching this film that it's patterned on maybe a Raymond Chandler/Sam Spade book. It's all about incest, infidelity, politics, treachery, lying, secrets - and no one who has seen it is likely to forget the scene in which Polanski himself appears for a brief and memorable sleazy cameo performance as a slimy scumball in cinema's best tradition.
Watch it again. It heralded a new wave of really well done crime films from Hollywood.

Perhaps the best film noir screenplay ever written. Performances are flawless, direction is impeccable and the casting is without parallel. "Chinatown" leaves one awed.

With all the Oscar hoopla this past year around director Roman Polanski's sprawling, if flawed "The Pianist," one would think that it's the only Polanski movie out there. Well, if you've seen "The Pianist," you've seen a Holocaust movie like the rest of 'em. Take a trip back to Polanski's 1974 movie "Chinatown" and forget all you know.
Who knew a movie about a water conspiracy would be so nail-bitingly intriguing, and who'd a thought that screenwriter Robert Towne could take an old, dying genre (the "gumshoe" movie) and turn it into arguably the best screenplay this side of "Citizen Kane" and "All About Eve"? It's all here, with Jack Nicholson as smooth private eye Jake Gittes, and Faye Dunaway as the cryptic Evelyn Mulwray. Look closely, though. As "Chinatown" unfolds, it looks like it's going to be the typical detective movie, but twists and turns in the film's complicated narrative turn a simple San Fransisco water conspiracy into a twisted, perverse, nightmare that reeks of the Electra complex.
Yes, "The Maltese Falcon" has the style that set a trend, and "The Big Sleep" juggles plot strands like a sideshow freak, but "Chinatown" adds a tragic depth to its narrative that was never seen in such a movie and has never been seen since. Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway are no Nick and Nora Charles - there's a deep secret lying beneath it all that makes the movie a haunting and unforgettable experience. Dunaway hides the film's tragedy well, revealing it in an infamous scene that proves this is the finest work she's ever done. And Nicholson. Drawn slowly into a twisted web of corruption and deceit, he seems almost too smart for it, but Towne's script proves that there is a heart beneath his inquisitive glare, and it, along with all of ours, is broken in the film's devastating finale.
If you're into gumshoe flicks, this is the best one out there, but it also stands as one of the finest American films of all time. Just look at the film's ending - though "American," it carries a tragic, "European" touch that was no doubt a product of the painful history of Polanski. In a way, this movie relays the torture and pain of his Holocaust experience in a better fashion than "The Pianist." Even without digging into director's intentions, the final product of the movie is haunting, tragic, and won't get out of your head for days. One of the great lines of the film is "Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown." Fortunately, forgetting "Chinatown" is something anyone that ever sees it will never be able to do.

Bad boy Roman Polanski filmed this gorgeous movie with Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway set in Los Angeles during the 30s - it's about water rights for southern California, which is all about money, money, money. One gets the feeling while watching this film that it's patterned on maybe a Raymond Chandler/Sam Spade book. It's all about incest, infidelity, politics, treachery, lying, secrets - and no one who has seen it is likely to forget the scene in which Polanski himself appears for a brief and memorable sleazy cameo performance as a slimy scumball in cinema's best tradition.
Watch it again. It heralded a new wave of really well done crime films from Hollywood.

Perhaps the best film noir screenplay ever written. Performances are flawless, direction is impeccable and the casting is without parallel. "Chinatown" leaves one awed.

With all the Oscar hoopla this past year around director Roman Polanski's sprawling, if flawed "The Pianist," one would think that it's the only Polanski movie out there. Well, if you've seen "The Pianist," you've seen a Holocaust movie like the rest of 'em. Take a trip back to Polanski's 1974 movie "Chinatown" and forget all you know.
Who knew a movie about a water conspiracy would be so nail-bitingly intriguing, and who'd a thought that screenwriter Robert Towne could take an old, dying genre (the "gumshoe" movie) and turn it into arguably the best screenplay this side of "Citizen Kane" and "All About Eve"? It's all here, with Jack Nicholson as smooth private eye Jake Gittes, and Faye Dunaway as the cryptic Evelyn Mulwray. Look closely, though. As "Chinatown" unfolds, it looks like it's going to be the typical detective movie, but twists and turns in the film's complicated narrative turn a simple San Fransisco water conspiracy into a twisted, perverse, nightmare that reeks of the Electra complex.
Yes, "The Maltese Falcon" has the style that set a trend, and "The Big Sleep" juggles plot strands like a sideshow freak, but "Chinatown" adds a tragic depth to its narrative that was never seen in such a movie and has never been seen since. Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway are no Nick and Nora Charles - there's a deep secret lying beneath it all that makes the movie a haunting and unforgettable experience. Dunaway hides the film's tragedy well, revealing it in an infamous scene that proves this is the finest work she's ever done. And Nicholson. Drawn slowly into a twisted web of corruption and deceit, he seems almost too smart for it, but Towne's script proves that there is a heart beneath his inquisitive glare, and it, along with all of ours, is broken in the film's devastating finale.
If you're into gumshoe flicks, this is the best one out there, but it also stands as one of the finest American films of all time. Just look at the film's ending - though "American," it carries a tragic, "European" touch that was no doubt a product of the painful history of Polanski. In a way, this movie relays the torture and pain of his Holocaust experience in a better fashion than "The Pianist." Even without digging into director's intentions, the final product of the movie is haunting, tragic, and won't get out of your head for days. One of the great lines of the film is "Forget it, Jake, it's Chinatown." Fortunately, forgetting "Chinatown" is something anyone that ever sees it will never be able to do.

Chinatown is a great story that moves along at a fairy good pace but does stall in parts. The real reason for seeing this film is Polanskis masterpiece direction of noir 30s LA and Jack Nicholsons wise-ass and wonderfully mouthy P.I.

The story is pretty complexed and you will have to stay awake for a lot of it or else it will pass you by because there are lots of plot twists and turns. I had to go back a few scenes now and again to figure out what was going on. Overall it is great entertainment and the dialogue is pretty snappy and on que. You will like and although I would love to give this film full marks it is prolonged in parts and these scenes do break the momentum of the movie.

Good stuff all the same..

In my opinion, CHINATOWN is the last masterpiece presented by polish director Roman Polanski. After this 1973 movie, Polanski will shoot good if not excellent movies that nevertheless won't match such references as REPULSION or CUL-DE-SAC directed in the sixties.

CHINATOWN is the one-time gathering of a director, a producer and a screenwriter who joined for creating a common project. This situation would hardly happen nowadays ; cinema is becoming so dependent on economic issues that movies all look the same and hardly translate into images the genuine vision of a director. Just think that under the severe studio laws of the 30's, 40's and 50's, such talented directors as Alfred Hitchcock, Vincente Minnelli or Fritz Lang were able to create a personal cinematographic world notwithstanding the studio pressures. On the contrary, less than ten american directors in activity can be considered today as authors-directors. And, for the most of them, they are growing very old.

Even if you are not particularly fond of the film noir genre, you cannot neglect CHINATOWN and its story of a private detective Jack " Jake Gittes " Nicholson searching for the truth in a Los Angeles sweating corruption and hidden sins. He will have to face another Hollywood giant - John Huston - before giving up in a pessimist finale à la ... Huston.

A DVD for your library.

About an hour into "Chinatown", Noah Cross (John Huston) says to Jake Gittes (Jack Nicholson), "You may think you know what you're dealing with, but believe me, you don't." Gittes, whose heard this rap before, just smiles. "Why is that funny?" asks Cross. "It's what the D.A. used to tell me about Chinatown." If any exchange defines "Chinatown" the movie then this is it. It's a film where the cliched metaphor of the onion is quite apt: the more layers you peel away, the more layers you find. And the less you're likely to understand. It begins life as a simple detective story, but eventually spins out of control into a web of intrigue (another cliched metaphor) that not only includes the murder of water commissioner Hollis Mulwray, but the entirety of 1930's Los Angeles.

Into this web is sprung Jake Gittes, a man who seems to be a typical film noir detective, but upon closer inspection is much more. Or, as we shall see, much less. I'd argue that Jake is an existential anti-hero, seemingly in control of every situation he enters in to, but ultimately just a pawn on an unfathomable chessboard. Minor notes in the movie confirm this hypothesis. A former client calls Jake on the phone, looking for his discretion. "Are you alone, Mr. Gittes?" she asks. "Isn't everybody?" Jake replies, clowning for his operatives, but saying more than he really intends to. It's not the last time he inadvertently comments on the futility of his existence. "That must really smart," says Yelburton, the deputy water commissioner, regarding Jake's newly bandaged nose. "Only when I breathe," he replies, pointing out the paradox. The bandaged nose also acts like a mask. Whereas Jake starts the movie as a handsome man in a slick suit (this is primetime Nicholson), he is slowly physically destroyed. The bandage is just the icing on the cake; it serves as a mask during the movie's middle third, hiding Jake's face and, at the same time, suppressing his identity. Identity, as an issue, is clouded by the fact that no one he meets can seem to get his name right. Cross, in what may be intentional, keeps calling him "Mr. Gitz" (correctly pronounced, 'Gittes' rhymes with 'kitties'). So not only is he a man with no face, he is a man with no name. Jake Gittes, as he gets deeper and deeper into the mysteries surrounding him, is ceasing to exist.

But that's not to say that he is a cipher of a character. How could he be when played by such a vibrant actor? Nicholson is subdued and cool here, in just the right amounts. He captures Jake's slow decent into near madness perfectly, while always allowing the man some sense of control. Nicholson is always watchable in whatever he does, but this may be his best performance because it asks him to tone down his manic energy, allowing it to bubble over in moments, while alluding to it as subtext in others.

Behind him, the acting is mostly superb. John Huston, in his few brief scenes, makes an indelible mark as the pure face of evil. Huston's deep, gravelly voice and imposing -- even at age 68 -- frame do a lot at conveying the man's power, while his twinkling eyes draw you to him, even though you know better. Although best known as a legendary director, Huston nearly steals the show here. Not faring as well is Faye Dunaway. She plays her femme fatale role with a bit too much iciness, and, in moments, melodrama. Although she holds her own, and portrays great anguish, in the film's climactic confessional scene, for the most part Dunaway isn't up to snuff.

Roman Polanski, who takes a brief but memorable role as the Man With Knife (that's how he's quite functionally billed), directs with his usual visual flare. Shots are composed as reflections in camera lenses or in a car's side mirror. The opening scene begins with a series of photographs detailing one wife's infidelity. Without saying anything, and without showing the audience the room around them, the scene is set perfectly. It's archetypal of how he shoots the rest of the film: with style and subtlety.

Maybe I put too much stock in what William Goldman has to say, but "Chinatown" has to be a frontrunner when tallying up the best screenplays of all time. A good screenplay will have two things going for it: a strong structure (of vital importance always), and interesting dialogue (useful in supporting the structure and in adding colour to the proceedings). Towne gets full marks on both counts. Structurally, it's a dream, a marvelous example of the micro turning into the macro as the web of intrigue broadens exponentially, while maintaining its power on the smaller scale all along. Add to this the crisp, precise dialogue, and you've got a screenplay that's as much fun to listen to as it is to follow. Jake is full of wisecracks and homespun wisdom. When asked about Mulwray's character, Yelburton denies ever hearing him talk about infidelity: "He never even kids about it." "Maybe he takes it very seriously," says Jake. When Cross asks if Lou Escobar, the investigating officer who's handling the Mulwray murder case, is an honest man, Jakes replies, "Far as it goes... of course he has to swim in the same water we all do." On its own this would be a great line, but in "Chinatown", where the water of L.A. plays a major role in the plot, its damn well genius.

"Chinatown" is much more than your average detective story. It's a narrative dripping in character, intrigue, and history. I'd sure like to see just what it was that happened in Chinatown, back in Jake's days on the police force, which made him the cynical sleuth he's become. It'd make a great prequel. As it stands, the movie we've got is a crackerjack yarn, rich enough to demand multiple viewings.

There are bad movies, good movies, very good movies, the classic movies, and the memorable movies. "The Pianist" is one of them; one of the movies you applauded to after it finished. This is the one you do not leave the theater until it is over; the last frame and the last sound. What makes a movie memorable? A touching story compounded with and multiplied by an excellent acting and a good cinematography would do the job every time. But, really, how often does it happen? Should I name a few, which I remembered for hours, days and would remember for life? We all have a special place for movies like this. Now I have one more movie to store there.

The story of this movie is well familiar to us. The war and the betrayal of the whole world let the Germans to occupy Poland. Well, it was not just an occupation it was rape of Poland on the scale not known in the history. Great Britain and France (the Polish partners in peace) were standing aside swallowing hard while the Russians were holding the victim, raped by the Germans, down. Poland was pillaged, raped and dismantled and who paid the price - as always the Jews. They were assembled, isolated and disposed of with the well-known German efficiency. Almost three million Polish Jews had perished with the smoke of hard working chimneys. The Jewish question was solved and everyone took a turn solving it.

The hero of the story survived and he told the story. That helps us to separate the good from the bad. I read the book before I saw the movie and the book was just one of the books covering the subject I knew so much about. But the movie shocked me and turned me around. I attribute it to the genius of Roman Polanski. Roman Polanski well deserves to be among the best directors.

There have been many films over the years dealing with the Holocaust and the atrocities in Europe during the Second World War. The best known of course is, Schindler's List. While Schindler's List will be the film by which all other films about this dark period of history will be judged, it has met its match in The Pianist. While Schindler gave us the viewers the story of one very flawed man who saved many lives in the guise of Jewish Labor, The Pianist is far different. The story of one man who managed to survive Warsaw during the Occupation and was ultimately the reciepant of some kindness from the most unlikely person,a German solider. The difference between the two films is that while Schindler's took a rather aneseptic and 'Hollywood' view of the flawed man Oskar Schindler, The Pianist drew on the real life experiences of its director to make the film much more personal. It not only becomes personal to the director himself, but to the viewer. Polanski himself was a boy during the Occupation, injected small things that he remembered during the Occuapation into the film. Little things like someone telling Spzilman not to run as he is pulled from the lines of people, including his family, being forced into cattle cars on their way to a certain death.It is things like this that bring the viewer closer to the characters and even to the director. Adrien Brody gave the performance of his life in this film. It deserved every Oscar it got and it is a true masterpiece to be treasured.

This is the best movie about Jewish discrimination in the II World War.Why? Because it shows the good and the bad side of both sides, it means of the Jewish people and of Nazis.
EXCELENT! A must see.

Considered very "with it" and uniquely horrifying upon its initial release in 1968, ROSEMARY'S BABY indeed still has the facility to give viewers the shivers. For some reason, witches seemed truly wicked when seen in the prosaic surroundings of a modern New York apartment (filming was at the legendary Dakota where John Lennon was shot in 1980). Polanski brilliantly establishes the atmosphere of evil without indulging in nasty excesses; thusly viewers were (and still are) held spellbound throughout by the pervading malevolence. Farrow gives a remarkably honest and realistic performance and her appearance is at once beguiling and eventually elfin-ish (her haircut caused quite a stir at the time). The unique Ruth Gordon so impressed audiences with her portrayal of Minnie, the eccentric modern-day witch who lives next door that she won herself an AA. ("I can't tell ya how encouragin' a thing like this is at my age" she told the academy). Sidney Blackmer is right as her "warlock" husband and there's Hope Summers (Andy Griffith) and the great comic veteran Patsy Kelly in support. Considering most films from this era (i.e. circa 1967-1972) date badly, this flick stands on its own-its a truly frightening work of art.

When I finished watching the DVD, I knew. I knew this was the greatest horror film out there - I have seen many - and I knew it would probably be the best horror film ever made. That's right - ever.

Polanski's visionary work will have you in suspense from the beginning of the film. Its tremendous reputation aside, the cinematography, timing, acting, and music come together in a terrifying way. The film conveys the magical realism and suspension of disbelief in Ira Levin's book: while the actual plot of the movie is simple to figure out, the movie, through its slight twists and marginal revelations, makes you believe what is going on is plausible. By the end of the film, you will know exactly what is going on, and an entirely implausible event leaves you speechless.

Afterwards, you'll shake your head, drink a vodka blush, and realize it was all a movie. Some of you tough-guys might have been saying that all along. But something about the film is chilling, something about the "God is dead" motif will strike you as real, and something about Rosemary's world will seem very much like our own.

Mia Farrow's performance is extraordinary and should have nailed her an Academy award (same goes for Polanski's debut directorial achievement, though he got his just desserts with The Pianist). This movie, like other classics in their respective genres, are movies to be emulated and never quite duplicated in style or effect. Even today, this movie could not have been done better, or with better casting. The movie is masterfully directed, frightfully self-aware, and simultaneously realistic and fantastic.

The DVD is terrific. Outstanding audio/video quality, superb special features including contemporary interviews. An essential DVD for your library. Not suitable for small children: unless they were rocked in an all-black cradle.

The terrifying part of this movie for me was my expectations of being shocked. There was little if any gratuitous horror, making the suspense delicious and demanding my attention for the entire film. Surreal colors, and Mia Farrow was superb not only in her acting but the make-up and her appearance subtly and believeably changed.

I love movies set in cities where I live, almost as much as seeing actors in early roles. Charles Grodin as the Doctor, along with the guy that played Dr. Zaius in the original Planet of the Apes and the other Duke brother from Trading Places. Great Film.

Considered very "with it" and uniquely horrifying upon its initial release in 1968, ROSEMARY'S BABY indeed still has the facility to give viewers the shivers. For some reason, witches seemed truly wicked when seen in the prosaic surroundings of a modern New York apartment (filming was at the legendary Dakota where John Lennon was shot in 1980). Polanski brilliantly establishes the atmosphere of evil without indulging in nasty excesses; thusly viewers were (and still are) held spellbound throughout by the pervading malevolence. Farrow gives a remarkably honest and realistic performance and her appearance is at once beguiling and eventually elfin-ish (her haircut caused quite a stir at the time). The unique Ruth Gordon so impressed audiences with her portrayal of Minnie, the eccentric modern-day witch who lives next door that she won herself an AA. ("I can't tell ya how encouragin' a thing like this is at my age" she told the academy). Sidney Blackmer is right as her "warlock" husband and there's Hope Summers (Andy Griffith) and the great comic veteran Patsy Kelly in support. Considering most films from this era (i.e. circa 1967-1972) date badly, this flick stands on its own-its a truly frightening work of art.

When I finished watching the DVD, I knew. I knew this was the greatest horror film out there - I have seen many - and I knew it would probably be the best horror film ever made. That's right - ever.

Polanski's visionary work will have you in suspense from the beginning of the film. Its tremendous reputation aside, the cinematography, timing, acting, and music come together in a terrifying way. The film conveys the magical realism and suspension of disbelief in Ira Levin's book: while the actual plot of the movie is simple to figure out, the movie, through its slight twists and marginal revelations, makes you believe what is going on is plausible. By the end of the film, you will know exactly what is going on, and an entirely implausible event leaves you speechless.

Afterwards, you'll shake your head, drink a vodka blush, and realize it was all a movie. Some of you tough-guys might have been saying that all along. But something about the film is chilling, something about the "God is dead" motif will strike you as real, and something about Rosemary's world will seem very much like our own.

Mia Farrow's performance is extraordinary and should have nailed her an Academy award (same goes for Polanski's debut directorial achievement, though he got his just desserts with The Pianist). This movie, like other classics in their respective genres, are movies to be emulated and never quite duplicated in style or effect. Even today, this movie could not have been done better, or with better casting. The movie is masterfully directed, frightfully self-aware, and simultaneously realistic and fantastic.

The DVD is terrific. Outstanding audio/video quality, superb special features including contemporary interviews. An essential DVD for your library. Not suitable for small children: unless they were rocked in an all-black cradle.

The terrifying part of this movie for me was my expectations of being shocked. There was little if any gratuitous horror, making the suspense delicious and demanding my attention for the entire film. Surreal colors, and Mia Farrow was superb not only in her acting but the make-up and her appearance subtly and believeably changed.

I love movies set in cities where I live, almost as much as seeing actors in early roles. Charles Grodin as the Doctor, along with the guy that played Dr. Zaius in the original Planet of the Apes and the other Duke brother from Trading Places. Great Film.