Doyle, Richard Movie Reviews

the Whole Roots Mini-Series has touched me deeply more than anything I've ever seen.it should be a must see for all eyes because it's so moving&speaks for Past Generations&Future Ones as well.

This series impacted my life in a inspiring way. I learned alot about American history and the perseverance of African-Americans. It is a must-see for every human being regardless of race, culture, or nationality.

I love this miniseries more than the first "Roots". I guess it's because I can relate more to the later years struggle.

This is a fantastic show which my mother hooked me on a few years ago. If you've never caught an episode on PBS, now is your chance. Unlike glitzy American prime-time soap operas, these characters have a great deal of depth and the status quo can change, dramatically, at any time. If you liked the quirky characters and situations of "Northern Exposure", you will love this show!

He really made it a COMEDY.

Five stars for the story; four stars for the DVD only because I cannot fathom why - with all the advancing technology and options available - any DVD theatrical release would not be offered in a wide-screen format. Otherwise this has to be the best Neil Simon work I have ever seen. Although I am from a much newer generation, I could identify easily with many of the characters, both from similar personal experiences, and from the culture within which I was raised. I would highly recommend this film, but only to true drama fans (of any age) and to older generations who have lived the times portrayed in this delightful romp. There is mild adult content, so be wary if you allow your young teens to watch. This is one of those rare classics that never received the publicity it deserved on the big screen; but then it can only appeal to a certain audience. If you feel like going out on a limb and watching something different or you want to conjure up old memories of yester-year, then by all means watch this film and enjoy!

I was cast as Eugene (I'm 15) In our highschool show of Brighton Beach. When I first read the script I fell in love with it, it is an AWESOME script. At the end of our performance the audience cheered loudly, they loved it. I then purchased this film, and it was amazing. It's a wonderful story, wonderful acting, and very touching. "It's called the unbelievable, fantastic, and completely private thoughts of I Eugene Morris Jerome, In this, the fifteenth year of his life, in the year ninteen-hundred thirty-seven, in the community of Brighton Beach, Burrow of Brooklyn, Kings County, City of New York, EMPIRE STATE of the American Nation".

He really made it a COMEDY.

Five stars for the story; four stars for the DVD only because I cannot fathom why - with all the advancing technology and options available - any DVD theatrical release would not be offered in a wide-screen format. Otherwise this has to be the best Neil Simon work I have ever seen. Although I am from a much newer generation, I could identify easily with many of the characters, both from similar personal experiences, and from the culture within which I was raised. I would highly recommend this film, but only to true drama fans (of any age) and to older generations who have lived the times portrayed in this delightful romp. There is mild adult content, so be wary if you allow your young teens to watch. This is one of those rare classics that never received the publicity it deserved on the big screen; but then it can only appeal to a certain audience. If you feel like going out on a limb and watching something different or you want to conjure up old memories of yester-year, then by all means watch this film and enjoy!

I was cast as Eugene (I'm 15) In our highschool show of Brighton Beach. When I first read the script I fell in love with it, it is an AWESOME script. At the end of our performance the audience cheered loudly, they loved it. I then purchased this film, and it was amazing. It's a wonderful story, wonderful acting, and very touching. "It's called the unbelievable, fantastic, and completely private thoughts of I Eugene Morris Jerome, In this, the fifteenth year of his life, in the year ninteen-hundred thirty-seven, in the community of Brighton Beach, Burrow of Brooklyn, Kings County, City of New York, EMPIRE STATE of the American Nation".

I thought Much Ado About Nothing made no sense really because it seemed shorter than Antigone, and there was a little too much love going on. I couldn't handle it all, especially the deception by Don John. The first love between Claudio and Hero were like two teenagers in puppy love, and Benedick and Beatrice who had crazy love, which means that they liked each other, but didn't confess about their feelings.

William Shakespeare's main purpose was I think showing what kind of loves there were through different types of people. The first of which is Claudio, the desperate type only looking for a girl to look cool. Whenever Don John told Claudio a lie, he would get all mad and act like he could never forgive Hero. He would whine like a little girl. I think the purpose didn't really click into to me because I am too young and don't understand love.

What I have personally learned from this is to not rush into love because even though Don John made up those lies and false judgments about Hero, those could really happen in real life, plus the fact that we are two young to understand it. We get into that high school puppy love which isn't the same as real love. When we are older we will understand because we will be at that stage where all of us will understand the true meaning of love.

I would not recommend this book because I think it had really no point but to show us what kind of loves there are and, how we should treat them with the person we love. The comedy in this was really good, but in this book, I didn't see the mix of comedy and love.

Much Ado About Nothing, a play written by William Shakespeare, is about two couples, who through a series of trials and schemes, fall in love with each other. This is a romantic play, and it contrasts two types of love, romantic and realistic love.
Benedick and Beatrice portray realistic love. They have a solid foundation for each other, they can tease each other, get mad at each other, and love each other at the same time. They are down to earth and practical about love. Once they fall in love, they cannot be swayed in their decisions even though they try to ignore their feelings. Claudio and Hero, on the other hand, represent romantic love. They live on Cloud 9, and their love is based on physical attraction. In the play they fall in love with each before talking. As soon as their relationship gats rocky, though, Claudio bails out, leaving a heartbroken Hero.
I think that Shakespeare wrote this play to show how comical love is. Benedick and Beatrice, who both swore mutual hate for each other, and pledged they would never get marry, fall desperately in love with each other after overhearing their friend's schemes to get them together. Claudio, who swears his undying affection to Hero, mentally dumps her once in the movie, and then leaves her at the wedding altar, because Don John plays tricks on his mind, and easily sways him to quit loving Hero. I think Shakespeare also tried to show us that true love conquers any obstacle in its way.
There are many life lessons in this play. The title, Much Ado About Nothing, relays one of the most important messages. Claudio constantly makes mountains out of molehills in this play. He is quick to jump to conclusions, and does not stop to verify the facts. He bases his judgments on perceptions, instead of reality.
I would highly recommend this book. Although it was written about 400 years ago, it is still applicable to real life. It was a good book, and it contained drama, action, romance, comedy, and deception. One of its downfalls was that it was hard to understand the language because it was written so long ago.

This story starts out as four people who don't really know how or that there fate lies with each other. Hero is a very charming innocent girl who likes to please people; she doesn't stand up for herself but basically obeys what her father tells her. She meets a man, Claudio, who falls in love with her because of her beauty. Claudio is very quick to judge and has no loyalty or consideration of other people. He is very selfish in what he acts on, he doesn't seem to care about anything else except what he wants. These two who fall in love with each other, at first they seem to be the perfect pair but soon much is found out about there character and perseverance when they face a trial that will test them and there devotion to each other.
At a first impression you would never guess their feelings toward each other but little did Benedick and Beatrice know. Beatrice is a fiery woman who is very opinionated and never ashamed to speak her mind, and especially shares her opinions with a certain man named Benedick. Benedick also has a very wild outlook and also likes to speak what he believes is right. They often bicker which they state there differences in a very fiery manner. Benedick protests quite openly how stupid he thinks Love and marriage is, which is comical seeing that later on, he would be giddy with the same love that he mocks. Slowly but surely there obstinate passion and their denial of there true feelings fall into the right place.
I think that Shakespeare's main purpose for writing this book is because he wanted to show how important marriage was. That you shouldn't base your whole relationship on what you look like but you should find out who that person is and then decide if you would want to marry them. Shakespeare wanted to describe the difficulties of having a fake-based love. Because then when you actually have to start dealing with the real issues then how are you going to be able to persevere. Whereas when you have that reality love, the love where you argue about stuff, but its realizing that there are different opinions and that you will get in arguments. So when you have that realistic love then you will know how to deal with the person you married. Whereas on fake love you dont even know who they really are let alone how to deal with them.

I have personally learned how important it really is when you are picking whom you are going to live with for the rest of your life. I have learned that you really need to look inside of the person to know who they are and to look at how they react to situations. Also not to base it on looks, because if you marry them then you are going to live with them for the rest of you life. God told us that if we get married then we are to be as one, and you should totally love them. Not just like how they look, but base your relationships on their character and personality.

I thought Much Ado About Nothing made no sense really because it seemed shorter than Antigone, and there was a little too much love going on. I couldn't handle it all, especially the deception by Don John. The first love between Claudio and Hero were like two teenagers in puppy love, and Benedick and Beatrice who had crazy love, which means that they liked each other, but didn't confess about their feelings.

William Shakespeare's main purpose was I think showing what kind of loves there were through different types of people. The first of which is Claudio, the desperate type only looking for a girl to look cool. Whenever Don John told Claudio a lie, he would get all mad and act like he could never forgive Hero. He would whine like a little girl. I think the purpose didn't really click into to me because I am too young and don't understand love.

What I have personally learned from this is to not rush into love because even though Don John made up those lies and false judgments about Hero, those could really happen in real life, plus the fact that we are two young to understand it. We get into that high school puppy love which isn't the same as real love. When we are older we will understand because we will be at that stage where all of us will understand the true meaning of love.

I would not recommend this book because I think it had really no point but to show us what kind of loves there are and, how we should treat them with the person we love. The comedy in this was really good, but in this book, I didn't see the mix of comedy and love.

Much Ado About Nothing, a play written by William Shakespeare, is about two couples, who through a series of trials and schemes, fall in love with each other. This is a romantic play, and it contrasts two types of love, romantic and realistic love.
Benedick and Beatrice portray realistic love. They have a solid foundation for each other, they can tease each other, get mad at each other, and love each other at the same time. They are down to earth and practical about love. Once they fall in love, they cannot be swayed in their decisions even though they try to ignore their feelings. Claudio and Hero, on the other hand, represent romantic love. They live on Cloud 9, and their love is based on physical attraction. In the play they fall in love with each before talking. As soon as their relationship gats rocky, though, Claudio bails out, leaving a heartbroken Hero.
I think that Shakespeare wrote this play to show how comical love is. Benedick and Beatrice, who both swore mutual hate for each other, and pledged they would never get marry, fall desperately in love with each other after overhearing their friend's schemes to get them together. Claudio, who swears his undying affection to Hero, mentally dumps her once in the movie, and then leaves her at the wedding altar, because Don John plays tricks on his mind, and easily sways him to quit loving Hero. I think Shakespeare also tried to show us that true love conquers any obstacle in its way.
There are many life lessons in this play. The title, Much Ado About Nothing, relays one of the most important messages. Claudio constantly makes mountains out of molehills in this play. He is quick to jump to conclusions, and does not stop to verify the facts. He bases his judgments on perceptions, instead of reality.
I would highly recommend this book. Although it was written about 400 years ago, it is still applicable to real life. It was a good book, and it contained drama, action, romance, comedy, and deception. One of its downfalls was that it was hard to understand the language because it was written so long ago.

This story starts out as four people who don't really know how or that there fate lies with each other. Hero is a very charming innocent girl who likes to please people; she doesn't stand up for herself but basically obeys what her father tells her. She meets a man, Claudio, who falls in love with her because of her beauty. Claudio is very quick to judge and has no loyalty or consideration of other people. He is very selfish in what he acts on, he doesn't seem to care about anything else except what he wants. These two who fall in love with each other, at first they seem to be the perfect pair but soon much is found out about there character and perseverance when they face a trial that will test them and there devotion to each other.
At a first impression you would never guess their feelings toward each other but little did Benedick and Beatrice know. Beatrice is a fiery woman who is very opinionated and never ashamed to speak her mind, and especially shares her opinions with a certain man named Benedick. Benedick also has a very wild outlook and also likes to speak what he believes is right. They often bicker which they state there differences in a very fiery manner. Benedick protests quite openly how stupid he thinks Love and marriage is, which is comical seeing that later on, he would be giddy with the same love that he mocks. Slowly but surely there obstinate passion and their denial of there true feelings fall into the right place.
I think that Shakespeare's main purpose for writing this book is because he wanted to show how important marriage was. That you shouldn't base your whole relationship on what you look like but you should find out who that person is and then decide if you would want to marry them. Shakespeare wanted to describe the difficulties of having a fake-based love. Because then when you actually have to start dealing with the real issues then how are you going to be able to persevere. Whereas when you have that reality love, the love where you argue about stuff, but its realizing that there are different opinions and that you will get in arguments. So when you have that realistic love then you will know how to deal with the person you married. Whereas on fake love you dont even know who they really are let alone how to deal with them.

I have personally learned how important it really is when you are picking whom you are going to live with for the rest of your life. I have learned that you really need to look inside of the person to know who they are and to look at how they react to situations. Also not to base it on looks, because if you marry them then you are going to live with them for the rest of you life. God told us that if we get married then we are to be as one, and you should totally love them. Not just like how they look, but base your relationships on their character and personality.

It's not unusual for fathers and sons to have trouble communicating. But no gap has ever been wider than the one bridged in Frequency (PG-13) when a meteorological anomaly reunites a troubled New York cop with his deceased dad by letting them converse via ham radio 30 years apart. This intelligently written thrill ride (part Back to the Future, part Field of Dreams) tugs heartstrings as it races to a wild climax.

In 1969, fireman Frank Sullivan died in the line of duty, leaving behind his loving wife and 6-year-old son, John. But the past is about to change. In 1999, John uses the mysterious radio and clarity of hindsight to save his dad's life-a noble act that creates a devastating wrinkle in the fabric of time-that father and son must iron out together.

Frequency employs intense violence as the Sullivan boys try to thwart a serial killer. Persistent alcohol use and about 30 profanities also get in the way of this film's many positive messages.

The pluses? Seemingly insignificant actions alter lives forever (a reminder that behavior has consequences). Frank and John feel responsible for the ripple effect they have created and risk their lives to help others. Scenes model affection in marriage and issue a wake-up call to workaholics. With a soft spot for second chances, the film recognizes the value of healthy two-parent homes and makes a powerful anti-smoking statement.

Male bonding over electronic gizmos and baseball minutiae (specifically the '69 World Series) won't attract hoards of teens to the local cinema. Rather, they'll want to see Frequency for its mind-bending premise and sheer velocity.

Frank Sullivan ( Dennis Quade) is a firefighter that dies tragically in the line of duty. Thirty years later, his son John ( Jim Caevizel) is now a cop whose life is a mess. The film opens on the eve of the 30 year anniversary of his father's death. John's childhood best friend Gordo( Noah Emmerich) comes over to cheer him up, and they drag out Frank's old ham radio. Due to a phenmenon called an "aurora borealis" John soon realizes that he is able to speak to his father Frank thiry years in the past where the same phenomenon is occuring. Since the death of his father has not yet happened, he is able to warn Frank about the accident. However, saving Frank's life also alters the course of a serial killer which effects John's entire family. John's current investigation is the same unsolved case from 30 years before. Now John and Frank work together over the radio to solve the case and avoid the tragedy that happened to their family.

Frequency remains one of my all time favorite movies. The acting is phenomenal!! Jim Caevizel gives the best performance in the movie as John Sullivan. The love for his dad that he shows as well as the determination to solve the case is amazing. Dennis Quade continues to amaze me with his versatile and brilliant roles. Frank Sullivan is no exception. I love the way that he shows love for his son, and how he must become like a cop even though he is a firefighter. Noah Emmerich adds a nice touch to the story with Gordo. A suprising performance was given by Elizabeth Mitchell who plays John's mom Julia. Andre Braugher always does a good job and continues to with Satch. The villan of the story is played by Shawn Doyle. He gives a very impressive performance that will shock you! The story itself is brilliant. It involves many elements. The love between father and son, a murder mystery, and the scientific phenomenon of the aurora borealis. Some timetravel movies suffer with due to lack of explanation. But as the movie goes on, memories of both lives ( the one with Frank dying, and the one with him alive) are shown. You get to see John's life on both timelines, as if they both merged to create the present. This lets us see where the chages were coming from and why they were done.

With amazing performances, an incredible script, and an action packed story, Frequency is a treat to watch. It puts an interesting spin on the time travel genre! The DVD is a must own because you not only get the movie, but great special features. You get to see featurettes, deleted scenes, and much much more

This is one of my favorite movies. The acting was very good and the story line was excellent. It is about a son who is able to talk to his dad on his ham radio even though his dad has been dead for thirty years. He is able to warn him about a fire he was going to where he would die. This changes the course of the future and some interesting things happen. This is a very good film.

This GREAT film version of Henry V deserves a better video presentation! I love this film, but I will NOT buy a DVD with the degraded image inherent to NON-anamorphic Letterbox formatting. What kind of idiots does MGM take us for??? There is simply no way that I will pay good money for an intentionally defective product.

This *HENRY V* DVD lacks both English closed-captioning -OR- subtitles as a menu option, yet they are offered in French & Spanish! -- Therefore, we whom are disabled by being hard-of-hearing, completely deaf, and others who MUST rely on DVDs or VHS-tapes to *ALWAYS* contain an English-language closed-captioning or a subtitle option: this DVD was a VERY BITTER purchasing disappointment. Moreover, here's yet another *MGM Studio* DVD release -- that's completely lacking any kind of English closed-captioning or subtitles option! ****CAVIAT EMPTOR!******

Kenneth Branagh is an excellent actor and I absolutely loved this movie, but there was one thing that drove me to the end of my wits. In the middle of the movie there is a scene with the french king's daughter and her hand maid (excuse me if wrong term is used) that is entirely in french and there are no subtitles!!! Sadly, I don't speak french, so I was exteremely upset when there was no way for us non-french speaking people to understand what was being said--except to pull out the story itself and read it while the movie is going on...sigh. Anyway, and excellent movie with that one flaw...

Dead Again was my first exposure to both Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson, and it is a film that I am very fond of. I remember seeing it for the first time late one evening when I was home alone; I couldn't have been more than 12 years old at the time. The film really made a big impression on me: the dramatic music, the swirling camera moves, not to mention the genuinly creepy performance by Branagh as Roman Strauss, really scared me. So much so that I didn't sleep that night. Today it doesn't scare me that much - but it is an entertaining film nevertheless. The plot is a classic murder mystery with a supernatural twist. If you can accept the theatrics of the script and Branagh's direction, it is a very exiting and engrossing film; the kind of stylish, noir-thiller which does not get made any longer. Hitchcock would have loved it, I'm sure. And if you have a fondness for old Hollywood-style thillers, Dead Again is certainly worth your money.

Although he received tremendous praise for his memorable film production of Shakespeare's HENRY V, DEAD AGAIN was the film that really introduced actor/director Kenneth Branagh to mainstream American film, and for a time he and then-wife Emma Thompson were the most celebrated acting couple since Olivier and Leigh. The marriage did not last, but fortunately this film did--and I say fortunately, for although it is somewhat forgotten today, DEAD AGAIN is an overlooked jewel of a film: classy, noir-ish, stylish, and very memorable indeed.

The story is fanciful. In the late 1940s noted composer Roman Strauss was convicted of mudering his noted pianist wife Margaret, and was sentenced to death. Some forty years later, a young woman suffering from amnesia falls into the hands of a no-nonsense Los Angeles private eye--and under hypnosis she recalls not her immediate past, but the lives of Roman and Margaret. Is this reincarnation? Is she Margaret Strauss? Is the private eye to whom she is attracted but of whom she is also strangely fearful the reincarnation of Roman Strauss, Margaret's killer? Is history repeating itself?

Scott Frank's clever script makes for a fast-paced, twisting, and fascinating plot-driven film--and it is flawlessly played by Branagh and Thompson, who assume dual roles as the 1940s Roman and Margaret Strauss and the 1980s Mike Church and Grace. The supporting cast is also excellent, with memorable performances by Andy Garcia and Derek Jacobi--and a truly exceptional cameo by Robin Williams, who here for the first time demonstrated that his talents went far beyond comedy. The shifts between past and present, nightmare and reality are exceedingly well done, and although the plot becomes more and more fantastic the entire film is so perfectly executed that one buys into it every step of the way.

If DEAD AGAIN has a flaw, it is that some of the twists and turns are predictable--but in the film's favor I must admit that it sweeps you along so quickly that you seldom have time to analyse that failing while you actually watch the film. It is also to a certain extent a "one trick pony" film; the film is at its most powerful upon a first viewing, when one is oblivious to what is coming. But even so, it is tremendously effective and it holds up as well today as when it first appeared on the big screen. The DVD includes little in the way of extras beyond commentary tracks by producer Lindsay Doran, writer Scott Frank, and director-star Kenneth Branagh--and these are as hit-and-miss as commentary tracks usually are, but they hit more often than miss. The picture and sound quality is overall very good. Recommended!

Dead Again is a brilliant psychological thriller! It's riveting and breathtakingly suspenseful from start to finish, directed with style by Kenneth Branagh. Many imaginative homages to Hitchock--and this is as good as anything the master has directed. Branagh fashions a fascinating puzzle that contains its share of action, romance, dry wit, and (of course) twists & turns. And, unlike most thrillers, there's a distinct element of unpredictability to the latter.

Dead Again is a tale of parallel stories in different time frames. The first, which transpires in post-World War II Los Angeles and is presented entirely through black-and-white flashbacks, relates the tragic romance of Roman and Margaret Strauss (Branagh and his then-wife, Emma Thompson). Roman, a German expatriate, is a world-famous composer and conductor, and Margaret, a Brit relocated to North America, is an up-and-coming musician. They meet when Roman conducts Margaret's orchestra, and it's love at first sight. They are soon married, but their fairytale existence begins to fray. Margaret is suspicious that Roman's housekeeper, Inga (Hanna Schygulla), and her son, Frankie (Gregor Hesse), may be stealing from Roman. He, in turn, is wary of her relationship with a reporter named Gray Baker (Andy Garcia), who appears to be exceeding the bounds of friendly propriety. This all leads to murder (I'm not giving anything away here, since this is revealed during an opening montage of newspaper clippings). Margaret is stabbed to death using a pair of scissors, an expensive anklet is stolen, and Roman is arrested and convicted. He goes to the electric chair claiming to be innocent.

The other part of the story occurs in 1991 Los Angeles, where a solitary private investigator, Mike Church (Branagh), has been requested by a local priest to uncover the identity of a pretty woman (Thompson) who has lost her voice and her memory. (She is given the faux name of Grace.) Mike's friend, newspaper man Pete (Wayne Knight), puts her photograph in the local paper, and the only respondent is a hypnotist/junk dealer named Franklyn Madison (Derek Jacobi), who believes that a trauma from the woman's past life may be causing her mute amnesia. He puts "Grace" under, and she begins to see visions from Roman and Margaret's life. She regains her voice, but not her memory, and, as she and Mike grow closer, she cannot avoid noticing similarities between their relationship and that of Roman and Margaret. As she looks more deeply into the past, she begins to fear Mike, sensing that he could be Roman re-incarnated and that the murder of 45 years ago may be about to happen again. Then, when Mike agrees to be hypnotized, he uncovers a startling secret.

Although Dead Again's story is complicated, Branagh presents it in a clear, straightforward manner that leaves little room for confusion. Each of the plot twists is exposed with suitable buildup, maintaining viewer interest. The characters, both past and present, are remarkably well-developed, and there is a legitimate sense of uncertainty concerning Roman's guilt. He may have gone to the electric chair for Margaret's murder, but did he really commit the deed? Branagh keeps us guessing until the plot demands the disclosure of the truth. When it comes to interweaving the two stories and offering a fulfilling resolution, Branagh and screenwriter Scott Frank do not disappoint us.

This definitely stands out as one of the most intriguing and memorable thrillers of the 1990s. My heart nearly stopped beating during the very intense finale.All in all, a wonderful flick - highly entertaining and intriguing; a great throwback to film noir with a kicky karmic twist. Recommended!

Dead Again was my first exposure to both Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson, and it is a film that I am very fond of. I remember seeing it for the first time late one evening when I was home alone; I couldn't have been more than 12 years old at the time. The film really made a big impression on me: the dramatic music, the swirling camera moves, not to mention the genuinly creepy performance by Branagh as Roman Strauss, really scared me. So much so that I didn't sleep that night. Today it doesn't scare me that much - but it is an entertaining film nevertheless. The plot is a classic murder mystery with a supernatural twist. If you can accept the theatrics of the script and Branagh's direction, it is a very exiting and engrossing film; the kind of stylish, noir-thiller which does not get made any longer. Hitchcock would have loved it, I'm sure. And if you have a fondness for old Hollywood-style thillers, Dead Again is certainly worth your money.

Although he received tremendous praise for his memorable film production of Shakespeare's HENRY V, DEAD AGAIN was the film that really introduced actor/director Kenneth Branagh to mainstream American film, and for a time he and then-wife Emma Thompson were the most celebrated acting couple since Olivier and Leigh. The marriage did not last, but fortunately this film did--and I say fortunately, for although it is somewhat forgotten today, DEAD AGAIN is an overlooked jewel of a film: classy, noir-ish, stylish, and very memorable indeed.

The story is fanciful. In the late 1940s noted composer Roman Strauss was convicted of mudering his noted pianist wife Margaret, and was sentenced to death. Some forty years later, a young woman suffering from amnesia falls into the hands of a no-nonsense Los Angeles private eye--and under hypnosis she recalls not her immediate past, but the lives of Roman and Margaret. Is this reincarnation? Is she Margaret Strauss? Is the private eye to whom she is attracted but of whom she is also strangely fearful the reincarnation of Roman Strauss, Margaret's killer? Is history repeating itself?

Scott Frank's clever script makes for a fast-paced, twisting, and fascinating plot-driven film--and it is flawlessly played by Branagh and Thompson, who assume dual roles as the 1940s Roman and Margaret Strauss and the 1980s Mike Church and Grace. The supporting cast is also excellent, with memorable performances by Andy Garcia and Derek Jacobi--and a truly exceptional cameo by Robin Williams, who here for the first time demonstrated that his talents went far beyond comedy. The shifts between past and present, nightmare and reality are exceedingly well done, and although the plot becomes more and more fantastic the entire film is so perfectly executed that one buys into it every step of the way.

If DEAD AGAIN has a flaw, it is that some of the twists and turns are predictable--but in the film's favor I must admit that it sweeps you along so quickly that you seldom have time to analyse that failing while you actually watch the film. It is also to a certain extent a "one trick pony" film; the film is at its most powerful upon a first viewing, when one is oblivious to what is coming. But even so, it is tremendously effective and it holds up as well today as when it first appeared on the big screen. The DVD includes little in the way of extras beyond commentary tracks by producer Lindsay Doran, writer Scott Frank, and director-star Kenneth Branagh--and these are as hit-and-miss as commentary tracks usually are, but they hit more often than miss. The picture and sound quality is overall very good. Recommended!

Dead Again is a brilliant psychological thriller! It's riveting and breathtakingly suspenseful from start to finish, directed with style by Kenneth Branagh. Many imaginative homages to Hitchock--and this is as good as anything the master has directed. Branagh fashions a fascinating puzzle that contains its share of action, romance, dry wit, and (of course) twists & turns. And, unlike most thrillers, there's a distinct element of unpredictability to the latter.

Dead Again is a tale of parallel stories in different time frames. The first, which transpires in post-World War II Los Angeles and is presented entirely through black-and-white flashbacks, relates the tragic romance of Roman and Margaret Strauss (Branagh and his then-wife, Emma Thompson). Roman, a German expatriate, is a world-famous composer and conductor, and Margaret, a Brit relocated to North America, is an up-and-coming musician. They meet when Roman conducts Margaret's orchestra, and it's love at first sight. They are soon married, but their fairytale existence begins to fray. Margaret is suspicious that Roman's housekeeper, Inga (Hanna Schygulla), and her son, Frankie (Gregor Hesse), may be stealing from Roman. He, in turn, is wary of her relationship with a reporter named Gray Baker (Andy Garcia), who appears to be exceeding the bounds of friendly propriety. This all leads to murder (I'm not giving anything away here, since this is revealed during an opening montage of newspaper clippings). Margaret is stabbed to death using a pair of scissors, an expensive anklet is stolen, and Roman is arrested and convicted. He goes to the electric chair claiming to be innocent.

The other part of the story occurs in 1991 Los Angeles, where a solitary private investigator, Mike Church (Branagh), has been requested by a local priest to uncover the identity of a pretty woman (Thompson) who has lost her voice and her memory. (She is given the faux name of Grace.) Mike's friend, newspaper man Pete (Wayne Knight), puts her photograph in the local paper, and the only respondent is a hypnotist/junk dealer named Franklyn Madison (Derek Jacobi), who believes that a trauma from the woman's past life may be causing her mute amnesia. He puts "Grace" under, and she begins to see visions from Roman and Margaret's life. She regains her voice, but not her memory, and, as she and Mike grow closer, she cannot avoid noticing similarities between their relationship and that of Roman and Margaret. As she looks more deeply into the past, she begins to fear Mike, sensing that he could be Roman re-incarnated and that the murder of 45 years ago may be about to happen again. Then, when Mike agrees to be hypnotized, he uncovers a startling secret.

Although Dead Again's story is complicated, Branagh presents it in a clear, straightforward manner that leaves little room for confusion. Each of the plot twists is exposed with suitable buildup, maintaining viewer interest. The characters, both past and present, are remarkably well-developed, and there is a legitimate sense of uncertainty concerning Roman's guilt. He may have gone to the electric chair for Margaret's murder, but did he really commit the deed? Branagh keeps us guessing until the plot demands the disclosure of the truth. When it comes to interweaving the two stories and offering a fulfilling resolution, Branagh and screenwriter Scott Frank do not disappoint us.

This definitely stands out as one of the most intriguing and memorable thrillers of the 1990s. My heart nearly stopped beating during the very intense finale.All in all, a wonderful flick - highly entertaining and intriguing; a great throwback to film noir with a kicky karmic twist. Recommended!