Don Movie Reviews

October Sky is indeed a great movie as nearly everyone has written in these reviews. But it is based on a great book, too, written by Homer Hickam (not Hickman!!!) titled Rocket Boys or in the paperback version October Sky. The book is quite a bit different from the movie but is every bit as powerful. If you want to know the real story of the Coalwood Rocket Boys and also just read a very good page-turning book, try it and the sequels out, too. The Coalwood Way and Sky of Stone - great books!

In 1957 the Soviet Union launched Sputnik into space and inspired a boy and a nation. Homer Hickman(Gyllenhaal) was a humble kid who dreamed of getting out of his coal mine hometown. His father(Cooper)has different views for his son and wants him to get his head out of the stars. Homer takes the ridicule from his father and then puts out one of the greatest acts of persevarance ever told.

Jake Gyllenhaal is great. This is superb acting from this young man. He is one of the fastest rising stars in Hollywood and this is his humble beginnig. He plays Homer well. He plays off the other actors around him well. It's an emotional performance in an emotional tale.

Chirs Cooper is quickly becoming one of the best actors alive. His performance as Homer's dad is as good as his performance in American Beauty. Cooper truly becomes the character he plays and thats why he's one of the best actors living. I really think him and Gyllenhaal got snubbed by Oscars for not getting any recognition for there roles.

I love October Sky. It's a great movie about hard work and perseverance. Everyone should see this movie. It shows the american dream and what can happen if you have a goal and do everything you can to acheive it. This is a great family film and is one of the best movies ever made.

While I do not see too many films when they are released in theaters, I raced out to catch this one because it seemed to carry such an inspiring message. I'll never forget the mamazing feeling in my heart when I left the movie theater that evening. I could not help but stare up into the sky, feeling like I could reach out and grab the stars.

Jake Gyllenhaal perfectly captures the essence of Homer Hickam. While the movie is heavy on melodrama, its perfectly necessary to get the message across. The life that was laid in front of Homer when he was born was not a pleasant one. He was going to work in the mines. His father knew, as did the whole town. But Homer doesn't accept this and his mother and teacher make sure that he does not quit.

Chris Cooper is unbelievable. I had not seen his previous work and had no idea who he was. After October Sky I pledged to never miss one of his films, and have yet to be disappointed.

The directing is a littleover-the-top and the screenplay had to do a lot of strecthing to make the movie accessible, but these changes do not detract from the story, they enhance it. Two scenes capture how this works. The "Rocket Boys" have been struggling with their propellant for a long time and can't get it right. Finally, they chance upon a solution that might work and when they got to test it, the entire high school and half the town is there to watch. Horrified at the prospect of screwing up in front of the entire town, Homer realizes he has no choice; he can't back down now. When the fuse is lit and the rocket soars perfectly into the sky, you heart swells with pride for what these boys accomplished.

And the final scene between Homer and his father still chokes me up as I think about it now. Homer has his speech where he thanks everyone and to his surprise, there is his father, who he invites to press the button to send the last rocket airborne. As his father watches the rocket fly, even he is impressed by what his son accomplishes and he lovingly puts his arm around his shoulders. A beautifully shot scene.

Now did these scenes happen exactly like this? The book shows us that they did not. But that doesn't matter. The art of film and the art of writing are completely different. The scenes are precisely what they need to be to put the message across visually. The emotions that these images provoke are visceral, and that is why the movie is so powerful.

The supporting cast are wonderfully understated, especially Laura Dern and Chris Owen. The movies beutifully shot and the screenplay is a nice adaptation of a book that is difficult to visualize. Thank you to all involved for giving me a movie that makes me cry every time I watch. I look forward to watching this movie with my children as they grow up.

This was one of my favorite movies as a child. I was very excited when I saw that I could order this movie on DVD. I am so disappointed in the quality. I agree with a previous reviewer the sound and picture are terrible. I also feel like I wasted my money. I had anticipated better. I would NOT recommend purchasing this on DVD.

This is a great movie. The problem is the quality of this DVD is AWFUL AWFUL AWFUL. It looks like someone took a camera and shot it at a poor VHS copy of the movie. I've seen movie theater bootlegs better quality than this! Maybe the VHS is better, but warning, the DVD is BAD BAD BAD quality. I'm not being overdramatic. Try to find a better quality release.

This is a great movie, a must see!!! I should know I've seen it at least a hundred times. When my mom first saw this movie she loved it so much she named me after it!!!!

The first time I saw TS1 & 2 was on a bad taped version, so I bought the 2 disc DVD the second I got a DVD player (a couple years ago). And the 2 disc was worth the money. But even seeing them on a badly taped version I was absorbed into the story of these toys. As an only child, I was convinced my toys had a life when I left so watching these movies took me back to my childhood. As disturbing as Sid was, there's a lot of kids who enjoy destroying toys and for this reason he was a perfect 'real' villian for the toys. The best part of these films is that (with the exception of Woody and Buzz, or in TS2's case 'the Woody toy collection') all the toys are real toys. The idea of Toys living has been done before, but the fact that these were actual toys (from Mattle, Hasbro, FisherPrice, etc) really brought it to life (that and the introduction of 3D computer animation in feature length format). At times, I forgot it was animated. And even though Woody and Buzz only became real toys because of the movie, the two eras of toys they represent are very real as are the stories sorounding them (TS1 shinny new toy becomes boy's favorite, TS2 Classic old toy becomes collectors item). Also, the story itself got to the heart of what a buddy film is suppose to be. There's nothing else to say except that these movies are a must have.

wow! If you or your children enjoy family time watching videos then you should deffinatly,deffinatly watch the set of Toy Story. Buzz and Woody set very good examples of friendship and the rest of the amazing toys show very good team work. This video is a video I myself could watch over and over again. This would be a video I would recomend to anyone, of any age, it is GREAT...

This is a beautifully packaged collection! Get one while supplies last, it may prove as valuable as a vintage Woody doll. Pixar really came up with something wonderful in these two stories, both provide such engaging accounts of one's [longing] for toys of the past. My kids treasure these two movies and the dialog is witty enough to draw parents into the stories. Toy Story II builds on the former, introducing a wider range of characters and offering a light-hearted parable on the collection mania in America. One too many out of the frying pan and into the fire situations for my taste, but the action keeps kids enthralled throughout. Hanks and Allen lend great voice to the battling lead characters, and there are many other wonderful voices as well. The only drawback (and it is a mild one) is not mixing Pixar toys with real family members. I think that would have made the stories even more compelling.

The first time I saw TS1 & 2 was on a bad taped version, so I bought the 2 disc DVD the second I got a DVD player (a couple years ago). And the 2 disc was worth the money. But even seeing them on a badly taped version I was absorbed into the story of these toys. As an only child, I was convinced my toys had a life when I left so watching these movies took me back to my childhood. As disturbing as Sid was, there's a lot of kids who enjoy destroying toys and for this reason he was a perfect 'real' villian for the toys. The best part of these films is that (with the exception of Woody and Buzz, or in TS2's case 'the Woody toy collection') all the toys are real toys. The idea of Toys living has been done before, but the fact that these were actual toys (from Mattle, Hasbro, FisherPrice, etc) really brought it to life (that and the introduction of 3D computer animation in feature length format). At times, I forgot it was animated. And even though Woody and Buzz only became real toys because of the movie, the two eras of toys they represent are very real as are the stories sorounding them (TS1 shinny new toy becomes boy's favorite, TS2 Classic old toy becomes collectors item). Also, the story itself got to the heart of what a buddy film is suppose to be. There's nothing else to say except that these movies are a must have.

wow! If you or your children enjoy family time watching videos then you should deffinatly,deffinatly watch the set of Toy Story. Buzz and Woody set very good examples of friendship and the rest of the amazing toys show very good team work. This video is a video I myself could watch over and over again. This would be a video I would recomend to anyone, of any age, it is GREAT...

This is a beautifully packaged collection! Get one while supplies last, it may prove as valuable as a vintage Woody doll. Pixar really came up with something wonderful in these two stories, both provide such engaging accounts of one's [longing] for toys of the past. My kids treasure these two movies and the dialog is witty enough to draw parents into the stories. Toy Story II builds on the former, introducing a wider range of characters and offering a light-hearted parable on the collection mania in America. One too many out of the frying pan and into the fire situations for my taste, but the action keeps kids enthralled throughout. Hanks and Allen lend great voice to the battling lead characters, and there are many other wonderful voices as well. The only drawback (and it is a mild one) is not mixing Pixar toys with real family members. I think that would have made the stories even more compelling.

I remember watching this as a kid, and it was one of my favorites. I recently saw it again after about 20 years, and must say I was extremely disappointed. Yes, it had an all-star cast, and Leslie Warren's performance holds up quite well. But compared to the 1997 production (with Brandy and Whitney Houston, etc.,) this version is SO stiff, so wooden, so BORING, and the guest stars all stodgy and way too old for their parts. (Pat Carroll as a step-sister? She must've been at least in her late 40's when this was filmed.) But most importantly, the sets are so unbelievably cheap and tacky, the special effects are so shoddy -- it's really embarrassing to watch stars like Ginger Rogers stooping so low to appear in such a "stagey" low-budget production. (Buy the newer (1997) version -- it was directed by Rob Marshall, the same man who directed the Oscar-winning "Chicago", and compares almost to the Wizard of Oz when it come to the production quality.)

This is another very nice musical version of Cinderella. I watched it on a movie channel like HBO when I was a teenager and when I found out that the Prince was played by Stuart Damon who plays Alan Quartermaine on General Hospital I was pleasantly surprised! If you like the Cinderella fairytale and you watch General Hospital than I think you just may like this version of Cinderella

I was born in 1978, and am completely in love with this movie. I grew up with it one of my favorites as a child, and now 25 yrs. later I have just bought a copy for myself

My two daughters watched this video. My husband and myself took turns watching it with the girls because it was so long. During my time watching it I noticed some adult words that shouldn't be in there and also female nudity on a bird that was a bit outrageous. Also my husband observed some female anatomy on a tree that was not for children. Parents, please watch this video with your children if you do buy it. As it is such a long movie I imagine many parents just let the kids watch it and go fix dinner or do other things...not in the same room. I got bored and left after a while. I don't think this is a cartoon for children. I may be the only one.

If you're looking for a great video for the kids to watch, this should make the list. Although some scenes might plod along too slowly for very young viewers, it is still a charming story for young and old alike. The voice cast is first rate, with a particular tip of the hat to Sir Christopher Lee, who should seriously consider more voice over work.
The downside in the cast is Jeff Bridges, who seems to want to be somewhere else, other than doing his role. On top of that, he sings. We're talking Clint Eastwood-Paint Your Wagon-I Talk To The Trees BAD! In the old days, if a prominent actor, or actress couldn't perform part of their role, someone else was called in, such as a stuntperson, body double, or singer. Audrey Hepburn and Natalie Wood had voice subs. Why, oh WHY, couldn't they do the same here?
The animation is not too shabby for Rankin-Bass. In fact, the art design is quite stylish at times. The musical score is well done, yet tends to be a bit loud. Film length is reasonable for young tykes, with a good mix of humor and minimal violence. I would recommend this movie to all parents.

When I was about four or five years old I loved to watch The Last Unicorn. Spotting it at Blockbuster, I decided to rent it, wondering how I would see it now.

I was worried when I saw that the animation was Rankin/Bass, but in the end I found it to be a visual confection.

Some of the characters do look a little cheesy, but most of the time the animation dazzled me. In particular Mommy Fortuna's tree stump hat is very cool, forestscapes are ethereal, and I love Molly's BIG brown eyes.

My favorite scene is the meeting of Molly and the Unicorn...The woman is angered that the Unicorn came to her at a low point in her life rather than when she was "new and innocent." After that schpiel Molly embraces her and whispers, "I forgive you."

To my mind, this is one of those works like The Little Prince or The Mouse and His Child that is meant for chidren but is sincere enough to captivate adults as well. Well done.

...was how much this movie reads like a TV play. So stark is it in its simple, high-key lighting and documentary-style cinematography that it faintly resembles another Rod Steiger character piece he did just a year earlier, the television performance of MARTY. (Both Steiger and newcomer Eva Marie Saint came from live television; the TV anthologies so popular at the time spawned many a future film star, and one can't help but wonder if Elia Kazan himself originally directed plays for television.) And of course, Actors' Studio champ Marlon Brando gives probably his most stunning performance- a tad more subdued and less studied then even the performances in both STREETCAR and GODFATHER, IMHO. The film even has a tremendous music score by Leonard Bernstein. A must-see. And it *does* have class.

Much has been written pro and con about this classic film. One thing seems certain -- Marlon Brando gives the performance of a lifetime as Terry Malloy, the down and out fighter turned longshoreman. His brother Charlie, played superbly by Rod Steiger, is accountant for the gang that runs what might be loosely called a union. Brando's performance is an acting clinic. James Dean in East of Eden shows us what he has learned from watching Brando. Dean's acting is also a revelation. Later Robert De Niro will come close to matching Brando's bravura performance as Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and then as Jake La Motta in Raging Bull.

The screenplay of On the Waterfront by Budd Schulberg, based on his previously published story, strains our credulity. As the film opens Terry Malloy calls to his friend Joey Doyle to meet him on the roof to give back a pidgeon which has gone astray. Doyle, an informer, is thrown fron the roof to his death by thugs acting for Johnny Friendly, played well, given the constraints of the screenplay, by Lee J. Cobb. Terry later confesses to Doyle's sister, in an academy award winning performance by Eva Marie Saint, that he knew nothing of the plan to murder Joey. Terry's guilt over his complicity in Doyle's murder prompts him to testify against Johnny Friendly and the union gang.

Only Johnny Friendly and his gang behave consistently in this film. The federal agents, police, longshoremen, and the parish priest, played by Karl Malden, all seem confused about what action to take to break the hold of the union gang over the longshoremen. Additionally, no one seems prepared for the violence unleashed by the gang against informers.

Elia Kazan directed On the Waterfront and some reviewers have suggested that the film is self-serving; that is, Kazan, an informer himself during the McCarthy era, attempts to justify his cowardly behavior by likening his actions to Malloy's informing on the mob that he once belonged to. To compare Kazan with a dim witted ex-fighter seems absurd to me. If this was Kazan's intent, he fails miserably.

If the story of On the Waterfront seems far fetched at times, then why give it a five star rating? Again, Brando's performance, for which he was justly given an academy award, seems to me to be a defining moment in American film. Brando sets a benchmark for actors that is high and secure. He is truly a great actor and this film demontrates his power and versatility.

"On the waterfront" was shot literally there, not in a studio, and has the reality and invigorating freshness of a true story of a man winning a victory for him and for mankind.

Marlon Brando, the greatest American actor, plays a plain, down beaten boxer, almost innocent, who slowly realises the extend of his abuse by the people he considers his friends, a criminal gang that has been abusing a dock-workers' Union as a cover for its money and power amassing activities. The gang is led by a "self made" ruthless murderer who has already "eliminated" several workers, suspected to "pigeon"( testify) in the criminal proceedings, pending against him, in a Court of justice.

Our hero is faced with a series of moral dilemmas, which he would have rather avoided, but eventually he comes to take the big decision to stand up against these powerful enemies and fight for his fellow workers, his friends and relatives --and defend his humanity.

Love for the sister of a friend, to whose death he unwittingly becomes instrumental, puts our hero in conflict with his actions. This strong love becomes a humanising factor, a compass in the maize of contradictions of attachments and loyalties in his life.

Out of this social jungle, there also emerges a priest, as true shepherd, who tries to uphold the word of worth he preaches to his demoralised and dispersed flock, with his personal guidance and involvement against that evil, mainly their fear and isolation...

Our hero goes through a process of self realisation and consciousness, and, as he is a true fighter, he challenges his enemy, beats him and is beaten by his; but the people like him see and take courage from his actions, and the carton-paper tiger of an omnipotent and unshakable criminal order of social arrangements at "the Waterfront" is exposed in the real light, for what it is, and collapses. There is a memorable sequence of tragic height, of the corrupt "Union leader" trying, yet again, to hang on power by his threatening tactics, but the people go past him, in peace. The people are free.

So, was it all so easy, to disarrange all this gangster brutality, inhumanity and injustice that terrorised and mesmerised a whole community at "the waterfront", the brutality, inhumanity and injustice that tantalises still, more than ever, our own privy world and humanity, in an age that we are aggressively deluged with all sorts of demoralising news about our humanity's crucifixions, around the globe? Kazan's answer is a great affirmation: Human liberation is possible, as in the story of the film, which is a true story.

There is a positive moral, a reinforcement of belief in the great myth of human progress; and in the Fifties this optimism was a tradition in the American cinema. But the great contribution of this classic American film, is the realism with which this is rendered: The realism of the waterfront, of the chorus of people around the protagonists, and of the hero himself; an artistic challenge set by the genius of Kazan and so happily matched by the genius of Marlon Brando.

Marlon Brando conveys the ethos of a plain man, who is content to keep the place he was allowed, unquestioningly. His self-abandonment evolves through the conflicts between the people he loves, in a crescendo, until he is confronted with his brother pointing a shotgun at him. We follow his agonising spiritual development; as he is forced to make judgments of right and wrong, and choose his stance, to testify for the crimes, take sides and find the courage to stand up for his choice, finally fight for his humanity and for his freedom to work. Alone at the turn point, he has to carry the weight of his choice all by himself, as his testimony against his criminal "friends" is regarded by his peers as unacceptable collaboration with an extra communal authority; but we feel satisfaction as we see the tide of sympathy turn his way, as the dockland community gathers courage and dignity by his courage, to fight against the tyranny of gangsters. As long as people love freedom, we will be always glad to hear this kind of news!

Brando's face in this film is a box- fighter's disfigured face, but no disfigurement can shadow the light of human kindness that shines through, as the invincible Helios. It is a good thing that there was a camera around to memorise this, and we can see it. This actor has achieved the ethos of this role as naturally as if it were his own self.

A mythical film, with exemplary interpretations by very talented actors. It is vitally uplifting for the viewer, too-- and I am sorry to have to underline this, as these days this quality is a rarity in the industry...

I was on vacation in California and I had never seen the movie before. Well the Nuart center they were performing the movie live. I must say it was wonderful! Colleen Camp was there. It was so amazing I can't even explain it! If you haven't seen the movie you HAVE to see it!

Clue is based on the classic mystery solving board game. In the movie, the original suspects come into a complex adventure that takes you further than the game would. The story follows as a group of people are invited to Mr. Boddy's mansion. Boddy claims to have called them on financial business. But when the six people discover that they have to use a covername given to them and find it mysterious that the host is taking forever to arrive, they get suspicious. Finally, Boddy arrives and presents them with objects that can be used as weapons (the revolver, candlestick, etc.). He turns off the lights and tells them to kill him. Not even the strong Colonel Mustard could do a thing like that but when they turn on the lights, Boddy is dead! The clan and Boddy's butler (the hillarious Tim Curry)go out to find whodunit and realize there is someone else in the mansion!
This movie is full of suspense, adventure, and laughter making it a must see! And the best part is you can try to solve the mystery on your own through the movie if you so desire!

This is one of the funniest movies of all time. It combines the genres of comedy and mystery into a hilariously entertaining whole. The dialogue is fast, clever, and chock full of subtle humor. There is plenty of physical comedy too. The story line is well written and the alternate endings are wonderful. All the endings are possible, I went back and saw who was where and it worked! The actors are all brilliant and they can say so much with just a look. Tim Curry as the butler was simply a pleasure to watch! This is one movie that didn't get the attention it deserved. Perfect to watch anytime!

I was on vacation in California and I had never seen the movie before. Well the Nuart center they were performing the movie live. I must say it was wonderful! Colleen Camp was there. It was so amazing I can't even explain it! If you haven't seen the movie you HAVE to see it!

Clue is based on the classic mystery solving board game. In the movie, the original suspects come into a complex adventure that takes you further than the game would. The story follows as a group of people are invited to Mr. Boddy's mansion. Boddy claims to have called them on financial business. But when the six people discover that they have to use a covername given to them and find it mysterious that the host is taking forever to arrive, they get suspicious. Finally, Boddy arrives and presents them with objects that can be used as weapons (the revolver, candlestick, etc.). He turns off the lights and tells them to kill him. Not even the strong Colonel Mustard could do a thing like that but when they turn on the lights, Boddy is dead! The clan and Boddy's butler (the hillarious Tim Curry)go out to find whodunit and realize there is someone else in the mansion!
This movie is full of suspense, adventure, and laughter making it a must see! And the best part is you can try to solve the mystery on your own through the movie if you so desire!

This is one of the funniest movies of all time. It combines the genres of comedy and mystery into a hilariously entertaining whole. The dialogue is fast, clever, and chock full of subtle humor. There is plenty of physical comedy too. The story line is well written and the alternate endings are wonderful. All the endings are possible, I went back and saw who was where and it worked! The actors are all brilliant and they can say so much with just a look. Tim Curry as the butler was simply a pleasure to watch! This is one movie that didn't get the attention it deserved. Perfect to watch anytime!

This is the first of five "Dirty Harry" films in which Eastwood stars as a San Francisco police detective. By the time the last appeared (The Dead Pool, in 1988), Eastwood had aged and times had changed but Callahan's values and methods remained essentially the same. When initially released, Dirty Harry was immediately controversial as was Death Wish (1974). Audiences tended to be divided between those who were offended by what they considered to be excessive violence and those who (like Harry Callahan and Paul Kersey) had lost confidence in society's willingness and/or ability to respond effectively to violent crime. After seeing each of the two films for the first time, I vividly recall joining those around me in the theatre as they rose and cheered...and continue to applaud for several minutes. I asked myself, "What's going on here? What's this all about?"

At least in the larger U.S. cities 30 years ago, residents had become totally fed up with traditional law enforcement initiatives. It was no longer safe to walk the streets at night. Even more dangerous to do so in public parks. Homes were robbed while people worked during the day. Many of the same homes were robbed again later after insurance coverage replaced the articles previously stolen. Racial animosities, drug abuse, and a widespread contempt for institutional authority all contributed to such problems.

Under Don Siegel's crisp direction, Eastwood and his associates in the cast bring R.M. Fink's screenplay to life (and yes, to death) as they focus on what is obviously an irreconcilable conflict between Callahan and his superiors who include the mayor of San Francisco. Callahan's motto seems to be "Whatever it takes." In some situations, it may take his 44 Magnum, "the most powerful handgun in the world." Callahan has not totally lost faith in his society nor in the importance of the legal system. However, he does feel betrayed. The mayor and even Lieutenant Bressler (Harry Guardino) just don't "get it." This is precisely the same point Jim Malone (Sean Connery) makes to Eliot Ness (Kevin Costner) in The Untouchables 26 years later: When orthodox ("by the book") crime-fighting strategies and tactics don't succeed, use others even if they are not (at least technically) legal. Countless other films (such as Magnum Force, The French Connection, and L.A. Confidential) also make the same point.

It is important to remember when seeing this film again, as I did recently, that it portrays elements of an urban society few of us ever experience. Also, that it is a drama, not a documentary. Its primary purpose is to tell a story. The plot focuses on a serial killer named "Scorpio" (Andy Robinson) whom Callahan is determined to eliminate. Even when he eventually does so, questions remain. Don't criminals also have rights? What would happen if all or most other detectives followed Callahan's example? To what extent (if any) should private citizens also be actively involved in law enforcement? I agree with several critics who claim that, with Dirty Harry, Siegel and Eastwood created a new film genre. Its influence proved to be substantial. Each viewer must decide for herself or himself how much social relevance it has retained after 32 years but almost everyone would agree that it has lost little of its entertainment value.

Okay, so ol' Clint takes the law into his own hands, vigilante-style. It's not good for politics if things like this go on in real life, but it sure makes a great movie. With beautiful and picturesque San Francisco as a background, the movie focuses on the tracking of a psychopath, the Scorpio killer who has everyone in the city suspecting their grocer, the taxi driver, and the washing machine repair man.
And Clint Eastwood was made for this part - or perhaps the part was made for Eastwood. He's so god at portraying a character to whom the end justifies the means - any means at all. If you haven't already seen it, rent it now. If you've already seen it, see it again. It's just as good second - or third - time around.

"Dirty Harry" made Clint Eastwood a star. Yes, there was the Italian westerns that made him famous, but this is the one that made him an American icon. Harry Callahan is the man every man wants to be.
The story is that a roof top sniper is killing the citizens of San Francisco. He is a cold, vicious murderer who wants a huge ransom to stop. Harry Callahan is the cop assigned to the case. Harry is a loner, he's the type to shoot first (with his massive, now infamous, Smith and Wesson .44 Magnum) and ask questions later. At first he goes along with police procedure, until the killer starts a new MO. When Harry tries to arrest him, he violate some of the killer's civil rights, and then is released. Harry begins stalking him as the killer is now trolling for new victoms.
This movie is not a mystery, it is more about social issues. Some people say the movie is dated. Maybe, maybe not. I think that rights of the accused are still highly sensitive issue today. Dirty Harry just did what any one of us in those extraordinary circumstances would have done.
On top everything it is an excellent action thriller. The pace is tight and it is just great to see someone just doing what's right, not nessesarily what's leagle.