Science Movie Reviews

I found this film's execution to be uninspired and unexceptional, although there were some aspects to the film that make it stand out from your average sci-fi tale.

First off, the movie's pluses. The supporting cast, including Law, Arkin, and Borgnine was strong, and both Hawke and Thurman were good (too understated though, seemingly by design). The movie also had style. In addition to style, it had some good messages, including anti-discrimination, and threats posed to individual liberty by technological 'advancement'. The most important message was that the human spirit, if strong enough can accomplish virtually anything.

These are certainly admirable themes. The movie just failed to deliver them in a mature and convincing way. Below I outline some of the problems, as I see them (beware of spoilers).

While realism is generally not the goal of science fiction, much of the science and several plot developments here were totally implausible. In terms of the science, the film gives too little allowance to the role of environment in human development; while this approach adds drama, it makes the film patronizingly simplistic. The weak hearts of the two protagonists also had no science fiction basis-it was just a plot device. Some other plot implausibilities: 1) the idea that one could (almost) hide their genetic signature, and 2) that people would no longer pay attention to facial appearances, something evolution has steered us towards recognizing for millennia.

The movie also felt flat; this was clearly the tone the film was going for, but I felt it took it too far. We needed to at minimum feel Vincent's passion for flight, and the couple's romantic passion. While there's no denying there was chemistry between Hawke and Thurman, the performances were too muted. We should have felt Vincent's excitement about his final achievement, but we don't, partly because we have no sense of what he will be doing in space.

Other characters and relationships were too simplistic as well. I know men can be boys, but the paring down of the brothers' relationship to little more than a game of chicken seems too extreme; where was the subtlety and nuance in their-or any of the other- relationship?

Many viewers criticize Gattaca for its implausibility. When the film was released, I recall reading a movie review entitled "You're too smart for Gattaca," which cited the improbability of the hero's success in a society where he is constantly subjected to testing to confirm his genetic "purity" and where the slightest trace of bodily detritus can expose him as an imposter.

I would respectfully submit that such critics have hit upon the central theme of the film without fully realizing it; the sheer implausibility of the hero's success under these conditions is precisely the point, and is what makes the story so powerful and poignant. The story is, after all, intended in part to be a cautionary tale.

In spite of the film's persistent "realistic" emphasis on the physical implausibility of the hero's success, however, it also bears emphasis that the ending, with Vincent rocketing to the heavens, is a genuinely Romantic assertion of faith that innate human intelligence and spirit can overcome bodily defects and limitations.

The ending also has mythological overtones of apotheosis (deification). In this respect, Vincent has heroic antecedents in Hercules and gnostic Christianity. Hercules' divine spirit was taken by the gods into Olympus after the self-inflicted destruction of his body by fire, and after the accomplishment of feats even more implausible than those confronted by Vincent. Similarly, Chirst ascended into heaven after his physical body was destroyed on the cross. Like both, Vincent endures great bodily suffering, but like both he ultimately transcends the physical limitations of the body.

As such, the story by its very design calls upon viewers at once to realize the physical impossibility of the hero's predicament, while at the same time suspending their disbelief in order to have faith in his ability to succeed against the odds. In this way, the story can be viewed as a contemporary and highly stylized variation on age old mythological and religious themes.

The world of Gattaca is one where people are stratified in society by their genetic composition. Racism and classism are things of the past. Those who are bred to be genetically superior are dominant in society compared to those conceived naturally and tethered with the possibilities of a plethora of medical problems.

In this world, Vincent (Hawke) is a person trying to overcome his own DNA by impersonating a genetic superior. In this reality, impersonation isn't just looks... The movie takes great pains to show how appearance has become secondary in identification.

This movie is not the best execution. It has an excellent cast, and the supporting cast tends to run away with the film. Hawke and Thurman give somewhat cold performances, along the lines of the film itself. I think this film's strongest points are an excellent premise (one that is very relevant today with health care becoming increasingly oriented towards risk stratification)and a wealth of supporting cast talent (especially Jude Law, whose performance is stellar, and it's always nice to see Ernest Borgnine in a movie).

This movie is true science fiction, not aliens and space ships and the like. It's sci-fi like Bradbury is sci-fi. It's thinking sci-fi.

As a note, the title Gattaca is derived from the letters GTAC, which stand for the letters used to represent the nucleic acids which make up DNA (Guanine, Thymine, Adenine, and Cytosine).

I found this film's execution to be uninspired and unexceptional, although there were some aspects to the film that make it stand out from your average sci-fi tale.

First off, the movie's pluses. The supporting cast, including Law, Arkin, and Borgnine was strong, and both Hawke and Thurman were good (too understated though, seemingly by design). The movie also had style. In addition to style, it had some good messages, including anti-discrimination, and threats posed to individual liberty by technological 'advancement'. The most important message was that the human spirit, if strong enough can accomplish virtually anything.

These are certainly admirable themes. The movie just failed to deliver them in a mature and convincing way. Below I outline some of the problems, as I see them (beware of spoilers).

While realism is generally not the goal of science fiction, much of the science and several plot developments here were totally implausible. In terms of the science, the film gives too little allowance to the role of environment in human development; while this approach adds drama, it makes the film patronizingly simplistic. The weak hearts of the two protagonists also had no science fiction basis-it was just a plot device. Some other plot implausibilities: 1) the idea that one could (almost) hide their genetic signature, and 2) that people would no longer pay attention to facial appearances, something evolution has steered us towards recognizing for millennia.

The movie also felt flat; this was clearly the tone the film was going for, but I felt it took it too far. We needed to at minimum feel Vincent's passion for flight, and the couple's romantic passion. While there's no denying there was chemistry between Hawke and Thurman, the performances were too muted. We should have felt Vincent's excitement about his final achievement, but we don't, partly because we have no sense of what he will be doing in space.

Other characters and relationships were too simplistic as well. I know men can be boys, but the paring down of the brothers' relationship to little more than a game of chicken seems too extreme; where was the subtlety and nuance in their-or any of the other- relationship?

Many viewers criticize Gattaca for its implausibility. When the film was released, I recall reading a movie review entitled "You're too smart for Gattaca," which cited the improbability of the hero's success in a society where he is constantly subjected to testing to confirm his genetic "purity" and where the slightest trace of bodily detritus can expose him as an imposter.

I would respectfully submit that such critics have hit upon the central theme of the film without fully realizing it; the sheer implausibility of the hero's success under these conditions is precisely the point, and is what makes the story so powerful and poignant. The story is, after all, intended in part to be a cautionary tale.

In spite of the film's persistent "realistic" emphasis on the physical implausibility of the hero's success, however, it also bears emphasis that the ending, with Vincent rocketing to the heavens, is a genuinely Romantic assertion of faith that innate human intelligence and spirit can overcome bodily defects and limitations.

The ending also has mythological overtones of apotheosis (deification). In this respect, Vincent has heroic antecedents in Hercules and gnostic Christianity. Hercules' divine spirit was taken by the gods into Olympus after the self-inflicted destruction of his body by fire, and after the accomplishment of feats even more implausible than those confronted by Vincent. Similarly, Chirst ascended into heaven after his physical body was destroyed on the cross. Like both, Vincent endures great bodily suffering, but like both he ultimately transcends the physical limitations of the body.

As such, the story by its very design calls upon viewers at once to realize the physical impossibility of the hero's predicament, while at the same time suspending their disbelief in order to have faith in his ability to succeed against the odds. In this way, the story can be viewed as a contemporary and highly stylized variation on age old mythological and religious themes.

The world of Gattaca is one where people are stratified in society by their genetic composition. Racism and classism are things of the past. Those who are bred to be genetically superior are dominant in society compared to those conceived naturally and tethered with the possibilities of a plethora of medical problems.

In this world, Vincent (Hawke) is a person trying to overcome his own DNA by impersonating a genetic superior. In this reality, impersonation isn't just looks... The movie takes great pains to show how appearance has become secondary in identification.

This movie is not the best execution. It has an excellent cast, and the supporting cast tends to run away with the film. Hawke and Thurman give somewhat cold performances, along the lines of the film itself. I think this film's strongest points are an excellent premise (one that is very relevant today with health care becoming increasingly oriented towards risk stratification)and a wealth of supporting cast talent (especially Jude Law, whose performance is stellar, and it's always nice to see Ernest Borgnine in a movie).

This movie is true science fiction, not aliens and space ships and the like. It's sci-fi like Bradbury is sci-fi. It's thinking sci-fi.

As a note, the title Gattaca is derived from the letters GTAC, which stand for the letters used to represent the nucleic acids which make up DNA (Guanine, Thymine, Adenine, and Cytosine).

Alien is one of my favorite films of at time. It is a master-piece of tension, physical space, atmosphere, tidy special effects, ensemble acting, and the unrelenting desire to unsettle. Its gorgeous cinemascope frame remains one of the best photographed in the history of film, and its legacy lives on both in the trilogy of sequels it has spawned, the presence of its titular beast (one of the most influential move monsters ever) in our pop culture, and in Sigourney Weavers incarnation of the iconic Ellen Ripley. It remains one of the few films that I can watch over and over again and never get tired of.

All this explains why news of a theatrical re-release became my cinematic event of 2003. I had been looking forward to this for years. Too young to have seen the original film in theaters, I had hoped that eventually the opportunity would present itself.

The chance to see at the marvelous tracking shots through the corridor of the Nostromo, Brett's (Harry Dean Stanton) quest to find the cat Jones in the bowels of the ship, Dallas' (Tom Skerrit) trip into the ventilation system, the verbal and later physical spacing between Ash (Ian Holm) and Ripley, Parker (national treasure Yaphet Kotto) and Brett's comic interplay ... all of that, finally on the big screen.

What's unfortunate about this re-release is the same as most theatrical re-releases of moderate-to-classic films: The director has suffered from a cumulative attack of coulda-woulda-shoulda syndrome, and decides to rethink and rework the film for contemporary audiences. Apocalypse Now Redux. The Exorcist: The version that you've never seen. Those Star War's "special editions." What do all of these films have in common? All of them were diminished with the addition of unnecessary material. In each case, a director who just can't leave well enough alone sullies the classic status of the Original film. (Mad props are due to Brian DePaima, who refused to let Scarface be altered in any way for its limited theatrical reissue before its DVD release ... sense a pattern?)

In interviews, Alien director Ridley Scott has spoken of making little trims here and there to help the pacing of the film) and show more glimpses of the alien). He has said, too, that the addition of the often spoken of "cocoon sequence" now fits very well in the film (the exact opposite of what he had been saying for years).

The original version of Alien starts out slowly, building gradually until the last 25 minutes are as relentlessly paced as any action classic. To try and speed up the first part of the film, then stop dead the last act to include a shocking, previously-deleted scene seems nothing more than a sop to contemporary film-going audiences with no patience for '70s pacing and a fetishized devotion to the cuff of the deleted scene. This is the innovator, not the imitator, and each shift feels like a tiny betrayal.

For This version of Alien to be coiled "The Director it Cut" is a lie. Ridley Scott wasn't forced to cut any material from the original at the studio's behest, nor did he have grave censorship concerns which required toning down any sequences. The film as released to theaters in 1979 was his director's cut, because he and editor Terry Rawlings cut it. This new version, I strongly suspect, exists to promote Fox's up coming Alien DVD box set. The seven-person (and one cat) crew of the Nostromo is again expendable; the priority is delivering more of the alien.

Should you see it? Absolutely as a good 90 percent or more it is still the same film, and its' soundscape will mess you up in a theater with a good system, and the DVD directors cut sounscape definitely falls into the same category, regardless of how large your home TV screen might be. Will it replace the original? Defiantly, no. For new version I give it a *** rating, while rating the original receives a solid **** star rating.

This movie rocked, big time. Does anyone know if there will be a special edition or something like that with the director's cut out in theaters again?

Ridley Scott's original 1979 film pulsates with dread and menace. Its darkened corridors mask a reptillian horror unmatched by any other in cinema. "Alien" scared the hell out of me when I saw it in its theatrical release, and the other night on DVD, it scared hell out of me again. Forget the sequels. This is one of the best movies of all time.

Yes, the story is simple, but that's the whole point. "Alien" is a fundamental horror story, your basic haunted house movie taken to the Nth degree. I love the fact it has only seven characters (OK, nine, if you count Mother and the alien itself ... the space jockey doesn't count). I love its simplicity, its straightforwardness. Aside from being a creepy, blood-curdling horror film (only "The Exorcist" and the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" top the chest-burster scene), it is also hard-core science fiction. James Cameron's sequel was an action-thriller (and an excellent one), and the subsequent sequels were just redundant. Scott's movie is the one for the ages.

It's about evil in a shape-shifting form. It's about our fear of the dark. It's about the bogeyman. It's about our irrational fear of creepy-crawlies, spiders, worms, snakes. It is by turns subtle and terrifying. It scares us by hiding the alien, revealing it only in bits and snatches (those exploding jaws!). There is surprisingly little blood; "Alien Resurrection" was a revolting gore fest. And it's a thoughtful film. It actually pauses to consider what a miracle the alien is on a biological level, which helps reinforce the fear and mystery that surround the creature.

In fact, the whole film is soaked in mystery. What is the intent of the beacon that attracts the Nostromo? What is the nature of the alien pilot, its own chest exploded in a gruesome foreshadowing of Kane's fate? What laid those eggs? How long had they been waiting down in the bowels of that awesome ship? Was the full-grown alien male or female? What did it try to do with Brett and Dallas? How exactly does it kill Lambert and Parker? Questions left largely unanswered. Not a problem for me -- I like loose ends, things left to ponder. That's the difference between a "plot" and a "story."

There's a hidden layer -- the fact that a faceless corporation sent those astronauts to their doom, knowingly, in order to extract the ultimate bioweapon. "Alien" is a subtle jab at Corporate America, the creature itself a representation of "the company's" blind, murderous greed.

See this movie. I repeat, if you love good movies, great movies, then seen this one. If you haven't already.

It's is hard to imagine that someone has NOT seen this movie, so I won't write much about the movie itself, but the purpose of this Special Edition DVD. I don't know much about the technology behind digital remastering of the audio, but it just seemed to me that the sound effects of the movie were just recorded over the original sound. Anyone who's seen this film over a dozen times or less would immediately notice gunshots, crash scenes, and voices (screams) were replaced. They did a pretty good job with the new sound effects, but there are a few glitches where the main characters' voices got muffled a bit (because they get mixed in with the new sound effects) and the sound of bullet impacts did not match what was seen on screen. As we all know, movie audio is just as important as the video, but the worst part is, the sound effects weren't even that great...just the average KABOOM's and POW's of any regular film...I mean there is no improvement, just replacement.
Being a die hard fan of The Terminator, it just bothered me a little that some sound effects were changed. It just didn't sit right for me or give me that same feeling it did almost 20 years ago. Luckily, it had the original Mono audio option that put the old sound effects in, so I was able to experience the original movie as it should be. Unfortunately, it didn't work through the 5.1 surround sound, of course.
The "Terminated Scenes" really got my hyped. I don't know if they presented these scenes in any other version of Terminator, but I could not believe they left such crucial scenes out of the original movie! Well, I won't spoil it, but there are a few scenes that would have made Terminator 2 a complete, accurate sequel to this movie. And it would have REALLY made the movie have a complete ironic twist.
My overall opinion is: If sound does not matter much, one must get this DVD for it awesome 5.1 feature. The deleted scenes included are great, if one has never seen them before.

On my Region 2 SE DVD, purchased in Holland as IMPORT (so I expect it a UK version) sone scenes are definitely cut:

1)When Terminator has just got the clothes, the rain starts, and it runs upon his face, but he does not blink

2)Just before getting into the GUNS store, Terminator passes a row of TV-sets, which get distorted, as he passes them.

Probably the scene of murder of the second "wrong Sarah" is also omitted.

THis really makes me think soon we shall get something like Ultimate version with these two scenes.

If someone has a comment on this, you can send me a note to lebedev_anton@mail.ru

1984's "The Terminator" is by far the bleakest (and the best!!) of the triligy. In it Arnold Schwarzenegger is a cyborg sent back from the future to the 1980s to kill Sarah Connor, a waitress who will soon give birth to the leader of man kind during the War Aginst the Machines. The good guys manage to send a lone warrior, Reese to protect her. The action is fast, continous, and brutal. This is the bloodiest of the batch with the coldly efficent Terminator. Also it is grim with the fact that the end of the human race is enevidable; you can not stop it, only prepare. Linda Hamilton dose a good job of being a vulnerable ditzy blond at the beginning and makes a credible transformation to a hero in her own right by the end. Michael Beihn's Reese is the heart of the movie, who is the passionate warrior fighting for all the right reasons, preservation of the human race and for the love of the woman. This is obviously Arnold's brake-out roll, he has nothing to emote, has less lines than the bum on the corner, but he is the most imposing figure in the film. There is also the message of over reliance on michines, even more relevent now in the 21st Centery than in '84. The DVD Special Edition has several documentries, and most of them are pretty good. I like the interview with Arnold and James Cameron. Hearing about it's troubled production is funny and interseting in retrospect (they tried out Lance Hindrickson and O.J. Simpson to play Terminator). This is the best of a great series, but of course you probably already knew that.

It's is hard to imagine that someone has NOT seen this movie, so I won't write much about the movie itself, but the purpose of this Special Edition DVD. I don't know much about the technology behind digital remastering of the audio, but it just seemed to me that the sound effects of the movie were just recorded over the original sound. Anyone who's seen this film over a dozen times or less would immediately notice gunshots, crash scenes, and voices (screams) were replaced. They did a pretty good job with the new sound effects, but there are a few glitches where the main characters' voices got muffled a bit (because they get mixed in with the new sound effects) and the sound of bullet impacts did not match what was seen on screen. As we all know, movie audio is just as important as the video, but the worst part is, the sound effects weren't even that great...just the average KABOOM's and POW's of any regular film...I mean there is no improvement, just replacement.
Being a die hard fan of The Terminator, it just bothered me a little that some sound effects were changed. It just didn't sit right for me or give me that same feeling it did almost 20 years ago. Luckily, it had the original Mono audio option that put the old sound effects in, so I was able to experience the original movie as it should be. Unfortunately, it didn't work through the 5.1 surround sound, of course.
The "Terminated Scenes" really got my hyped. I don't know if they presented these scenes in any other version of Terminator, but I could not believe they left such crucial scenes out of the original movie! Well, I won't spoil it, but there are a few scenes that would have made Terminator 2 a complete, accurate sequel to this movie. And it would have REALLY made the movie have a complete ironic twist.
My overall opinion is: If sound does not matter much, one must get this DVD for it awesome 5.1 feature. The deleted scenes included are great, if one has never seen them before.

On my Region 2 SE DVD, purchased in Holland as IMPORT (so I expect it a UK version) sone scenes are definitely cut:

1)When Terminator has just got the clothes, the rain starts, and it runs upon his face, but he does not blink

2)Just before getting into the GUNS store, Terminator passes a row of TV-sets, which get distorted, as he passes them.

Probably the scene of murder of the second "wrong Sarah" is also omitted.

THis really makes me think soon we shall get something like Ultimate version with these two scenes.

If someone has a comment on this, you can send me a note to lebedev_anton@mail.ru

1984's "The Terminator" is by far the bleakest (and the best!!) of the triligy. In it Arnold Schwarzenegger is a cyborg sent back from the future to the 1980s to kill Sarah Connor, a waitress who will soon give birth to the leader of man kind during the War Aginst the Machines. The good guys manage to send a lone warrior, Reese to protect her. The action is fast, continous, and brutal. This is the bloodiest of the batch with the coldly efficent Terminator. Also it is grim with the fact that the end of the human race is enevidable; you can not stop it, only prepare. Linda Hamilton dose a good job of being a vulnerable ditzy blond at the beginning and makes a credible transformation to a hero in her own right by the end. Michael Beihn's Reese is the heart of the movie, who is the passionate warrior fighting for all the right reasons, preservation of the human race and for the love of the woman. This is obviously Arnold's brake-out roll, he has nothing to emote, has less lines than the bum on the corner, but he is the most imposing figure in the film. There is also the message of over reliance on michines, even more relevent now in the 21st Centery than in '84. The DVD Special Edition has several documentries, and most of them are pretty good. I like the interview with Arnold and James Cameron. Hearing about it's troubled production is funny and interseting in retrospect (they tried out Lance Hindrickson and O.J. Simpson to play Terminator). This is the best of a great series, but of course you probably already knew that.

What makes this movie great is the conflict betwenn Kirk and Khan and the fact that it's a sequel to an episode of the show. Cool stuff.

The even movies in this series are the "real" Trek movies. ST4 had the whales. ST6 had the last of the old crew. ST8 had the Borg, ST10 had the Romulans and a clone. But ST2, ah ST2, that had Ricardo Mantalban giving William Shatner's scene chewing a run for it's money.

In fact, Shatner is relatively subdued for the better part of the movie. His Captain Kirk is feeling his age and faced with an estranged son that would prefer to remain estranged. Lost love and missed opportunities, and a tight reign from director Nicholas Meyer (Time After Time, ST6), help keep Shatner in check.

Also marks the screen debut of Kirstie Alley as Lt. Saavik.

The DVD package is put together very well. Once Paramount decided to start doing a good job with DVD special editions. They took it all the way to the bank.

This is the movie that, done on a shoestring budget, salvaged the Star Trek movie series. The original cast is reunited under now Admiral James T. Kirk as they take a shipload of cadets out on a routine training mission. Unknown to Kirk, his old enemy Khan (as well played by Ricardo Montalban and first seen in the original 1960's episode "Space Seed") has escaped from the desolated planet Seti Alpha Five and vowed to have his vengeance. Their bitter battle carries them across the galaxy, involves a reunion with Kirk's long lost son, and involves Project Genesis: an experiment with the potential for great good or unparalleled destruction. What ensues is non-stop action and a classic Star Trek adventure.

This is easily one of the top Star Trek films ever made, and my personal favorite. It combines everything that made the original series so beloved, such as a well drawn out plot, great character development, humor, and of course, exceptional space combat featuring the U.S.S. Enterprise. William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, and Deforest Kelley (Kirk, Spock, McCoy) are the big three, and their interaction really makes the film. Also of note is newcomer Kirstie Alley as Saavik in what would prove to be her breakout role. This directors cut (ooh la la extra scenes and commentary) of a great sci-fi movie is a must have for Trekkies everywhere.

What makes this movie great is the conflict betwenn Kirk and Khan and the fact that it's a sequel to an episode of the show. Cool stuff.

The even movies in this series are the "real" Trek movies. ST4 had the whales. ST6 had the last of the old crew. ST8 had the Borg, ST10 had the Romulans and a clone. But ST2, ah ST2, that had Ricardo Mantalban giving William Shatner's scene chewing a run for it's money.

In fact, Shatner is relatively subdued for the better part of the movie. His Captain Kirk is feeling his age and faced with an estranged son that would prefer to remain estranged. Lost love and missed opportunities, and a tight reign from director Nicholas Meyer (Time After Time, ST6), help keep Shatner in check.

Also marks the screen debut of Kirstie Alley as Lt. Saavik.

The DVD package is put together very well. Once Paramount decided to start doing a good job with DVD special editions. They took it all the way to the bank.

This is the movie that, done on a shoestring budget, salvaged the Star Trek movie series. The original cast is reunited under now Admiral James T. Kirk as they take a shipload of cadets out on a routine training mission. Unknown to Kirk, his old enemy Khan (as well played by Ricardo Montalban and first seen in the original 1960's episode "Space Seed") has escaped from the desolated planet Seti Alpha Five and vowed to have his vengeance. Their bitter battle carries them across the galaxy, involves a reunion with Kirk's long lost son, and involves Project Genesis: an experiment with the potential for great good or unparalleled destruction. What ensues is non-stop action and a classic Star Trek adventure.

This is easily one of the top Star Trek films ever made, and my personal favorite. It combines everything that made the original series so beloved, such as a well drawn out plot, great character development, humor, and of course, exceptional space combat featuring the U.S.S. Enterprise. William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, and Deforest Kelley (Kirk, Spock, McCoy) are the big three, and their interaction really makes the film. Also of note is newcomer Kirstie Alley as Saavik in what would prove to be her breakout role. This directors cut (ooh la la extra scenes and commentary) of a great sci-fi movie is a must have for Trekkies everywhere.

The first Back to the Furtre is a classic 80s movie. One of my alltime favorites. Unfortunatley, the two sequels aren't anywhere near as good. I don't want to blow forty bucks to get just the first one on DVD. Sell them separately for crying out loud. This is just a marketing scheme to force everyone to buy all three.

The time-traveling misadventures of Michael J. Fox has finally made its way to DVD with "Back to the Future" 4-Disc box set. "Back to the Future" was one of the most popular films of the 1980s and a surprising boxoffice hit in 1985. Director Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump & Cast Away) and co-writer Bob Gale successfully combine elements of humor and science fiction into an inventive and entertaining movie experience. The two sequels lack some of the energy and spirit of the original but are certainly quite enjoyable.

Universal's "Back to the Future" 4-Disc box set will satisfy fans who have awaited this release. Each film is presented in 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen format. The DVD contains a fine video transfer with bright colors but there are some minor flaws in its presentation. The 5.1 digital sound is surprisingly clear but a DTS audio track should have been included. This 4-Disc box set features over 10 hours of supplements including audio commentaries, deleted scenes, outtakes, music videos and Making the Trilogy featurettes. With its many supplements, the "Back to the Future" Trilogy earns a solid "B+".

Its been a long while since I've seen the Back to the Future movies, so I decided to rent all of them on VHS. Soonafter, I found out that all three films were on DVD(and in WIDESCREEN), I HAD to buy the box set. Luckily for me, I wasn't disappointed. The video quality was MUCH better that the VHS versions, and there were so much special features(Making of's, commentaries, etc.) that you could spend hours just watching them. Of course, there are a few problems with the discs, like the infamous widescreen 'glitch' on Part II and Part III. And the Q & A sessions end early on the last two movies for some reason. Either than that, there are no other problems I could find. Since most everybody else explained the plot of the three BttF films, I'll spare you the same ol' same ol'.

Personally, my favorite of the three films is Part III, and I'm really glad that they didn't leave the ending too open. The whole trilogy feels complete, and even though Zemeckis and Gale didn't originally plan to make a sequel to Back to the Future, it was great of them to create the last two movies in a way that they would seem like they were intentionally tied to the first film from the beginning. It's also a good thing that the quality of the sequels aren't so bad that they're unwatchable, like so many other movie sequels.

The first Back to the Furtre is a classic 80s movie. One of my alltime favorites. Unfortunatley, the two sequels aren't anywhere near as good. I don't want to blow forty bucks to get just the first one on DVD. Sell them separately for crying out loud. This is just a marketing scheme to force everyone to buy all three.

The time-traveling misadventures of Michael J. Fox has finally made its way to DVD with "Back to the Future" 4-Disc box set. "Back to the Future" was one of the most popular films of the 1980s and a surprising boxoffice hit in 1985. Director Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump & Cast Away) and co-writer Bob Gale successfully combine elements of humor and science fiction into an inventive and entertaining movie experience. The two sequels lack some of the energy and spirit of the original but are certainly quite enjoyable.

Universal's "Back to the Future" 4-Disc box set will satisfy fans who have awaited this release. Each film is presented in 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen format. The DVD contains a fine video transfer with bright colors but there are some minor flaws in its presentation. The 5.1 digital sound is surprisingly clear but a DTS audio track should have been included. This 4-Disc box set features over 10 hours of supplements including audio commentaries, deleted scenes, outtakes, music videos and Making the Trilogy featurettes. With its many supplements, the "Back to the Future" Trilogy earns a solid "B+".

Its been a long while since I've seen the Back to the Future movies, so I decided to rent all of them on VHS. Soonafter, I found out that all three films were on DVD(and in WIDESCREEN), I HAD to buy the box set. Luckily for me, I wasn't disappointed. The video quality was MUCH better that the VHS versions, and there were so much special features(Making of's, commentaries, etc.) that you could spend hours just watching them. Of course, there are a few problems with the discs, like the infamous widescreen 'glitch' on Part II and Part III. And the Q & A sessions end early on the last two movies for some reason. Either than that, there are no other problems I could find. Since most everybody else explained the plot of the three BttF films, I'll spare you the same ol' same ol'.

Personally, my favorite of the three films is Part III, and I'm really glad that they didn't leave the ending too open. The whole trilogy feels complete, and even though Zemeckis and Gale didn't originally plan to make a sequel to Back to the Future, it was great of them to create the last two movies in a way that they would seem like they were intentionally tied to the first film from the beginning. It's also a good thing that the quality of the sequels aren't so bad that they're unwatchable, like so many other movie sequels.

With everyone debating whether its a copy or good action film I'm really suprised nobody pointed out that they accidently put two scenes in the wrong order! I won't mention what they are, 'cause it destroys the purpose of the film.

The scene order aside, it is an excellent film. Made even more so by the quality produced on such a low budget. I highly recomend the viewing of this work.

Equlibrium is set in a futuristic society, where a strict regime has eiliminated war by suppresing emotion and destroying everything that causes it - books, art, music, animals, etc.. To keep everyone in line, the government administers a mind altering drug that hinders emotion called Prozium. A form of police called the Clerics, have been created to enfore the law, and anyone who breaks it by feeling or showing emotion is put to death. John Preston ( Christian Bale), is the highest ranking Cleric who is responsible for destroying anyone who breaks the rules. But John is soon effected by a prisoner ( Emily Watson), who claims that you cannot truly live life unless you are able to feel, and experience emotion. To test her theory, he skips his next dose of Prozium. Right away, John sees that the society that he helped create, has been wrong all along. John has been trained to enforce the laws of the new regime at all costs, but he is now the only person capable of overthrowing it. His partner (Taye Diggs)sets his eyes on John's position, and becomes determined to stop him...

I was literally blown away by this film. Director Kurt Wimmer did a great job creating the future society, with the outstanding visuals. While the story is similar to "Fahrenhiet 451" in some aspects, the story still manages to keep your interest and seem original for the most part. "Equilibrium", is also the best action film I have seen in recent memory. Even "The Matrix" pales in comparison. When I first saw this film at the theater, everyone in the audience was literally gasping and making comments about how original and amazing the action was. A totally original form of martial art was introduced in this film called " The Gun Kata". It mixes martial arts together with gun play to create a more effective shooting technique. Watching this new type of self defense unfold on the screen was mind blowing. The ending to this film is great and features one of the best sword fights I have ever seen.

Christian Bale puts in another good performance. He plays both sides of John Preston so well. The first is the Cleric who feels nothing, and kills anyone who breaks the law. He looks down right menacing! The second, is the man that comes to believe what he is doing is wrong. Watching him feel for the first time will amaze you, because he gave such an accurate portrayal of what it would really be like. Taye Diggs did an outstanding job as his partner. He is dispicable and a truly great villan. Emily Watson, Angus MacFadyen and Sean Bean were also fantastic in their roles.

"Equlibrium" raised the bar of action films to a whole new level. The gun play, martial arts action, and overall violence will blow your mind. It is fast paced, realistic, and extremely gory!! The visuals are stunning as well, and the performances are great. Once this film becomes more well known, it will have people talking for a long time to come!

Just say it yesterday. I would have to say that to those who have compared this to the Matrix, the two aren't even in the same league. It grabs your attention from beginning to end, and the storyline keeps you on edge. Definitely a must see....