Reviews

When I first viewed "Joseph" on cable network TNT, I did so only because of my "infatuation" with Paul Mercurio, but found the movie to be a story of rape, betrayal, jealousy, vengeance, and ultimately a tale of redemption and forgiveness (hey, just like the "Good Book" itself). A gripping story anyone can find likable.

But the story would not have been so greatly told without top-notch performances. Paul Mercurio portrays Joseph, whose witness to these sins allows him to grow into a man of unquestionable moral value, along with the ability to forgive even the most grievous actions toward him (witness how he treats Adnan, played by Warren Clark, the foreman who at first abuses him, then helps when it comes out that the man cannot read).

Ben Kingsley portrays Potiphar, chief of Pharoah's palace guard. He plays the role with a certain humor, though ultimately confused when he gives Joseph run of his house, only to find Joseph accused of betraying that trust. His decision how to handle this shows a man with great strength of character.

Martin Landau gives his usual bravura performance as Jacob, head of the tribe of children of Israel. Jacob is flawed, perhaps naively causing the resentment felt toward Joseph by his brothers, but he is thoroughly justified in the actions he takes after the behavior of his sons.

The only misstep in casting, IMO, is that of Lesley Ann Warren as Potiphar's wife. Her giggly style of acting is just a little out of step with the fine actors in the other roles.

This is a biblical epic even an atheist can enjoy. Very well done.

If you loved "Arthur", then you'll like the sequel, it's not as bad as you've been led to believe.

I enjoy it mainly because it's like catching up with old friends you haven't seen in a while.

Things go awry for Arthur here, and all seems lost. Will there be a happy ending? Watch it and find out.

I have to agree with those who feel that the facial expressions of Carlos Villarias got in the way of his performance - he looks as though he was mugging for the camera, rather than trying to portray the story at hand. Too funny for words are some of his reactions, they look like they belong in another film. Many of the other actors were, IMHO, lethargic copies of the Americans, except for the actor playing Renfield, Pablo Alvarez Rubio, whose animated performance steals the whole show.

The camera work is just as static as in the Lugosi version, only occasionally do we see a more fluid shot than in the American version.

The story is fleshed out a bit more, explaining a few things that the English version glosses over. But superior to the Lugosi version? Not on your Nelly!!

"The Wolf Man", while signaling the end of the classic Universal horrors, is in and of itself their greatest triumph.

Much of the Werewolf lore taken as fact by the general public in fact was the invention of the screenwriter, the very talented Curt Siodmak, and has very little, if any, basis in true folklore. Not bad for an immigrant from Nazi Germany, Mr. Siodmak had said that much of the "horror" in the film was derived from the horrors he witnessed in his homeland before emigrating to the USA.

Contrary to other reviews, the very talented Lon Chaney Jr. gives a performance as the cursed Larry Talbot equal to or superior to his role of Lenny in "Of Mice and Men". The scenes between he and Claude Rains, portraying his father, Sir John Talbot, are given real emotional heft by the two actors, even though I've never known a father and son who discuss their being "stiff-necked and undemonstrative types" who vow never to have any more such reserve with only a handshake. The later scenes clearly show Chaney playing Talbot as a man who thinks he's going nuts, while his father (being stiff-necked and undemonstrative) grasps at straws to help him fight his demons.

The supporting players are just as luminous, especially Evelyn Ankers (Ankers Away!!) as Gwen Conliffe, the proprietor of the antique shop who is engaged, but who falls for Larry just the same. Bela Lugosi, being thrown a crumb at Universal after starting the horror cycle with "Dracula" in 1931, plays Bela the Gypsy Fortune Teller, the one who visits the curse upon our Larry. Mme. Maria Ouspenskaya portrays Bela's mother, Maleva, who schools Larry and the viewers about werewolves, and becomes a self-appointed look-out for the man turned beast (a role she no doubt played for her own son). Ralph Bellamy as Col. Montford plays the role as if he's in the Talbots' pockets, nonetheless is dashing enough in the role of the local constable. Bits by Warren William as Dr. Lloyd and by Patric Knowles as Frank Andrews, Gwen's fiancé, add to the horrific festivities.

The film only runs 70 minutes, but contains more intelligence, wit, and downright chills than any 10 so-called "horror" films made in the last 30 years.

"The Wolf Man" is a film to be savored over and over again, especially by men who are pure in heart, and say their prayers by night.

All of a sudden everybody's Roger Ebert.

People who gave this film a bad review missed the whole point.

This is NOT a slasher/gore-fest like they've been making since "Friday the 13th" entered the landscape and ruined almost all horror films ever since. It is a throwback to subtle horror films with emotional resonance and fleshed-out (sorry for the pun) characters. True, no back-story is given, so the origin of Nestor Duvalier is unknown.

But the film is played straight (this is not a horror-comedy, as some reviewers have insisted) and the tone is set early in the film, a story of how a family is thrown into turmoil by the unlucky intrusion of a monster.

Jeanne Bates is totally sympathetic as Emily Dwyer, a woman who lives alone, is somewhat neglected by her kids, and wants not only some extra cash, but some companionship. She shows she's worse at picking tenants than Matthew Modine and Melanie Griffith in "Pacific Heights"!!!

The rest of the cast acquits themselves very nicely, this is not Shakespeare, it's a low-budget fright flick. And as such, it delivers 90 minutes of old-fashioned fright fun.